Latest News
- Trump administration proposes repeal of rule protecting national forest areas
- Health Canada seizes unauthorized prescription drugs from Montreal store
- Former DOJ lawyer claims Trump administration misused investigations targeting Harvard, Brown and Columbia
- Disabled man removed from Virgin Australia flight over wheelchair aid dispute
- European Commission confirms that returns fall under EU law
- Alaska and Wyoming primaries to highlight key Senate races and party dynamics
- Climbers seek to deepen connection with British Columbia’s forests
- Florida holds primaries for governor and Senate alongside key races in Alaska and Wyoming
LIVE German 2025 Election Results as they come in and analysi on who will be the next German Chancellor.
Knowledge Hub
Global Reaction to DE Elections
Trump administration proposes repeal of rule protecting national forest areas
10:00 pm
Get you up to speed: Trump administration moves to end rule protecting swaths of forest land
The United States Department of Agriculture has proposed rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, impacting nearly 45 million acres of national forest land. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins stated the move aims to reduce wildfire risk by empowering local forest managers.
The USDA’s proposal to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule is positioned as a means to enhance local forest management in response to increasing wildfire risks. Public comments on the proposed rule will be accepted until September 21, as the country deals with one of the worst wildfire seasons in a decade, with over 7.3 million acres burned by mid-August.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has proposed rescinding the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, with Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins asserting that the change will allow local managers to address wildfire risks more effectively. Environmental groups, however, warn that this move could exacerbate wildfire threats, as research indicates that fires are four times more likely to ignite near roads, and the public can submit comments on the proposal until September 21.
What remains unclear — It is not specified how local forest managers will determine the best practices for managing wildfire risk in the absence of the 2001 rule.
Trump administration proposes repeal of rule protecting national forest areas
News|EnvironmentTrump administration moves to end rule protecting swaths of forest land
US Agriculture Department says rescinding the 2001 rule will help reduce wildfire risk and return control to local managers.
Published On 18 Aug 202618 Aug 2026
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has filed a proposal to rescind the entirety of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which prohibits road construction and logging on nearly 45 million acres (18 million hectares) of national forest land.
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins submitted the proposal on Tuesday, saying it will mitigate wildfire risk by returning authority to local forest managers, who “know the land best”.
“For too long, outdated restrictions have kept tens of millions of forested acres off-limits to the very treatments that improve forest health and reduce wildfire risk to our communities,” Rollins said in a statement. “It’s time to turn the page on the failed roadless rule and return our forests to health and productivity.”
The Trump administration and Republican lawmakers say building roads in these areas would make it easier for firefighters to access the land if a wildfire breaks out.
“For 25 years, the heavy thumb of Washington, D.C., has hindered Montana’s ability to properly manage wildfire risk and road development on nearly 60 percent of Forest Service land across the Treasure State,” Republican Governor Greg Gianforte of Montana said in a statement.
While the areas are referred to as “roadless”, there are thousands of miles of existing roads within the lands with federal, state, and county ownership. About half of these lands are within 1 mile (1.6km) of a road, and 31 percent are within 0.5 miles (800 metres) of a road, according to the National Forest Service.
The USDA clarified that it is not forcing timber cutting or road construction.
But environmental groups say rescinding the conservation rule will open the door to developments that will increase the risk of wildfire. Fires are four times more likely to start near roads than in roadless forests, according to research from The Wilderness Society.
“Roadless forests are where wildlife live,” Taylor McKinnon, southwest director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “They’re home to jaguars, Mexican spotted owls, and ocelots, some of the most iconic animals on the continent. Plowing roads into their habitat will bring human-caused wildfires and disturbances that they don’t need and can’t afford.”
The US is experiencing one of its worst wildfire years in the last decade, with 7.3 million acres (3 million hectares) burned in about 49,000 fires through August 17, according to the National Interagency Fire Center.
More than 95 percent of the affected areas would be in 10 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
In early August, the state of Washington fought a highly destructive wildfire that burned more than 8,000 acres (3,200 hectares) and forced approximately 65,000 people to evacuate.
Last month, the Trump administration finalised rollbacks of two regulations affecting the Endangered Species Act. One change requires officials to weigh economic and national security considerations when determining whether an area should be designated as “critical habitat”.
The public will have until September 21 to comment on the proposed Roadless Rule.
Health Canada seizes unauthorized prescription drugs from Montreal store
9:00 pm
Get you up to speed: Unauthorized drugs seized from Montreal store by Health Canada
Health Canada has seized eight different prescription drugs from a store in Montreal, declaring them unauthorized for use or sale in Canada. The situation involves an established violation of Canadian health regulations.
Health Canada has confirmed that eight different prescription drugs were seized from a store in Montreal due to their lack of authorisation for use or sale in Canada. The investigation is ongoing, and further details regarding the store’s compliance history have yet to be disclosed.
Health Canada issued a statement confirming the seizure of eight unauthorized prescription drugs from a Montreal store, emphasising the need to protect public health. The agency plans to conduct further investigations to ensure compliance and prevent the sale of any similar unauthorized products in the future.
What remains unclear — It is not specified how many units of each drug were seized.
Health Canada seizes unauthorized prescription drugs from Montreal store
Eight different prescription drugs have been seized from a Montreal store because Health Canada says they are unauthorized for use or sale in Canada.
Former DOJ lawyer claims Trump administration misused investigations targeting Harvard, Brown and Columbia
7:00 pm
Get you up to speed: Former DOJ lawyer alleges Trump administration abused investigative process to target Harvard, Brown and Columbia
The Trump administration pressured civil rights attorneys to investigate alleged antisemitism at Harvard, Columbia, and Brown universities without a factual basis, according to whistleblower Haley Van Erem. The complaint, made public by Rep. Jamie Raskin, details concerns regarding the integrity and outcomes of these investigations.
Haley Van Erem’s whistleblower complaint has been submitted to the inspectors general for the DOJ and HHS, as well as the Office of Special Counsel, highlighting concerns about the politicisation of civil rights investigations. A federal judge recently dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit against Harvard, stating that the alleged discrimination was insufficient to support civil rights violations under Title VI.
The whistleblower complaint highlighting alleged political pressure on civil rights investigations has drawn scrutiny from Rep. Jamie Raskin, who described the investigations as a “fake” operation designed to undermine academic freedom. In response, Raskin has requested communications and records from Harmeet Dhillon regarding the federal investigations into Harvard, Columbia, and Brown University.
What remains unclear — The specific communications and records requested by Rep. Raskin concerning the federal investigations into Harvard, Brown, and Columbia have not been disclosed.
Former DOJ lawyer claims Trump administration misused investigations targeting Harvard, Brown and Columbia
Washington — The Trump administration pressured its career civil rights attorneys to investigate allegations of antisemitism at the university campuses of Harvard, Columbia and Brown even though there was no factual or legal basis to do so, according to a former Justice Department attorney.
Haley Van Erem, a longtime lawyer at the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, accused political leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services and DOJ of improperly pushing staff to issue adverse findings against all three schools as part of a whistleblower complaint made public on Tuesday by Maryland Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin.
Before leaving the department, Van Erem was one of several DOJ attorneys who were involuntarily detailed to HHS to help investigate allegations of antisemitism on college campuses.
“Senior officials at DOJ and HHS departed from longstanding investigative practices designed to ensure due process, accuracy and legal compliance. Ms. Van Erem and her colleagues encountered compressed timelines to conduct investigations that compromised the ability to ensure that findings were justified and accurate,” her attorneys from the Government Accountability Project wrote in a letter to members of Congress that accompanied a copy of her complaint.
“For at least some of the investigations, there was little to no factual predicate justifying opening them. When they asked questions, raised legal concerns, or sought to document their objections, they were sometimes admonished and their concerns were often disregarded,” the letter said. “Taken together, these circumstances led the attorneys reasonably to believe that certain enforcement outcomes had been determined before the relevant evidence was collected and evaluated.”
A Justice Department spokesperson denied the allegations, and said that Van Erem was not involved in those specific investigations.
“While at the DOJ, Ms. Haley Van Erem did not work on university investigations. And for all matters, the Department stands behind the integrity of these investigations,” the spokesperson said.
WTX US News has reached out to HHS for comment.
The whistleblower complaint was made public just days after a federal judge dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Harvard accusing the school of violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Richard Stearns in Massachusetts found that instances of alleged discrimination cited by the government were “too isolated and episodic” to support federal civil rights violations of Title VI, which prohibits discrimination by entities that receive federal funding.
Unlike Harvard, which litigated the case, Brown and Columbia settled with the federal government to resolve similar Title VI allegations over antisemitism and have their federal funding restored.
WTX US News has reached out to Harvard, Brown and Columbia for comment.
Van Erem’s whistleblower complaint was submitted to the inspectors general for DOJ and HHS, as well as the Office of Special Counsel. It lays bare concerns that are widely shared by many longtime former Civil Rights Division attorneys about the politicization of civil rights investigations under the leadership of Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general who leads the division.
Dhillon has upended many of the traditional approaches by the division to investigate discrimination against people of color, in favor of other priorities that have included cracking down on campuses that allowed pro-Palestinian protests, investigating the use of diversity, equity and inclusion policies on college campuses and establishing a section solely devoted to the protection of gun rights.
According to the whistleblower complaint, attorneys assigned to investigate Brown did not substantiate any violations of Title VI, instead determining the school had promptly and effectively responded to the handful of incidents that occurred. Despite this finding, the government nevertheless pressed for and entered into a settlement with the school, the complaint said.
In the Columbia probe, meanwhile, the complaint said staff were pressed to issue findings against the school on an accelerated timeframe and before the factual and legal review was complete. As a result, her lawyers said the government relied on “allegations that were unsupported” as well as “news reports or litigation filings” and activities that were protected by the First Amendment.
Finally, in the Harvard case, the complaint said that DOJ attorneys raised grave legal concerns after the government moved to cut off the school’s funding prematurely and sought a settlement before any investigation had been completed.
“The outcomes of the investigations were predetermined, without regard to the evidence,” her attorneys wrote in her whistleblower complaint. “Hundreds of millions of dollars were suspended from these universities prior to the completion of Title VI investigations and the investigative team’s conclusions were frequently disregarded.”
In a letter to Dhillon, Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, asked her to hand over certain communications and records related to the federal investigations into the three schools.
“Antisemitism at American universities and medical schools is real. It needs to be addressed seriously. But your ‘investigation’ into antisemitism was fake, a pre-baked frame-up operation thoroughly political in nature,” he wrote in his letter on Tuesday.
“Before an actual investigation took place and regardless of what you actually found, the whole project was designed to harass professors and administrators at major universities, to curtail their freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to strip targeted institutions of hundreds of millions of dollars in grants that they had already been awarded on the merits of their applications,” he added.
Disabled man removed from Virgin Australia flight over wheelchair aid dispute
6:00 pm
Get you up to speed: Disabled man ‘booted off’ flight after dispute over his wheelchair aid | News World
Shane Hryhorec, a 41-year-old wheelchair user and travel blogger, was removed from a Virgin Australia flight from Sydney to Adelaide due to a dispute over the storage of his battery-powered wheelchair aid. The incident caused a 20-minute delay before Hryhorec was ultimately offloaded from the plane, which continued to ground passengers waiting to take off.
Virgin Australia is conducting a review of the incident involving Shane Hryhorec to explore how to better address seating and stowage requirements for passengers with disabilities. Hryhorec has indicated he may contact the Australian Human Rights Commission regarding his experience.
Virgin Australia has stated it is “reviewing the circumstances of yesterday’s experience” involving Shane Hryhorec and is exploring improvements for seating and stowage for disabled passengers. Hryhorec is contemplating contacting the Australian Human Rights Commission regarding the incident.
What remains unclear — It is uncertain how Virgin Australia plans to improve its handling of passengers with disabilities following this incident.
Disabled man removed from Virgin Australia flight over wheelchair aid dispute
A man was removed from a flight over his wheelchair aid (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
A wheelchair user was removed from his flight home over a disability aid after an ‘undignified’ confrontation with airline staff.
Shane Hryhorec, an activist and travel blogger, was flying with Virgin Australia when new restrictions proved problematic for his wheelchair aid.
He was preparing to fly from Sydney to Adelaide but ended up in a 20-minute back-and-forth with crew, grounding takeoff for the rest of the passengers.
Hryhorec, 41, is a C5 incomplete quadriplegic, with paralysis in his legs and torso, as well as impact on his hand function.
He uses a battery-powered removable SmartDrive device to push his wheelchair, allowing him to travel without someone pushing him.
However, due to new restrictions on lithium-ion batteries, it could no longer be placed in the overhead storage and had to be placed by his feet.
Sign up for all of the latest stories
@shanehryhorec
Kicked off a Virgin Australia plane today. ✈️♿️ I boarded my flight from Sydney to Adelaide with my wheelchair, SmartDrive and service dog, just as I have on multiple Virgin flights over the past week. The problem was the seat Virgin had allocated me. There was nowhere safe to secure my SmartDrive without it rolling around near my service dog. I asked for another solution, including moving seats or securing it elsewhere on the aircraft. Instead, I was offloaded from the plane in front of everyone. I didn’t choose that seat. The airline put me there. Yet I was the person removed when the setup they provided didn’t work. This is exactly why so many people with disabilities have anxiety about flying. It’s 2026. Disabled passengers shouldn’t have to fight this hard simply to get on a plane and get home. I’m angry, upset and genuinely shocked by how this was handled today. More to come.
♬ original sound – Shane Hryhorec
Unfortunately, the middle seat Hryhorec was in had no underseat storage, blocked by the business class seat in front, and his service dog was taking up the neighbouring footwell.
‘There was a barrier in front of me, which meant there was absolutely nowhere for a SmartDrive or a bag to go, and then in the (aisle) seat next to me was a passenger,’ he told 7News.
The SmartDrive has omnidirectional wheels, so it would not have stayed in place throughout the flight and could have potentially hit his dog.
Hryhorec continued: ‘The airline was instructing me to either put it under the seat in front of me, which is literally not possible, or I had to get off the plane.’
He told the Australian outlet he ‘felt like a burden’ and was ’embarrassed’ knowing the issue was holding up the whole plane.
‘All of this was happening whilst people were watching,’ the activist added. ‘It was just … so undignifying as well, and it just truly makes you feel disabled’.
A SmartDrive is used to make a wheelchair power assisted (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
There was no space in the footwell for a bag to go under the seat (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
Hryhorec added he’d had ‘no issues’ with Virgin Australia in the past four flights, to which one female attendant replied: ‘They’ve done the wrong thing then, just to accommodate you.’
One staff member did attempt to provide solutions, offering to strap the device under an empty seat but the other attendant said that wasn’t possible.
The customer experience manager, Jenna, told him: ‘It’s your battery sir, it needs to go under your seat,’ as he tried to explain there was nowhere to put it.
Hryhorec’s service dog was in the neighbouring footwell (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
He explained that even a bag, without the issue of wheels, would not fit in the space they were suggesting it needed to go.
As the debate continued, Hryhorec reminded the staff that he had not chosen to sit in that seat but did not need to keep his mobility aid near him during the flight.
The crew member asked if he was happy to move to a smaller seat with less room, to which the now-frustrated activist responded that he ‘doesn’t care’ as long as he can sit with room for his service dog.
Realising the dog would have to move with him, the woman said she was ‘unable to delay the flight anymore’ and began discussing removing him from the plane.
After he was ‘booted off’ – which he called ’embarrassing’ and ‘upsetting’ – the attendant continued to explain why they had made the decision but Hryhorec said he needed space to calm down.
He was put on a later flight, with the SmartDrive placed in a bag in an empty neighbouring footwell.
He was happy to place his back elsewhere but couldn’t use the footwell (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
Hryhorec said the whole thing was ’embarrasing’ and ‘upsetting’ (Picture: Shane Hryhorec)
To 7News, the travel blogger added: ‘It’s become quite clear after this experience … that Virgin Australia just doesn’t care about people with disabilities.
‘And I feel like Virgin Australia doesn’t want people with disabilities on their (planes).’
A spokesperson said: ‘Virgin Australia remains committed to providing an accessible and inclusive travel experience for all our guests.
‘While the safety of our guests and crew is always our highest priority, we are reviewing the circumstances of yesterday’s experience to understand whether there are opportunities to better identify specific seating or stowage requirements in advance and how our teams can support guests in similar circumstances.
‘We have reached out to Mr Hryhorec to find out more about his experience and we are reviewing the circumstances that led to this unfortunate outcome for one of our guests.’
Hryhorec has not commented publicly on the situation since but did say he was considering reaching out to the Australian Human Rights Commission.
Comment now
Comments
Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google
European Commission confirms that returns fall under EU law
4:00 pm
European Commission confirms that returns fall under EU law
EU Law Confirmed
The European Commission confirmed on Tuesday that returns are covered by EU law.
The European Commission confirmed on Tuesday that returns are covered by EU law.
Legal Framework
The European Commission’s affirmation that returns are governed by EU law underscores the legal obligations member states must adhere to regarding immigration and deportation policies.
The European Commission’s affirmation that returns are governed by EU law underscores the legal obligations member states must adhere to regarding immigration and deportation policies.
EU Law Affirmation
The European Commission stated, “Returns are covered by EU law,” reaffirming its commitment to existing legal frameworks on the matter.
The European Commission stated, “Returns are covered by EU law,” reaffirming its commitment to existing legal frameworks on the matter.
EU supports repatriation of unaccompanied migrant minors from Ceuta to Morocco
The European Commission confirmed on Tuesday that returns are covered by EU law.
Alaska and Wyoming primaries to highlight key Senate races and party dynamics
3:00 pm
Get you up to speed: What to watch in the Alaska and Wyoming primary elections
Voters in Alaska and Wyoming participated in primary elections on Tuesday, affecting key Congressional races. In Alaska, incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan faced a challenge from former Democratic Representative Mary Peltola, while Wyoming witnessed significant competition for the Senate seat vacated by Cynthia Lummis, with Trump-backed Harriet Hageman as the frontrunner.
Polls in Alaska open at 7am local time and close at 8pm, while in Wyoming, voting begins at 7am and ends at 7pm. Key insights indicate that Wyoming’s Republican primary features nine candidates vying for the House nomination, amid a major political reshuffle driven by incumbent withdrawals.
Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy, barred from seeking a third term, has prompted a highly competitive gubernatorial race with 17 candidates, while in Wyoming, former Congresswoman Harriet Hageman emerges as the frontrunner to succeed retiring Senator Cynthia Lummis amid a divided Republican Party. As voters head to the polls, both states’ races are expected to influence broader national political dynamics leading up to the midterms in November.
What remains unclear — It is not specified how the divided factions within Wyoming’s Republican Party will impact the outcomes of the primary elections.
Alaska and Wyoming primaries to highlight key Senate races and party dynamics
EXPLAINERNews|US Midterm Elections 2026What to watch in the Alaska and Wyoming primary elections
From a key battleground Senate race to intra-party feuds, here’s what we’re watching in Tuesday’s primaries.
Published On 18 Aug 202618 Aug 2026
Primary races across the country have offered an early read on where voters want their parties to head before November’s consequential midterms in the United States.
With only a handful of US states remaining in the congressional primary calendar, voters in Alaska and Wyoming — two reliably Republican strongholds — head to the polls on Tuesday, with races that could send ripples well beyond their small electorates.
Although the state has long been safe Republican territory in federal elections, this year marks the third consecutive election cycle in which Alaska finds itself among a handful of states at the centre of the fight for control of Congress.
Wyoming offers a different kind of race: a rare wholesale turnover of Republican leadership. Wyomingites have a glut of new leaders to choose from at the statehouse, in the governor’s mansion and in the US Capitol. Contests that could further consolidate the state’s ultraconservative politics or begin to push them to the centre.
Here’s what’s on our radar.
Alaska
When do polls open and close?
Polls open at 7am (15:00 GMT) and close at 8pm local time (04:00 on Wednesday GMT), although Alaska’s two time zones stagger poll closings across the state.
What makes Alaska’s primary different?
Unlike most states, Alaska uses a single primary rather than separate Republican and Democratic contests. This comes after Alaska voters approved Ballot Measure 2 back in 2020, which effectively eliminated the state’s traditional party-primary system for most offices. Instead, all candidates appear on a single, nonpartisan primary ballot. The top four vote-getters advance.
What are the key races to watch in Alaska?
The US Senate race carries the clearest national stakes because it could tip control of the chamber. The governor’s race is worth watching because of its exceptionally crowded and competitive field.
Seventeen candidates are running to replace Alaska’s staunchly pro-Trump Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy, who is barred by term limits from seeking a third term. Among them is former Governor Bill Walker, who is running as an independent. Republican candidates include former state Senators Click Bishop, Shelley Hughes and Lesil McGuire, former Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson, former state revenue Commissioner Adam Crum, Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, former state Attorney General Treg Taylor and business owner and conservative activist Bernadette Wilson.
Former state Senator Tom Begich and former state Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins are the two Democrats in the race.
Meanwhile, sixteen candidates are running for Alaska’s US Senate seat, but the race has two chief frontrunners: incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan and former Democratic Representative Mary Peltola. The Cook Political Report ranks the race among the country’s most competitive Senate contests.
Why the Senate race matters nationally
Though Alaska has not sent a Democrat to the Senate since 2008, former Representative Peltola, who represented Alaska in the US House from 2022 to 2025, demonstrated that a Democrat can win statewide there.
The race has drawn millions in campaign spending, including money being spent to elevate political unknowns who are unlikely to win the seat, but could materially alter the November field.
Super PACs have spent more than $2m trying to boost candidates who are not considered serious contenders for the seat, according to Alaska Public Media.
An Alaska Survey Research poll conducted in March found Peltola ahead of Sullivan among primary voters, 46.4 percent to 40.9 percent. In a simulated general-election matchup using Alaska’s ranked-choice system, Peltola also polled ahead of Sullivan.
A tale of two Dan Sullivans
There is an unusual Senate subplot: two Republicans named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot. One is the incumbent senator; the other, Dan J Sullivan Jr is a retired teacher from Petersburg. The state’s Division of Elections initially removed him from the ballot after determining that his candidacy appeared intended to confuse voters, but the Alaska Supreme Court later ordered officials to restore him to the primary ballot.
That creates a problem that is particularly acute in Alaska’s primary. Unlike the November election, the primary is not ranked-choice: voters select a single candidate, and the four highest vote-getters prevail in the general election. With two Dan Sullivans vying for the same electoral spot, even a relatively small number of mistaken votes could influence which candidate clears the hurdle.
Senator Sullivan will appear on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan” alongside the labels of “Registered Republican” and “Incumbent”. Challenger Sullivan will be listed as “Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.” without any party affiliation listed, although he filed for office as a Republican.
Israel-sullivan-and-peltola-find-common-ground”>On Israel, Sullivan and Peltola find common ground
Much of the attention around incumbent Dan Sullivan’s fundraising reflects the issues that have defined his Senate career, including his strong support for Israel and his hawkish approach to Iran.
The 61-year-old has repeatedly backed military aid and closer US-Israel defence ties while vehemently opposing efforts by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute Israeli officials. His congressional record includes repeated efforts to maintain or strengthen sanctions on Iran.
Sullivan’s reelection run has attracted substantial backing from high-profile political organisations, including the Republican Senate Leadership Fund, which has committed at least $15m towards his campaign. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC ) has also helped funnel about $250,000 in individual contributions to Sullivan during the first quarter of 2026.
Peltola has also championed Israel-related legislation during her time in the House, and sometimes even broke with fellow Democrats on Israel-related votes. The Jewish Democratic Council of America, which describes itself as advocating for a strong US-Israel relationship, endorsed her Senate campaign back in March.
Wyoming
When do polls in Wyoming open and close?
Voting begins at 7am local time (13:00 GMT) and ends at 7pm local time (01:00 GMT the following day).
What’s one big race to watch?
The Senate Republican primary.
In deep-red Wyoming, the Senate primary is less a contest about whether the GOP will hold the seat than about which Republican candidate will win it.
The Cowboy State has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1964, with the exception of 1976, when Jimmy Carter carried Wyoming. The Senate race is also interesting because it is an open-seat succession fight.
What are the important races in the Wyoming primary election?
The US’s least populated state is in for a political makeover, with a shake-up at nearly every level. With incumbent Senator Cynthia Lummis declining to seek re-election and Representative Harriet Hageman relinquishing her House post to try to succeed her in the Senate, Wyoming is poised for an unusually broad reshuffling in elected officeholders.
Wyoming’s Republican Party is divided between a hard-right bloc that already controls the state House and more traditional conservatives who retain greater influence in the Senate.
Hageman, the Trump-backed hard-lined congresswoman who rose to national prominence after unseating Liz Cheney in the 2022 Republican primary, is the clear favourite to succeed retiring Senator Cynthia Lummis. Among the other Republicans running to replace Lummis in the US Senate are former Kirby Mayor Sam Mead and former environmental services business owner Jimmy Skovgard.
In an April interview with Jackson Hole Community Radio (KHOL), Mead said that the endorsements Hageman received from Trump, Lummis and Barrasso come with an expectation that she will support the administration “no matter what.” While Mead has promised that he would push back against Trump on public lands, tariffs and foreign wars when he believes the administration’s policies run counter to Wyoming’s interests.
Nine active candidates are competing for the Republican nomination to replace Hageman in the US House in what’s shaping up to be the most expensive contest on Tuesday’s ballot. The field includes former state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jillian Balow, state Senate President Bo Biteman, businessmen Steve Friess and Reid Rasner, and Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray.
Local insights
Related Election News
© 2026 WTX News.