Federal agents searched the D.C.-area home of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Monday, taking the extraordinary step of executing a criminal search warrant against a sitting member of Congress just 22 days before Election Day, as the Trump administration investigates allegations involving her family’s immigration records.

The search immediately drew accusations of political intimidation from Omar’s supporters, who pointed to President Donald Trump’s repeated attacks on the Minnesota congresswoman and questioned the timing of an investigation targeting one of his most outspoken critics.

“Representative Omar is a dedicated public servant and a true ally for working families, and Donald Trump has done nothing but use racist tropes and stereotypes to attack her,” said Joel Payne, MoveOn’s chief communications officer. “Now, he’s abusing his power to physically intimidate and harass her.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman acknowledged that Homeland Security Investigations agents, part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, searched a District residence as part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation.

The spokeswoman declined to provide additional information or publicly identify the person under investigation.

According to published reports, the warrant identified possible violations involving false statements, immigration document fraud and conspiracy. Federal investigators have also examined questions concerning Omar’s finances, campaign funds and interactions with foreign citizens.

No criminal charges against the congresswoman were identified, but Monday’s search occurred less than four weeks before voters decided whether to return Omar to Congress.

The investigation follows months of public accusations from senior Trump administration officials, including Vice President JD Vance, who previously claimed that Omar committed immigration fraud.

In an interview with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, Vance asserted, without publicly presenting evidence, that the administration believed Omar had broken immigration laws. He also said he and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller had discussed how to pursue the allegations.

“What are the legal remedies now that we know that she’s committed immigration fraud?” Vance asked during the interview. “How do you go after her? How do you investigate her?”

Omar has repeatedly rejected the accusations, including claims that she married her brother to facilitate immigration fraud. Her office dismissed Vance’s allegations in March as fabricated and defamatory.

Questions about the investigation intensified in August when Immigration and Customs Enforcement refused to release records sought under the Freedom of Information Act concerning allegations surrounding Omar’s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

The agency cited an exemption allowing law enforcement authorities to withhold records when disclosure could interfere with enforcement proceedings. The refusal did not establish that Omar committed fraud or, at the time, confirmed that she was personally under investigation.

Omar, who came to the United States as a refugee from Somalia, was elected to Congress in 2018 and became one of the first two Muslim women to serve in the House. She represents Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, which includes Minneapolis, and has frequently challenged Trump over immigration enforcement, civil rights, and his administration’s treatment of immigrant communities.

Her confrontations with the administration have made her a recurring target of the president’s political attacks. The criminal investigation also follows a frightening incident earlier this year in which Omar was physically attacked during a public appearance.

On Jan. 27, a man attacked Omar during a town hall meeting at the National Urban League’s Twin Cities headquarters in Minneapolis. The incident prompted condemnation from the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation and its Black Women’s Roundtable, which demanded accountability and warned against political violence.

“We are shocked and extremely disturbed by the attack on Rep. Ilhan Omar yesterday while she attempted to address the critical issues and chaos swirling around in Minneapolis,” Melanie L. Campbell, president and CEO of the coalition and national convener of the Black Women’s Roundtable, said in a Jan. 28 statement.

Campbell praised Omar for continuing to speak out despite threats against her.

“We believe that NO public official should be threatened or physically attacked, especially when they are serving in the best interests of their constituents,” Campbell said. “Political violence and intimidation have no place in our democracy.”

MoveOn, the progressive advocacy organization, accused Trump of using federal law enforcement to intimidate a political opponent and urged voters to respond at the ballot box.

“On Nov. 3rd, we get our chance to fight back and hold him and his corrupt administration accountable,” Payne said.

Based on reporting by Washington Informer.

The NAACP is launching a voter protection hub ahead of the 2026 midterm elections as voting rights groups prepare for potential challenges at the polls.

Voters will be able to report allegations of intimidation and suppression by phone and through online submissions, while NAACP attorneys and legal volunteers investigate complaints and seek emergency court intervention when necessary.

According to The Washington Post, the hub is scheduled to launch October 24.

“We are ready,” NAACP General Counsel Kristen Clarke told The Washington Post. “We have an army of legal volunteers across the country and are prepared to activate and seek emergency relief on Election Day where necessary.”

The effort comes as organizations are also working to increase Black voter participation ahead of the midterms. BIN reported in September that the Congressional Black Caucus Institute launched its “SO VOTE” campaign, which plans to spend at least $4.5 million registering and mobilizing Black voters, young voters and rural voters.

The Associated Press reported that the campaign is targeting Georgia and Mississippi statewide, along with 16 congressional districts.

The NAACP is particularly focused on voter intimidation, changes to election rules and the impact of redistricting on Black voting power.

The organization filed a lawsuit against Justice Department Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon on Friday (October 2), seeking records about the department’s plans to deploy election monitors at polling places during the midterm elections.

“To be clear, there is no federal statute that gives the U.S. Department of Justice the right to send their so-called ‘election monitors’ to polling sites across the country,” Clarke said in a statement.

The NAACP’s voter protection hub will give voters a centralized way to report problems and connect with the organization’s legal team during the election.

The Black Information Network is your source for Black News! Get the latest news 24/7 on The Black Information Network. Listen now on the iHeartRadio app or click HEREto tune in live.

Based on reporting by Atlanta Daily World.

Here’s a transformational idea: everyone should have access to safe, healthy and affordable food.

If this idea doesn’t feel radical to you, then perhaps you haven’t spent much time in the Southside of Chicago and its adjoining suburbs.

Food insecurity is rampant in our neighborhoods. If you live in Washington Heights, you are practically guaranteed to experience lower food access than the average Chicagoan – with similar circumstances in the South Shore, West Englewood or West Pullman.

It has been clearly documented that “Food is Medicine.” In fact, according to countless scientific studies, good nutrition is critical during cancer treatment. It empowers your body to maintain muscle, rebuild damaged tissues and better withstand aggressive radiation or chemotherapy. A patient with access to nutritious food will experience fewer side effects, like fatigue and nausea, and will have less need for extra medicines. In short, good food improves a patient’s daily life.

Instead, though, a Black woman with breast cancer in our South Side neighborhoods or suburbs has the opposite experience. In fact, if “food is medicine,” then we are inarguably in a crisis, and it is disproportionately affecting Black women with breast cancer.

As co-authors of the Pinkprint and members of the Chicago Better Together Breast Cancer Disparities Think Tank, an initiative launched to address the disproportionate impact of breast cancer mortality on Black women in Chicago’s South Side and South Suburbs, we know that by combining data-informed strategies with community-driven advocacy and leadership, we will create equitable, sustainable outcomes for those most affected by breast cancer and the lack of access to nutritious foods in their communities.

Solutions start as local initiatives. We must pilot community-driven solutions in areas with the highest breast cancer mortality rates and limited access to nutritious food.

Existing local programs – food pantries, community fridges and even hospital-run delivery systems – are a critical piece of this local infrastructure. They are just a component, though, of the robust nutrition infrastructure the South Side lacks. In the long-term, our neighborhoods need clean, well-stocked grocery stores – and we must demand that our elected officials do everything they can to attract and retain these food corporations to invest in our communities.

This is just one item on their to-do list. Long-term solutions will include policy changes and targeted incentives at the city, state and federal levels. Just this spring, over 150,000 people in Illinois lost SNAP benefits, a devastating cut with ripple effects across families into entire neighborhoods. These cuts disproportionately affect people in the South Side of Chicago – not to mention, overwhelm food banks and other centers that serve as part of our social safety net. The Families Receiving Emergency Support for Hunger (FRESH) program in Illinois provides a one-time, automatic $400 cash payment per eligible household member to residents who lost their SNAP food benefits. This will help ease the immediate negative effects of these cuts and is much appreciated. But it is not a long-term solution.

When we started conversations in work groups about this project, we started with the idea that Black women deserve equitable access to quality breast cancer care. Any conversation about breast cancer care and goals for improved outcomes, must include a conversation about nutrition justice.

Nutrition justice is not just a transformational ideal: it is an idea that will literally transform our neighborhoods and the quality of life of every single person living in them. It will put grocery stores in empty storefronts; it will deliver food to a breast cancer patient going through chemotherapy.

Nutrition justice will help improve breast cancer outcomes for Black women on Chicago’s South Side. And Black women should not have to wait.

This op-ed is the second in a series focusing on eliminating breast cancer mortality in Black women on Chicago’s Southside. The authors are part of the Chicago Better Together Breast Cancer Disparities Think Tank, an initiative launched to address the disproportionate impact of breast cancer mortality on Black women in Chicago’s Southside and South Suburbs. Together with other community leaders, they have co-authored the Pinkprint, a strategic multistep plan and call-to-action on this critical issue.

The post She’s Not Non-compliant, She’s Hungry: Addressing Food Justice to Improve Breast Cancer Outcomes appeared first on Chicago Defender.

Based on reporting by Chicago Defender.

By now, there’s little question that a maternal health crisis is rocking the Black community. The data tells the story: Black moms are dying during childbirth at three times the rate of white moms, a disproportionately high percentage of Black children are born prematurely, and Black infants are about twice as likely to die as white infants in states like Louisiana.

But new data from a handful of pilot projects also suggests a potential solution that could significantly improve outcomes for Black mothers and their babies: cash payments, no strings attached.

Studies show the unrestricted money led to fewer preterm births, higher newborn birth weights, and fewer critical-care infant hospitalizations. It also reduced stress among new moms who would otherwise struggle to attend prenatal check-ups, pay for food and formula, or keep a roof over their heads.

“This makes so much sense to me,” says Tamara Mason, an official with the nonprofit March of Dimes who worked on an Atlanta project distributing money to low-income pregnant women. “Why isn’t everyone doing this?”

Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, is among several sponsors of legislation that would provide direct financial aid to new mothers, similar to the expanded child tax credit in 2021. The credit sent monthly payments of up to $300 per child straight to most families’ bank accounts; experts credit it with lifting millions of children out of poverty.

When it expired, child poverty rose again.

“I believe that we need to, for moms, flood resources to them through things like the child tax credit,” Booker said during an August press briefing on the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act. “We were able to cut child poverty virtually in half for our communities, and that actually does affect child outcomes.”

Those positive outcomes in part spurred the March of Dimes to launch trial programs providing universal basic income, or UBI, to pregnant women and new moms in two cities: Atlanta, which Bloomberg ranked as the most economically unequal large city in the country, and New Orleans, which March of Dimes gave an F grade.

No strings attached

In Atlanta, the Guaranteed Basic Income Program gave each participant $1,000 a month during pregnancy and her baby’s first year. Women most likely to live in poverty in that city are Black women of reproductive age; 25 pregnant women in two of the area’s highest-need ZIP codes received the cash.

March of Dimes ran the pilot through an Atlanta collective-impact partnership known as the collaborative. It is modeled on San Francisco’s Abundant Birth Project and, organizers say, rooted in an idea the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. championed decades ago.

Funders Skeptical at First – Then All In

Mason said she spent months pitching foundations on the idea, which some considered outside her organization’s lane.

“I was honestly surprised that a couple of foundations,” Mason says. “Funders were like, ‘Why is March of Dimes in this space? You all are the birth defects people. You’re the preterm birth people.’”

The Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta signed on as the primary funder. The Liz Blake Giving Fund and the Jesse Parker Williams Foundation funded data gathering and evaluation Emory University conducted.

The nonprofit Center for Black Women’s Wellness handled recruitment, and more than 110 women applied for the 25 spots, Mason said. Applicants had to live in one of the two ZIP codes, earn no more than 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and be 12 to 28 weeks pregnant.

Cash, Diapers and a Network

Stipends were paid through a prepaid card, letting evaluators track spending without restricting it. Helping Mamas, a nonprofit focused on diaper insecurity, supplied 300 diapers and eight packs of wipes a month, plus a car seat and other essentials. The Georgia Black Doula Network encouraged, but didn’t require, participants to hire doulas.

Early results from Emory’s evaluation, as described by Mason, show a 20 percent decrease in financial stress and a 66 percent decrease in hopelessness, a figure she called striking. Prenatal outcomes trended better than average.

Mason was careful not to oversell what $1,000 a month can fix. Several participants lost housing; one or two dealt with domestic violence.

Even though GBI reduced financial stress, “it still is one piece of the puzzle,” Mason said.

New Orleans: Overcoming Crisis

March of Dimes runs a similar program in New Orleans, GBI Rx, offering pregnant patients in their first or second trimester $12,000, as a lump sum or $1,000 a month. Two partner medical clinics enroll patients for healthcare, and the payment card blocks cash withdrawals and spending on liquor and gambling.

In Louisiana, “we have a maternal and infant health crisis – specifically, a Black maternal and infant health crisis,” said Robin Gruenfeld, director of collective impact for March of Dimes in New Orleans. ”And it’s been that way for a long time.”

Black infants there died at about twice the rate of white infants from 2021 to 2023. Gruenfeld said Orleans Parish has the state’s lowest prenatal care utilization rate.

Gruenfeld said the program’s city seed money, federal pandemic relief funds, and foundation funding were “zeroed out” without notice. Most funds were later restored at a lower level, forcing organizers to scale down to 94 participants instead of the 100 planned. They also enrolled on a first-come, first-served basis.

Recipients spent lump sums on housing, cars and insurance. But spending priorities for the participants changed when the federal government stopped paying out SNAP food benefits during last fall’s federal shutdown.

“During that time, more than a quarter of the funds that we gave folks was going to groceries,” Gruenfeld said.

Several New Orleans city government officials are now weighing a program modeled on Michigan’s Rx Kids, which a study credits with nearly halving neonatal deaths in Flint, one of the poorest cities in the state.

“We are seeing policies pushed by the political will of predominantly Black women come into effect, and then also the backlash,” says Danielle Atkinson of Mothering Justice Action Fund, a nonprofit advocacy organization. “In Michigan, we have Rx Kids, which is extremely popular [and] the data on the impact is undeniable.”

But recent changes are endangering the success of such programs, particularly amid President Donald Trump’s hostility towards programs focused on diversity, equity and inclusion.

“We’re getting this pushback around identifying race and parental status as systemic areas of oppression,” Atkinson says. It remains to be seen, she says, “whether or not we are going to be able to prevail with the political power and the popular will of these issues, or the rhetoric and the history of racism in our country.”

Washington Looks Elsewhere

That includes the Republican-controlled Congress, which has shown little appetite for cash aid tied to pregnancy.

The Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act, which Booker reintroduced along with Democratic Reps. Lauren Underwood of Illinois and Alma Adams of North Carolina, bundles 14 bills on housing, nutrition, WIC and the perinatal workforce, but not direct cash.

Still, signs suggest the issue – providing cash aid to low-income mothers and their babies – may stay on the front burner as the midterm elections approach in November.

This month, former Vice President Kamala Harris and Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, both Democrats, hosted a Black maternal health roundtable in Detroit. Danielle Atkinson of Mothering Justice took part.

“Black mamas deserve access to quality healthcare that sees us, listens to us, and understands us at every step of the way,” Atkinson said afterward. “The responsibilities we carry do not end at pregnancy, nor do they disappear when we give birth and want to spend time with our newborn. They stay with us throughout all that we experience.”

Based on reporting by Louisiana Weekly.

Instead of it taking place at an Ivy League school in Ithaca, New York, what would it look like if a national story concerning rape allegations from fraternity members took place on an HBCU campus in Atlanta, Washington, D.C., or Nashville?

Would President Donald Trump still feel “badly” for the alleged?

Do you think the Kappas, Sigmas, and Alphas would face the same scrutiny?

Might people use more compassionate language when discussing the case’s legalities?

We already know the answers to those questions.

Sunny Hostin from “The View” recounted a call she received from actress Cynthia Erivo, who said, ‘Sis, I know you, and I know your heart and your life’s work has been about protecting women and children. But the clip that I saw doesn’t reflect who you are.” Hostin’s initial remarks about the case focused on its legal aspects, lacking compassion for the alleged victims and other survivors who might have been affected. Hostin reflected, “Instead of leading with the law, I need to lead with empathy so that people can receive the message about the law. I was accused of defending these young men and victim-shaming, which is something I would never do since I spent the majority of my career prosecuting sex crimes.”

If you’re reading this, then you are already aware of the allegations against the “Cornell 7.” The news comes just weeks after 14 people were charged in connection with the alleged trafficking of kilos of cocaine on Penn State’s campus by members of white fraternities. A decade ago, the rape scandal at Baylor University dominated the news, which was around the same time as the Brock Turner case at Stanford.

I ask again: how would the news coverage, social media chatter, and podcast conversations differ if such incidents happened on HBCU campuses and included members of Black Greek-letter organizations?

Based on reporting by Atlanta Daily World.

Families across the country are opening their monthly utility bills with a growing sense of dread. Groceries cost more. Rent costs more. Now electricity has become one more expense pushing household budgets to the breaking point, and for many in the Black community – as usual – the squeeze is being felt hardest of all.

Residential electricity prices are expected to average more than 18 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2026, about 5 percent higher than last year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. At the same time, demand for power is climbing fast as the nation adds data centers, factories, and other large energy users. And consumers remain exposed to a market rattled by global conflict and swings in fuel prices.

These costs do not land on everyone equally. For a family with little left over at the end of the month, even a modest jump in the light bill means less for food, transportation or medicine. Low-income households spend three times more of their income on energy than other households, and Black households spend 43 percent more than white households, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

The question every public official should be asking, then, is simple: How does America add the reliable electricity it needs while keeping costs down for the families least able to absorb them?

Instead, a group of state attorneys general has chosen a very different fight.

In November 2024, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued three of the nation’s largest asset managers, BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard, and was joined by a coalition of other states. The lawsuit claims the firms bought up large stakes in major coal producers and then used their influence as shareholders to pressure those companies to cut production in pursuit of climate goals. The attorneys general argue this restricted coal supply, raised coal prices and, in the end, raised electricity prices for consumers.

Paxton and his colleagues have presented the case as a way to bring down power bills. But when Paxton’s office announced its settlement with Vanguard, it billed the deal as an agreement “to protect the coal industry.” That wording tells us a great deal about whose interests are really at the center of this case.

Attorneys general have only so much time, staff, and money. Every hour spent on litigation against investment firms is an hour not spent on the problems that actually drive up household energy costs: transmission bottlenecks, permitting delays, an aging grid, energy efficiency and the shortage of new power generation.

There is actually an even deeper problem with making coal the centerpiece of an affordability strategy. Coal has been losing ground in the marketplace for decades.

Around 1990, coal supplied more than half of the nation’s electricity. By 2025, its share had fallen to about 17 percent. Most of that decline came from competition, chiefly cheaper natural gas, along with the growth of renewable energy and tougher environmental rules. In the first three months of 2026 alone, coal plant output fell 11 percent from a year earlier, while renewable generation grew. And this summer, Lazard’s annual analysis found renewables remain the lowest-cost option for new power plants, even as existing plants have become more competitive and continue to provide real value to the grid.

Coal’s decline did not begin with Wall Street, investment policies or the climate movement. It is the result of decades of change in America’s energy economy. Where a coal plant remains affordable and necessary to keep the lights on, utilities should keep running it. But keeping a useful plant open is very different from treating the survival of an entire industry as public policy. If other sources can provide power more cheaply, government has no business shielding coal from that competition.

For Black communities, the cost of coal does not stop at the utility bill. Burning coal produces air pollution and coal ash that must be managed, and the Environmental Protection Agency notes that coal ash contains contaminants like mercury, cadmium, and arsenic. A landmark NAACP study found that the roughly 6 million people living near coal plants had lower average incomes than the nation as a whole, and that people of color made up a majority of those living near the worst polluters. Too many of our neighborhoods carry both burdens at once: high energy bills and a greater share of the pollution. Any policy that claims to help consumers should account for both sides of that ledger.

The truth is that families do not much care whether the power running their refrigerator comes from a coal plant, a natural gas facility, or a wind farm. They care that it is there when they need it and that they can afford to pay for it.

Critics of environmental policy often complain that government should not pick winners and losers in energy markets. That principle should apply evenly. Financial firms should not be allowed to break antitrust laws in pursuit of climate goals. But government should be just as cautious about using its power to guarantee coal a permanent place in the market. Coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar, battery storage, and new technologies should all compete on cost, reliability, and what the grid needs.

The real challenge before the nation is building enough reliable power, and building it quickly. Clinging to coal’s past, especially through the courts, does nothing to solve that.

At a time when so many Americans are struggling just to pay bills, it is fair to ask why state officials are pouring so much energy into protecting one industry. Attorneys general should be working to make power more plentiful and more affordable. Families facing economic hardships deserve more than to be invoked as props in a political fight between government officials and some of the world’s largest financial institutions.

Based on reporting by Our Weekly Los Angeles / Our Weekly Antelope Valley.