National News

Following through on his pledge to use all means necessary to find, arrest and return absconding House Democrats to Texas, the Texas House, led by House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, sued Democrats hiding out in California.
The Texas House on Saturday sued Democratic state Reps. Rhetta Andrews Bowers, Gina Hinojosa, Ann Johnson, Ray Lopez, Mary Ann Perez and Vincent Perez.
The lawsuit was filed in Superior Court of California, County of Tehama. Joining Texas as plaintiff is Newport Beach-based Dhillon Law Group.
This is the second lawsuit the Texas House filed against absconding Democrats, who left their home state to prevent a vote on Republicans’ Congressional redistricting effort. The first was filed against 33 Democrats in Illinois, The Center Square reported.
“The Texas House stands ready to conduct the work expected of us by our constituents, but until the absent members return, our state will continue to do without critical disaster relief and solutions for a more prepared and resilient Texas,” Burrows said. “This political game holding up our efforts has gone on long enough. All members will eventually have to come back, but the business before the House is too important to wait on the outside political influences pushing these members to delay the inevitable.”
Burrows signed civil warrants Monday for the arrest of 56 Democrats who failed to return to Austin, ensuring no quorum would be reached. Only six Democrats showed up. By Friday, only nine had, bringing the total of members present to 95. One hundred are needed for a quorum. Without reaching a quorum, the Texas House can’t vote on bills, including disaster relief for Hill Country flood victims.
By Friday, Burrows said, “all hands were on deck” to locate, arrest and return missing Democrats, The Center Square reported. He also said the state would be suing Democrats in other states. Next to be sued were those hiding out in California.
“The members who fled have been given ample time and opportunity to return on their own accord, and because they have continued to refuse their responsibilities to their constituents and return to Texas, the State has no choice but to pursue additional legal remedies to compel their return from other states,” Burrows said. “Our full focus is on stopping this dereliction of duty and restoring quorum in the Texas House as soon as possible so we may return our time, attention, and resources where they most matter – on the critical issues of the special session call.”
Burrows issued arrest warrants pursuant to his authority under Article III, Section 10 of the Texas Constitution and Rule 5, Section 8, of the Texas House Rules, which states that when the speaker issues a “call of the house,” which Burrows did on Monday, “[a]ll absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found.”
The California lawsuit is similar to the one filed in Illinois, requesting the California court to domesticate Texas warrants issued by the Texas House of Representatives against legislators who absconded.
The lawsuit cites the same Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, stating, “The United States Constitution, federal statute, and the doctrine of comity between states demand otherwise. This Court must give full faith and credit to warrants duly issued by the Texas House of Representatives that compel these civil servants to return to Texas and to their civic responsibilities.”
“Texas requests and is entitled to the assistance of its sister State, the State of California, to enforce the Quorum Order and Quorum Warrant as to each of the Texas House members breaking quorum and evading civil arrest in California,” the lawsuit states. “Texas seeks enforcement of the rule of law in California, the assistance of California law enforcement officials, and this Court’s assistance, to lawfully return to Texas the Defendant legislators who fled to California to evade their duties to participate in the ongoing Special Session of the Texas Legislature.”
It asks the court to “issue a rule to show cause why Respondents should not be held in contempt,” to initiate contempt proceedings against them “for unlawfully seeking to evade Texas’s duly issued Quorum Warrants,” and set a hearing as soon as possible. If it doesn’t, “Texas is threatened with immediate and irreparable harm,” the lawsuit argues.

With antisemitism at its highest level in recorded history, Jewish delis in the U.S. are providing a glimpse of hope, celebration and award-winning pastrami on rye sandwiches.
This August marks the 10th annual National Deli Month, celebrating last century’s New York-style Jewish delicatessens. It was launched by David (Ziggy) Gruber of the beloved Houston establishment, Kenny & Ziggy’s New York Delicatessen Restaurant and Bakery.
Since 1999, Kenny & Ziggy’s “has made it a mission to give Houstonians the ultimate dining experience by combining traditional New York deli food with contemporary cuisine. Of course, it’s in owner Ziggy Gruber’s blood, being he is a third-generation deli man, and his grandfather opened the first Jewish deli on Broadway in New York City back in the 1920s.”
Each participating deli is donating proceeds to charitable causes.
A portion of proceeds from Kenny & Ziggy’s price fixed menu is going to the Holocaust Museum of Houston. The museum is also offering anyone who purchases a National Deli Month meal one free admission ticket.
The museum, founded by Holocaust survivors, is dedicated to educating the public about the Holocaust and the dangers of hatred, prejudice and apathy. It also presents exhibits about American culture, including one previous exhibit about Jewish immigrants and delis.
“The story of the Jewish delicatessen is as much about immigration as it is about food,” a past exhibit of the museum’s, “I’ll Have What She’s Having,” explained. “Between 1880 and 1924, more than two million Jewish immigrants made new homes in the United States. The emergence of delis can be traced to an influx of Jewish immigrants from the Rhineland – an area of Central Europe that is part of present-day Germany – to New York City in the mid-nineteenth century. These newcomers were soon followed by Jews from Eastern Europe and the Russian Empire in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
“The Jewish deli combined dishes from various regions of Central and Eastern Europe as Jews from different countries met in America. Foods such as pickles, knishes, gefilte fish, borscht, pastrami, smoked fish, bagels, babka, and rugelach began to be served under one roof for the first time. Many of these dishes are not specifically Jewish in origin, but reflect regional cuisine that European Jews adopted to fit the kosher dietary laws dictated by Jewish tradition. Over time, these foods became the hallmarks of the Jewish deli in the United States.”
The Jewish deli also relied on the emerging cattle industry – led by Texas, where “beef remains the hallmark of a classic deli sandwich.”
This year, in addition to banning the production of lab grown meat in Texas, the Texas legislature officially designated two steaks as the official steak of Texas, the Texas Strip (Senate) and the tomahawk ribeye (House), The Center Square reported. The House and Senate couldn’t agree on which cut so they chose two. The chambers also passed resolutions highlighting the significance of cattle in Texas, noting that in the late 19th century, as urban centers grew, demand for beef increased.
This spurred the era of cattle drives when Texas ranchers and cowboys moved cattle along the open range to reach train depots to transport their cattle to major urban centers like New York, where the deli was founded. The growth of the cattle industry in the U.S. coincided with a large influx of Jewish immigrants who don’t eat pork, the museum notes.
In the early 1900s, Texas also became a primary destination for Jewish immigrants fleeing Russian pogroms through the Galveston Movement. More than 10,000 arrived in Galveston, considered the “Ellis Island of the South” at the time.
The monthly recognition of delis is something to celebrate, patrons argue, at a time when antisemitism and hate crimes against Jews in the U.S. has reached an all-time high. According to a new FBI report, hate crimes against Jews account for 70% of all religiously motivated hate crimes. Antisemitic incidents increased in the U.S. after the Oct 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attack against Israel.
The number of antisemitic attacks tracked by the Anti-Defamation League were the largest on record last year since it began reporting them in 1979, The Center Square reported. The majority of antisemitic attacks, 64%, occurred in 10 states, eight run by Democrats. New York, the birthplace of American delis, reported the most.
The governor and legislature have implemented significant measures to combat antisemitism in Texas and support for Israel, The Center Square has reported.
Participating National Deli Month delis are located in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas, Virginia and Canada.
Ziggy argues the month-long celebration of delis is important, “endlessly believing the deli world is a wonderful place that should never be lost.”

Among the executive orders President Donald Trump signed Thursday was one instructing federal banking regulators to shed language from their guidance documents that the administration believes can lead to the debanking of people or institutions for political reasons.
“It is the policy of the United States that no American should be denied access to financial services because of their constitutionally or statutorily protected beliefs, affiliations, or political views, and to ensure that politicised or unlawful debanking is not used as a tool to inhibit such beliefs, affiliations, or political views,” the order reads.
Debanking individuals or institutions on the basis of political and personal views has become more visible in the U.S. since 2020, following similar reported trends in the U.K. and Europe where organizations like BankTrack and Bankwatch have monitored and reported on banks’ clients’ compliance with certain climate and human rights initiatives for decades.
Debanking occurs when a financial institution either closes or restricts an account or refuses to provide services to a potential client. Perhaps the most well-known, large-scale example occurred in 2022, when the Canadian government seized and froze the bank accounts of some participating in the Freedom Convoy, a convoy of thousands of truckers across Canada protesting the country’s vaccine mandates.
Financial institutions can and have also debanked clients independently of government involvement or direction. The order, however, focuses on federal reforms to prevent the government from encouraging or inciting debanking, as it claims it did in Operation Choke Point. The operation, which took place under the Obama administration, designated certain industries as high-risk for fraud and money laundering.
Republicans say the administration used it to target individuals, businesses and industries it opposed politically – like the gun industry – while Democrats say it was simply aimed at protecting consumers.
The Small Business Administration and other federal banking regulators are to “remove the use of reputation risk or equivalent concepts” from documents they use to “regulate or examine” financial institutions to avoid encouraging the debanking of clients for political or “unlawful” reasons.
The order also directs the SBA to ensure the reinstatement of clients’ accounts at financial institutions that debanked them for such reasons.
Thirty-two members of the State Financial Officers Foundation from 24 states signed onto a joint statement commending the executive order.
“President Trump’s executive action directly confronts this abuse of regulatory authority,” they said. “By reaffirming that banks must evaluate customers based on objective financial criteria, not political or religious views, his leadership marks a crucial step toward restoring viewpoint neutrality and putting an end to unlawful discrimination in our financial sector.”
Financial institutions can debank clients if those clients are found to be engaged in illegal activity.

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost and South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson have taken up Texas’ fight to enforce its immigration law.
The two prosecutors, both from states where points of entry from other counties are possible through Lake Erie and the Atlantic Ocean, said Thursday their amicus brief leads a group of 18 states in asking for a full federal appeals court review and reversal of a district court ruling.
Illegal immigration is a violation of state law in Texas, with deportation possible through penalty of conviction. The ruling blocks the state from enforcing its law.
“This flawed legal analysis by a divided panel of judges would erode the constitutional right of states to enforce their own laws,” Yost said in a release. “State sovereignty is at stake, and a threat of that magnitude demands a careful review by the full appeals court.”
The attorneys general believe the ruling “diminished every state’s sovereignty.” The District Court said Texas’ law likely conflicts with the federal government’s exclusive power over immigration policy.
The new amicus brief filed Thursday argues states have the right to pass legislation that protects their residents’ safety, saying illegal crossings at the southern border impact public safety, health care and state resources.
Joining Yost and Wilson in signing the brief are the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday filed an emergency petition with the Texas Supreme Court to remove from office the Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair, Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston.
Wu led more than 50 House Democrats out of state to prevent the Texas House from reaching a quorum and conducting official business.
Abbott filed a 35-page Petition for Writ of Quo Warranto “to address ongoing abuses of public office by ousting ‘the non-user’ Wu, who has abdicated his official responsibilities by avowedly repudiating them.”
The petition cites Chapter 66 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which Abbott first cited when he warned on Sunday that he would take action to remove House Democrats from office who abdicated their position, The Center Square reported.
“I made clear in a formal statement on Sunday, August 3, that if the Texas House Democrats were not in attendance when the House reconvened at 3:00 PM on Monday, August 4, then action would be taken to seek their removal,” Abbott said in a statement Tuesday night.
On Sunday night, Wu, along with more than two dozen House Democrats, fled Texas for Chicago and held a news conference with Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker. It was the second time Wu led a delegation to Chicago in an attempt to thwart Texas redistricting efforts.
A Select House Committee on Redistricting advanced a redistricting measure on Saturday that Wu and other Democrats argue is illegal.
Wu said Republican-led redistricting was disenfranchising Texans and the “tool they’re using is a racist gerrymandered map. A map that seeks to use racial lines to divide hard working communities who have spent decades building up their power and strengthening their voices. Governor Abbott is doing this in submission to Donald Trump so that Donald Trump can steal these communities’ power and voice. We will not be complicit in the destruction of our own communities.”
Pritzker held a news conference Tuesday with Texas House Democrats where Wu was absent.
On Monday and Tuesday, more than 50 Democrats had not returned to Austin; 56 Democrats were were absent from Texas’ special legislative session on Monday and 54 absent on Tuesday. House Speaker Dustin Burrows signed civil warrants for their arrest, The Center Square reported.
“They have not returned and have not met the quorum requirements. Representative Wu and the other Texas House Democrats have shown a willful refusal to return, and their absence for an indefinite period of time deprives the House of the quorum needed to meet and conduct business on behalf of Texans. Texas House Democrats abandoned their duty to Texans, and there must be consequences,” Abbott said.
The lawsuit argues, “Willful refusal to serve as a representative is abandonment of the office of representative.” It also argues that the “principal duty of a legislator is to attend and participate in legislative sessions as required by Article III, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution. The quorum provisions further underscore that attendance is not optional; it is an affirmative constitutional obligation.”
“Representative Wu has openly renounced these constitutional mandates by fleeing the State of Texas to break quorum, obstruct legislative proceedings, and paralyze the Texas House of Representatives,” the petition states.
“It is no answer for Wu to say that he plans to continue serving as a representative. His own statements and actions show a refusal to actually serve as a representative in fact,” the petition continues. “That’s because what representatives do is represent their constituents in the legislative chamber. They appear for a quorum. They meet with other legislators in hearings. They speak with their constituents. They debate bills. And, in the end, they vote their district.
Prior to flying to Chicago, Wu and others posted pictures of themselves on social media with fundraising links asking for support for their efforts to block a vote on redistricting that was scheduled for Monday.
Abbott directed the Texas Rangers to investigate potential bribery charges connected to fundraising to thwart official legislative business.
The petition states that “Wu’s actions violate Article XVI, Section 41, which requires forfeiture of his office. … There is an especially good reason why bribery may form the basis for removal from office: Our Constitution seeks to root out bribery at practically every turn. The oath-of-office provisions, for example, obligate state officers to sign a statement swearing that they have not and will not exchange things of value ‘for the giving or withholding of a vote,’” the petition states.
Abbott also asks the court to order Wu’s removal from office to “ensure that public office remains a trust exercised in good faith, as opposed to a platform for private gain and governmental sabotage. It could also begin to make it easier to establish a quorum while the Special Session is still under way.”
Wu’s office has yet to issue a public statement and has not responded to requests for comment.

The “whipsaw effect” of President Donald Trump’s tariffs is increasing or having no impact on imports at California ports despite widespread speculation.
One theory among economists has been that Trump’s tariffs could lead to a decrease in imports to the U.S. But the flow of goods into the ports of San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco have yet to be hindered by the tariffs, according to officials. The latest round is scheduled to take effect Thursday.
Gene Seroka, the executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, said the uncertainty of Trump’s tariffs is the cause for the increase of imports in June and possibly in July as well.
Nations around the world are working hard to push as many imports into the U.S. before more tariffs are placed, he said.
Seroka said during the port’s July cargo news briefing that the port had 892,340 container units in June, making it the port’s busiest June on record.
Of the total units, 470,450 units were imports, 126,144 units were exports and 295,746 were empty units.
Compared to June of last year, the Port of Los Angeles had an 8% increase in container units. The port had 827,757 total units, and of those units, 428,753 were imports, 122,515 were exports and 276,489 were empty containers.
The Port of Los Angeles has moved 4,995,811 units since the beginning of this year. This time last year, the port had moved 4,731,491 units.
Seroka attributed the increase in the number of containers to the “whipsaw effect” of Trump’s tariffs.
Seroka said that when tariffs on imports went into effect in May, imports at the Port of Los Angeles slowed down significantly through the first half of June. Seroka added that when some tariffs stopped in the middle of June, then cargo started moving again.
Seroka said he was expecting the port to have around 950,000 units in July, which would be one of the port’s top months.
The Port of Los Angeles told The Center Square the cargo units were still being counted and that the latest number won’t be released until the cargo news briefing on Aug. 13. But the port said Seroka’s July projections are looking to be in line with the data seen so far.
Trump’s executive order on July 31 sets new tariffs that will start on Thursday. Seroka said he expects imports at the port to decrease after that.
“Looking into August, if everything holds the way we see it right now, I expect volume to ease because of those new tariffs being placed, making it more costly for American importers,” he said.
Port of San Francisco spokesman Eric Young told The Center Square, “Recent tariffs have not affected the number of exports or imports of vehicles.”
Young, the port’s director of communications, added that the port exported 9,686 vehicles and imported 18,835 vehicles last year. From the vehicles imported, 1,252 were Kia vehicles from South Korea and 17,583 were General Motor vehicles that were manufactured in Mexico.
The U.S tariff rate for Mexico is at 25% and the U.S. tariff rate for South Korea will be at 15%, starting Thursday.
The Port of San Diego operates four terminals, two of which are marine cargo terminals.
The National City Marine Terminal is San Diego’ main marine cargo terminal. The terminal is the most advanced vehicle import and export facility on the West Coast, according to the Port of San Diego’s official website. The terminal serves as the “primary port of entry for one out of every 10 new foreign cars” imported to the U.S.
Brianne Page, the port’s public information officer, told The Center Square that the Port of San Diego and Pasha Automotive Services, which operates from the National City Marine Terminal, report they haven’t seen any increase or decrease in vehicle imports cause by tariffs. The port and Pasha said they have, however, seen some slow recovery since the COVID-19 pandemic.
Cary Davis, president and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities, spoke on NPR Monday about the impact of Trump’s trade and tariff policies on U.S. ports. Davis said the U.S. is seeing a lot more products coming into its ports.
“We have a lot more volumes of cargo, freight, cars, materials, coming through our seaports and even our land borders,” Davis said.
Davis also said the tariffs’ “whipsaw effect” has made it hard for ports to know how much goods will be coming through.
“The whipsaw effect that’s happening of the unpredictability of tariffs makes it really hard to plan for exactly how much free volume will be coming through the ports,” Davis said.
When Trump’s new set of tariffs start later in the week, U.S. ports and many Americans will be paying close attention whether imports actually decrease.

Consumers across the country are bracing for higher prices on everything from coffee to cars as President Donald Trump’s full suite of “Liberation Day” tariffs go into effect next week.
Some public companies had previously delayed price hikes, but that could change as more tariffs become effective.
Prices for clothes and shoes could jump. In the short term, consumers could pay 39% more for shoes and 37% more for clothes, with shoes and apparel prices expected to gain 18% and 17% higher in the long term, respectively, according to the latest figures from the Yale Budget Lab. That group projected that the tariffs would increase average household costs by about $2,400 annually.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the largest business lobby, reported that manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers are paying higher prices for goods and services. At the same time, “they are slowly beginning to raise the prices they charge their customers,” said Neil Bradley, executive vice president, chief policy officer, and head of strategic advocacy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Countries with the highest tariffs include Syria (41%), Laos (40%), Myanmar (40%), Switzerland (39%), Serbia (35%) and Iraq (35%). Some countries could face higher rates, including Brazil, depending on final rates, most of which Trump set unilaterally.
Trump cut deals with about two-thirds of the United States’ major trading partners. Those nations mostly came in under 19%. Most got 15%. So far, the United Kingdom has the lowest rate at 10%. Trump extended the deadline for several other key trading partners, including Canada, Mexico and China.
The White House said Thursday that Trump would continue to be open to deals that benefit America.
Consumer Technology Association CEO Gary Shapiro said the trade group hopes to see more deals to lower tariffs in the coming week.
“Constant shifts in tariff policy make it increasingly difficult for U.S. companies – especially startups and small businesses – to plan, invest, and compete globally,” he said. “CTA continues to urge the administration and Congress to pursue a predictable, forward-looking trade agenda rooted in fairness, and collaboration with, trusted partners. American innovation thrives when markets are open, trade rules are clear, and businesses are free to focus on creating jobs and bringing groundbreaking technologies to market.”
He added: “We expect the administration will use the next seven days before the tariffs go into effect on August 7 to negotiate further deals with trading partners, including with our northern friend and neighbor Canada, to lower tariffs, provide greater certainty, and eliminate barriers to trade.”
Businesses could still get relief through the courts. On Thursday, a panel of 11 appellate court judges scrutinized Trump’s tariff authority, asking attorneys on both sides of the case tough questions about the president’s authority to restructure global trade without help from Congress. The court didn’t rule on the tariffs on Thursday but is expected to do so in the coming weeks.
Trump has said he wants to use tariffs to restore manufacturing jobs lost to lower-wage countries in decades past, shift the tax burden away from U.S. families, and pay down the national debt.
A tariff is a tax on imported goods paid by the person or company that imports the goods. The importer can absorb the cost of the tariffs or try to pass the cost on to consumers through higher prices.