By MELISSA GOLDIN

As the leadup to the 2026 midterm elections begins, social media users — among them billionaire X owner Elon Musk, who briefly served as a top advisor to President Donald Trump — are using false information to advocate for more voter ID laws in the U.S.

Related Articles

Judges allow North Carolina to use a map drawn in bid to give Republicans another US House seat

Trump administration’s effort to end 1960s school desegregation cases faces a hurdle

Russia’s frozen assets at center of negotiations over Ukraine peace deal

Government push to unseal court records offers clues about what could be in the Epstein files

Immigrant with family ties to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is detained by ICE

“America should not have worse voter ID requirements than every democratic country on Earth,” Musk wrote in a recent X post, which had been liked and shared approximately 310,000 times as of Wednesday. “California and New York actually banned use of ID to vote! It is illegal to show your ID in those states. The only reason to do this is fraud.”

But voter registration requirements and guidance for poll workers paint a different picture.

Here’s a closer look at the facts.

CLAIM: It is illegal for voters to show ID when casting a ballot in New York and California.

THE FACTS: This is false. Voters in both states need to show ID when it is necessary to complete their registration, but it is not required otherwise. Poll worker guidance published by New York and California instructs workers not to ask voters for ID unless records indicate that it is needed.

“There is nothing unlawful about that voter presenting a form of photo identification at a poll site in addition to fulfilling the signature verification requirement outlined in the state’s consitution,” Kathleen McGrath, a spokesperson for the New York State Board of Elections, said of voters whose identity has already been verified. “In fact, in some counties, voters are allowed to scan their license in an effort to expedite the looking up of their voter record on the e-pollbook, but this cannot be legally required.”

The California secretary of state’s office similarly said that “California law does not prohibit a voter from voluntarily presenting their identification.”

In New York, voters provide their Department of Motor Vehicles number or the last four digits of their social security number when registering to vote. They may also use another form of valid photo ID or a government document that shows their name and address, such as a utility bill or a bank statement. Voters will be asked for ID at the polls if their identify cannot be verified before Election Day, according to the state’s registration form.

Recent guidance for New York poll workers states: “Do not ask the voter for ID unless ‘ID required’ is next to their name in their voter records.”

California has similar identification processes. If voters do not provide a driver’s license number, a state ID number or the last four digits of their social security number when registering, another form of ID must be provided if they are voting for the first time in a federal election and registered by mail or online, according to the secretary of state’s office.

FILE – A sheriff’s deputy inspects ballots with the aid of a dog at the L.A. County Ballot Processing Center Nov. 4, 2025, in City of Industry, Calif. (AP Photo/Ethan Swope, File)

“Poll workers must not ask a voter to provide their identification unless the voter list clearly states identification is required,” reads recent guidance for California poll workers released by the state.

County election officials automatically mail ballots to all active registered voters. In the 2024 general election, 80.76% of voters voted by mail. Some counties in California do not offer in-person voting at all.

Musk’s post also includes an image that lists 114 countries under the title, “Full or partially democratic countries that require ID to register to vote or cast a ballot on election day in all districts.” All of them have a green checkmark to their left except for the U.S., which has a red “x.”

Although many countries listed in the image require ID for one or both of these actions, there are at least two exceptions — New Zealand and Australia. In New Zealand, voters can register without ID by filling out a signed enrollment form and do not need to present ID at the polls. Australian voters do not need ID to cast a ballot and may have someone who is already registered confirm their identity when submitting an enrollment form.

Representatives for Musk did not respond to a request for comment.

Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

By COLLIN BINKLEY

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration’s effort to overturn decades-old school desegregation orders is facing pushback from a federal judge in Louisiana.

Related Articles

Russia’s frozen assets at center of negotiations over Ukraine peace deal

Government push to unseal court records offers clues about what could be in the Epstein files

Immigrant with family ties to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is detained by ICE

Supreme Court won’t immediately let Trump administration fire copyright office head

Pushing an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, Trump looks to his Gaza ceasefire playbook

After the judge refused to close the books on a desegregation case dating back to the 1960s, the Concordia Parish school system in central Louisiana and the state on Tuesday filed an appeal. The case offers the first major test of the government’s attempt to quickly end some of the long-running cases.

The school system has become a focal point in the administration’s attempt to end legal cases that reach back to the Civil Rights era. Louisiana state officials say the cases are outdated and no longer needed. In a remarkable turn, they’ve recently gained support from the U.S. Justice Department, which spent decades fighting for such cases.

The campaign encountered its first major obstacle this month when U.S. District Judge Dee Drell rejected a court filing from Louisiana and the Justice Department aiming to free Concordia from a 1965 lawsuit. That case was brought by Black families who demanded access to the town’s all-white schools.

A number of legal requirements from the case remain in place today, and some families say the court orders are still needed to improve education at the area’s mostly Black schools.

Louisiana and the federal government tried to dismiss the case immediately by saying all remaining parties believe the case is no longer necessary. It was not signed by any families who brought the suit, who are no longer involved.

Drell refused, saying the court can reject such agreements when bigger issues are at stake.

“At the heart of this case is public policy and the protection of others, and the court has been tasked with ensuring the resolution of this matter in accordance with long established legal precedent,” Drell, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, wrote in a Nov. 19 order.

Instead, Drell offered Concordia Parish a hearing to prove it has fully dismantled state-sponsored racial segregation — the traditional route to get such cases dismissed.

The school district and the state appealed that decision in a Tuesday filing. They did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Justice Department used the same tactic to lift a 1966 order in Louisiana’s Plaquemines Parish school district — the judge in that case had been dead for decades — and it signaled plans to have others dismissed later.

Dozens of 1960s school desegregation cases remain in place across Louisiana and the South, including some that are actively being litigated and others that have languished.

The Justice Department has framed the decades-old cases as federal intrusion into local school decisions. Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the department’s civil rights division, previously promised that other cases would “bite the dust.”

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Attorney General Keith Ellison has joined 21 other attorneys general in suing the federal government over new eligibility guidelines for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — known as SNAP.

The federal legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” narrowed SNAP eligibility for certain groups, including refugees, asylum recipients, and others admitted to the U.S. under humanitarian protection programs. According to the state attorneys general, a U.S. Department of Agriculture memo on Oct. 31 “incorrectly asserted that all individuals who entered the country through these humanitarian pathways would remain permanently ineligible for SNAP, even after obtaining green cards and becoming lawful permanent residents,” according to a statement on the lawsuit from Ellison’s office.

The USDA memo also noted that federal legislation expanded the age range for able-bodied adults without dependents subject to a time limit on benefits to individuals aged 18 to 64. And, it noted that a typical 120-day grace period for states to adjust systems without penalty expired on Nov.  1, 2025.

In their lawsuit, the group is maintains that the USDA guidelines contradict federal law and will “impose massive financial penalties on states.”

Related Articles

Gov. Tim Walz presents Gru, Minnesota’s Thanksgiving turkey

Report revives claims Minnesota fraud funded terrorists. Here’s what we know.

Changes to agency charged with election security leads to concerns

Washington state’s paid leave program struggles. Will MN be different?

U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar meets with Pope Leo XIV during Vatican visit

“It is extremely troubling to once again have to take President Trump to court to stop him from taking food off our neighbors’ tables,” Ellison said in a statement. “If the United States accepts refugees fleeing war, famine, and persecution, the last thing we should do is let them go hungry once they are here.”

In their lawsuit, the attorneys general are asking the court to “vacate the unlawful guidance” and block it from being implemented.

By SAM McNEIL

BRUSSELS (AP) — Money is as central to Europe’s vital support of Ukraine as ammunition and intelligence. Yet, the bloc’s most viable funding mechanism involves seizing billions of dollars worth of Russian assets that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed taking over.

The first draft of Trump’s 28-point peace plan called for an investment scheme for Ukraine’s reconstruction controlled by the U.S. but financed by $100 billion in frozen Russian assets matched by another $100 billion from the European Union — with 50% of profits sent back to Washington.

The plan surprised Europeans, who have spent years fiercely debating the fate of Russia’s frozen fortune.

Those funds are central to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s plan to both maintain pressure on Russia and increase support for Ukraine as mysterious drone incursions and sabotage operations rattle European capitals.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addresses the media in Johannesburg, South Africa, Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)

“I cannot see any scenario in which the European taxpayers alone will pay the bill,” she said Wednesday in Strasbourg, France to applause from lawmakers in the European Parliament.

The 27-nation EU has sent Ukraine almost $197 billion since Russia invaded Ukraine nearly four years ago. While there’s no consensus on how to provide more aid, there’s near unanimity on seizing the Russian assets to cover the estimated $153 billion for Ukraine’s budget and military needs for 2026 and 2027.

The Commission has proposed paying that bill with joint debt taken on by the EU and grants by individual nations, but its main source is the $225 billion assets frozen at Euroclear, a Brussels-based financial institution.

That is, if the Trump administration doesn’t get them first.

Perks of the deal

Trump’s brash negotiating style left many in Europe suspecting he wants a quick deal that forces Europeans to make it work and pay for it. All while the U.S. profits.

Analysts say the proposal was essentially a U.S. attempt to snatch these assets, coming as Brussels and Washington relaunch trade negotiations over tariffs.

Agathe Demarais, a senior fellow at the Berlin-based European Council on Foreign Relations, said the proposal was akin to a “signing bonus” for a peace deal heavily slanted towards Russia.

Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the Brussels-based European Policy Centre, called the U.S. takeover of the assets “outrageous,” but suggested it might also be acceptable to Europeans “if that is ultimately the price to pay for a good deal.”

After intense discussions between the U.S., Germany, France, the United Kingdom and representatives from the European Commission, the investment scheme was removed from the new draft peace plan. Russia has already signaled its total rejection of the new draft.

The assets frozen in Belgium

A quick seizure of Russia’s frozen assets by the EU would not only secure Ukraine’s defense budget, but also empower Brussels at the negotiation table, Demarais said.

“If the EU rushes to seize Russia’s central bank assets before Washington grabs them, the bloc may be able to drastically curb Trump’s interest in a bad deal,” she said.

The European Commission has proposed taking direct ownership of the assets. Under von der Leyen’s leadership, it could then issue a loan to Ukraine, which would be repaid only if Moscow provides war reparations to Kyiv.

The bulk of these assets are held in a clearinghouse called Euroclear in Belgium. However, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has refused to approve their use as collateral for a massive loan for Ukraine, citing fears that Russia would retaliate against Belgian interests.

Related Articles

Government push to unseal court records offers clues about what could be in the Epstein files

Immigrant with family ties to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is detained by ICE

Supreme Court won’t immediately let Trump administration fire copyright office head

Pushing an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, Trump looks to his Gaza ceasefire playbook

Trump administration says lower prices for 15 Medicare drugs will save taxpayers billions

“We are a small country, and retaliation could be very hard,” De Wever said in October.

Yet the Belgian position on thawing the assets was influenced by an impasse in local politics over deep federal debt. After months of domestic political wrangling ended last week in a deal, politicians from Riga to Lisbon started hoping that De Wever would be able to lift his objections to seizing Russian assets.

Sweden’s Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard said after the Brussels meeting on Wednesday that “the clock is ticking” and that seizing the assets was “the only realistic financing option that would make a real difference and one that would be most fair to taxpayers” in Europe.

Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat said Wednesday there is now broad EU support for Belgium.

“It would send the strongest message to Moscow that it cannot wait us out, and we need to make this decision fast,” said Kallas.

On Dec. 18, De Wever will join the other EU national leaders for a summit in Brussels over, among other subjects, seizing the Russian assets.

Associated Press writers Geir Moulson and Kirsten Grieshaber contributed from Berlin.