Politics

(ATLANTA) — The district attorney leading the Fulton County, Georgia, investigation into efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election told a judge Tuesday that she opposes the public release of the grand jury’s report on the probe.

Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney is hearing arguments regarding whether or not to publicly release the long-anticipated confidential report, which the grand jury submitted earlier this month, according to court records, after probing the matter for months.

“In this case, the state understands the media’s inquiry and the world’s interest,” Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis told the judge. “But we have to be mindful of protecting future defendants’ rights. We want to make sure that everyone is being fairly, and we think for future defendants to be treated fairly, it is not appropriate for this report to be released.”

“Decisions are imminent,” Willis said.

Donald Wakeford, a prosecutor in the DA’s office, also argued that release would be “dangerous” to the people “who may or may not be named in the report for various reasons.”

“It’s also a disservice to the witnesses who came to the grand jury and spoke the truth to the grand jury,” Wakeford said.

Prosecutors said that 75 witnesses were interviewed as part of the probe.

Thomas Clyde, a lawyer representing a coalition of media outlets that includes ABC News, urged Judge McBurney to order the release of the report based on existing case law and “a genuine public interest in what these jurors found.”

“We believe the report should be released now and in its entirety,” Clyde said. “It is not unusual for the [district attorney] … to release information during the progress of its case.”

Clyde cited several examples in which “special purpose” grand jury reports were made public, and argued that none of the material likely included in the report would justify keeping it sealed.

Though the grand jury does not have the ability to return an indictment, it can make recommendations concerning criminal prosecution. Another grand jury would bring any possible charges, should they be recommended.

The central question regarding the report: Did the grand jury recommend criminal charges for Donald Trump and his allies?

Attorneys for Trump said in a statement on Monday that they would not be participating in Tuesday’s hearing — and did not expect charge recommendations.

“On behalf of President Trump, we will not be present nor participating in Tuesday’s hearing regarding the possible release of the special purpose grand jury’s report,” said the statement. “To date, we have never been a part of this process. The grand jury compelled the testimony of dozens of other, often high-ranking, officials during the investigation, but never found it important to speak with the President. He was never subpoenaed nor asked to come in voluntarily by this grand jury or anyone in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office.”

Attorneys in the statement said they therefore “assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump” — although there’s no indication if that’s true or not.

Willis officially launched the probe in February 2021, sparked in part by the now-infamous Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump pleaded with Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the exact number Trump needed to win Georgia.

Trump has repeatedly defended his call to Raffensperger, calling it “perfect.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ATLANTA) — The judge hearing arguments over whether or not to publicly release the report by the Georgia grand jury investigating efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election said Tuesday that he will take all arguments under consideration and “circle back” with a decision at a later date.

Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney heard arguments Tuesday regarding whether or not to publicly release the long-anticipated confidential report, which the grand jury submitted earlier this month, according to court records, after probing the matter for months.

“My proposal is that I think about this a little bit and then contact both groups,” McBurney said. “There will be no rash decisions.”

Earlier in the hearing, the district attorney leading the probe told the judge that she opposes the public release of the grand jury’s report.

“In this case, the state understands the media’s inquiry and the world’s interest,” Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis told McBurney. “But we have to be mindful of protecting future defendants’ rights. We want to make sure that everyone is being fairly, and we think for future defendants to be treated fairly, it is not appropriate for this report to be released.”

“Decisions are imminent,” Willis said.

Donald Wakeford, a prosecutor in the DA’s office, also argued that release would be “dangerous” to the people “who may or may not be named in the report for various reasons.”

“It’s also a disservice to the witnesses who came to the grand jury and spoke the truth to the grand jury,” Wakeford said.

Prosecutors said that 75 witnesses were interviewed as part of the probe.

Thomas Clyde, a lawyer representing a coalition of media outlets that includes ABC News, urged Judge McBurney to order the release of the report based on existing case law and “a genuine public interest in what these jurors found.”

“We believe the report should be released now and in its entirety,” Clyde said. “It is not unusual for the [district attorney] … to release information during the progress of its case.”

Clyde cited several examples in which “special purpose” grand jury reports were made public, and argued that none of the material likely included in the report would justify keeping it sealed.

Though the grand jury does not have the ability to return an indictment, it can make recommendations concerning criminal prosecution. Another grand jury would bring any possible charges, should they be recommended.

The central question regarding the report: Did the grand jury recommend criminal charges for Donald Trump and his allies?

Attorneys for Trump said in a statement on Monday that they would not be participating in Tuesday’s hearing — and did not expect charge recommendations.

“On behalf of President Trump, we will not be present nor participating in Tuesday’s hearing regarding the possible release of the special purpose grand jury’s report,” said the statement. “To date, we have never been a part of this process. The grand jury compelled the testimony of dozens of other, often high-ranking, officials during the investigation, but never found it important to speak with the President. He was never subpoenaed nor asked to come in voluntarily by this grand jury or anyone in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office.”

Attorneys in the statement said they therefore “assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump” — although there’s no indication if that’s true or not.

Willis officially launched the probe in February 2021, sparked in part by the now-infamous Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump pleaded with Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the exact number Trump needed to win Georgia.

Trump has repeatedly defended his call to Raffensperger, calling it “perfect.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., announced Monday that he will be “sidelined in Sarasota for several weeks” while recovering from a fractured pelvis, a punctured lung and torn ligaments in his neck — injuries that his office said he sustained when he fell from a ladder last week.

“I will be carrying out as many of my congressional duties as possible, and our DC and district staff continue to be readily available to assist Floridians,” Steube wrote in a tweet on Monday.

In a separate tweet, he added, “I am eager to rejoin my colleagues in Washington as soon as possible.”

Due to the elimination of proxy voting in the House, Steube’s absence will leave Republicans with one less vote on the floor and could impact their narrow majority’s ability to pass legislation and conduct other business.

Steube’s office said on social media last week that the congressman, who was first elected in 2018, took a 25-foot fall off a ladder while cutting tree limbs at his Sarasota property on Wednesday.

A witness then called 911 and Steube was taken to the intensive care unit at Sarasota Memorial Hospital, according to his office.

House Republicans have since shared well wishes for Steube, including Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

“He is in good spirits, and our entire conference prays for a swift recovery. I informed him he will serve on the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, and he is eager to get back to work” McCarthy tweeted on Thursday.

Steube was discharged from the hospital over the weekend and will be recovering at home, his office said.

On Saturday, he tweeted his thanks to his medical team. “[My wife] Jen and I remain endlessly blessed by the prayers and support from our friends, family, and community,” he wrote.

On Monday, he shared another update from home.

“I am blessed to have a great support team in my wife Jennifer as well as numerous friends and family, including the Steube pups,” he tweeted along with a photo of him lying on the couch in a neck brace with his two dogs by his side.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A Fulton County, Georgia, judge is hearing arguments Tuesday regarding whether or not to publicly release the long-anticipated report submitted recently by the special grand jury investigating efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

The special grand jury submitted its confidential final report earlier this month, according to court records, after probing the matter for months.

Though the grand jury does not have the ability to return an indictment, it can make recommendations concerning criminal prosecution. Another grand jury would bring any possible charges, should they be recommended.

The central question regarding the report: Did the grand jury recommend criminal charges for Donald Trump and his allies?

Attorneys for Trump said in a statement on Monday that they would not be participating in Tuesday’s hearing — and did not expect charge recommendations.

“On behalf of President Trump, we will not be present nor participating in Tuesday’s hearing regarding the possible release of the special purpose grand jury’s report,” said the statement. “To date, we have never been a part of this process. The grand jury compelled the testimony of dozens of other, often high-ranking, officials during the investigation, but never found it important to speak with the President. He was never subpoenaed nor asked to come in voluntarily by this grand jury or anyone in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office.”

Attorneys in the statement said they therefore “assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump” — although there’s no indication if that’s true or not.

A spokesperson for the DA’s office declined to comment on the status of the investigation ahead of the hearing. The office also had not yet filed a motion in court indicating its position on whether the report should be publicly released.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis officially launched the probe in February 2021, sparked in part by the now-infamous Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump pleaded with Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the exact number Trump needed to win Georgia.

Trump has repeatedly defended his call to Raffensperger, calling it “perfect.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A game of political musical chairs is unfolding in Indiana ahead of the 2024 campaign cycle as some of the state’s most high-profile Republicans begin to lay the groundwork for new prospects amid a competitive national Senate landscape.

The looming shuffle kicked off after Sen. Mike Braun announced in December that he plans to run for governor rather than pursue a second term in office.

Since then, Rep. Jim Banks officially threw his hat into the ring to succeed Braun and at least two other Hoosier Republicans — Rep. Victoria Spartz and former Gov. Mitch Daniels — have emerged as potential contenders. Spartz confirmed the possibility in December and while Daniels has not publicly acknowledged the possibility of a Senate run, he hasn’t ruled it out either, sources told ABC News.

State Republican operatives said that although primaries featuring multiple federal-level lawmakers on the same ticket is not a new phenomenon, it does give Indiana a unique political brand that favors candidates’ abilities to articulate and execute conservative policies.

“The Republican Party in Indiana is both blessed and cursed,” said Pete Seat, who served as an executive director for the Indiana Republican Party before pursuing a bid for state treasurer in 2022.

“It’s blessed in that it has an exceptionally deep bench of talent — just look at the fact that 90% of county-wide offices are held by Republicans. We have supermajorities in the state House and the state Senate. We’ve got a lot of people who could aspire to running for federal office. But that’s also the curse: There’s only so many options [available],” Seat told ABC News in an interview.

The 2024 Senate race will come the same year as the presidential election, which all but ensures high voter interest and media coverage. Republicans are also looking to take back the chamber, and holding Braun’s seat makes it all the easier to focus on the 23 Senate seats held by Democrats or independents, multiple of them in red or swing states.

Armed with a broad spectrum of Republican talent, Hoosier conservatives are now closely watching whether Daniels decides to get back into politics. He served eight years as the state’s top executive but left office in 2013 due to term limits.

Since then, Daniels has been working as the president of Purdue University while offering opinions on the national environment as a contributing columnist for The Washington Post. Daniels stepped down from his post at Purdue at the end of last year, and in November he penned a column on Election Day that warned about how “transparent nonsense can be shielded by tribalism or the groupthink of ‘elite’ opinion” while applying that idea to fiscal policy.

“If a notion is convenient enough in justifying a preferred outcome, it can survive despite mountains of evidentiary, or just common sense, refutation. Think of imaginary stolen elections or defunding police in an era of exploding crime,” Daniels wrote at the time.

The combination of policy topics cited by Daniels — anti-election denialism, pro-police — could lay the groundwork for the kind of platform the former governor would likely express on the campaign trail.

“If there was a Mount Rushmore of Indiana politicians, Mitch Daniels would be on it,” former Rep. Luke Messer told ABC News, while also noting that Daniels’ stature within the party does not preclude other Republicans from running successful campaigns.

The mounting speculation surrounding the upcoming Republican primary lineup is already opening the door for political attacks. In an online video earlier this month, the conservative anti-tax group Club for Growth threw its support behind Banks while labeling Daniels as “an old guard Republican clinging to the old ways of the bad old days.”

Nearly a week into his Senate candidacy, Banks boasts another high-profile ally: former President Donald Trump.

In an interview with The Daily Mail, a British tabloid, Banks welcomed Trump to join him on the campaign trail, and the former president — who announced his third presidential bid in November — appeared to lean into the idea on conservative social media.

Meanwhile, Spartz made waves earlier this month by changing her vote amid the contentious House election for the speakership. She opted to vote “present” on the fourth ballot before ultimately voting in favor of now-Speaker Kevin McCarthy on the 12th ballot. At the time, the congresswoman attributed her decision to shift the dynamics of the fourth ballot to her belief that Republicans needed to negotiate further until one candidate had enough support to secure the gavel.

In a December campaign email, Spartz expressed uncertainty about her future plans in politics but confirmed being “asked to consider” a Senate run. The congresswoman did not specify who requested her consideration for the role.

“I love our Republic dearly and understand how important these times are for our nation, but I need to decide if I am ready to commit at least 8 more years to Washington D.C. As some of you might know, I am not a huge fan of it,” Spartz wrote in the email, adding that she would make a decision about “how and where I can bring the most value and will let you know for sure in January-February of next year.”

Despite the current rough contours of the race, state Republicans go into 2024 with a heavy advantage to win the Senate seat, thereby ensuring the national spotlight — as well as the bulk of political spending — will stay focused on them into next year’s primary election.

In November, incumbent Sen. Todd Young was reelected in a landslide victory that nearly reached 60% of the vote.

Democrats appear to also be on shaky ground in the state’s 3rd Congressional District, which will be open due to Banks’ Senate candidacy. The district covers the northeastern corner of Indiana and has a partisan lean of 34 points, according to FiveThirtyEight. Banks won reelection with 65% of the vote in the fall.
Spartz represents the 5th Congressional District, where she also won by double digits, topping 60% of the vote.

The area covers parts of the northern Indianapolis ring counties where Republicans boast a partisan lean of 22 points over Democrats.

“Look at Indiana in 2022 — we actually did have a red wave, other states didn’t,” Seat, formerly with the state GOP, told ABC News. “We were talking about how it was going to be a wash across the shores, from sea to shining sea. Well, it happened here in the middle of America, and it didn’t happen in other places.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday fielded his first questions on the Justice Department’s handling of the investigation into classified documents found at President Joe Biden’s Delaware home and a post-vice presidency think tank, responding in broad terms to criticism that Biden has faced fairer treatment than former President Donald Trump.

“The department has a set of norms and practices,” Garland said. “These mean, among other things, that we do not have different rules for Democrats or Republicans, different rules for the powerful or powerless, different rules for the rich or poor.”

Garland addressed the questions during a meeting of the Justice Department’s reproductive rights task force, which was founded following the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. Wade last summer.

His answer came in response to a question on how he would answer those who argue Biden has been treated better than former Trump — who had his home searched by the FBI last August after the government said he repeatedly resisted efforts to hand over all classified records in his possession.

“We apply the facts and the law in each case in a neutral and nonpartisan manner,” Garland said. “That is what we always do, and that is what we do in the matters you are referring to.”

Asked about his decision to appoint special counsels to investigate both Biden and Trump and whether that was “good for the country,” the attorney general again emphasized that he believed he was following the department’s rules and norms.

“The role of the Justice Department is to apply the facts and the law in each case in a nonpartisan and neutral way without regard to who the subjects are,” Garland said. “That is what we have done in each of these cases and what we will continue to do.”

Trump has denied wrongdoing in his handling of classified materials while out of office and has claimed he is being politically persecuted.

An attorney for Biden said earlier this month that his documents were “inadvertently misplaced” and he moved quickly to address the matter once it was discovered.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has selected Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., to sit on the powerful House Intelligence Committee, setting up a fight with Speaker Kevin McCarthy over the assignments.

In a letter sent to McCarthy over the weekend, Jeffries wrote that Schiff — most recently the top Democrat on the intelligence panel — and Swalwell were both “eminently qualified” to continue to serve on the committee, despite McCarthy’s criticism of their conduct.

“It is my understanding that you intend to break with the longstanding House tradition of deference to the minority party Intelligence Committee recommendations and deny seats to Ranking Member Schiff and Representative Swalwell,” Jeffries wrote.

The House Intelligence Committee has special rules that allow the speaker to assign its members in consultation with the minority leader. McCarthy is able to decline to seat members without relying on a full floor vote of the chamber.

Typically, however, the minority party’s recommendations have been seated.

McCarthy has repeatedly pledged to keep Swalwell and Schiff off of House committees in this Congress — in Swalwell’s case, because of his reported run-ins with an alleged Chinese spy, though Swalwell wasn’t accused of any wrongdoing; and for Schiff, because of what McCarthy has said was his promotion of a disputed dossier about Donald Trump and Russia.

Jeffries wrote in his letter to McCarthy that “the denial of seats to duly elected Members of the House Democratic Caucus runs counter to the serious and sober mission of the Intelligence Committee.” Jeffries also wrote that embattled Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., is a “serial fraudster” who was seated on committees while Democrats could lose their seats.

“The apparent double standard risks undermining the spirit of bipartisan cooperation that is so desperately needed,” Jeffries wrote.

Republican leaders have cited how the House’s Democratic majority in the last Congress removed Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar from their committees over their past incendiary behavior, including Greene spreading conspiracies.

In both cases, some Republicans joined Democrats in voting to strip Greene and Gosar’s seats, Jeffries noted in his letter to McCarthy.

McCarthy has not responded to ABC News’ request for comment on Jeffries letter or when he will respond. Punchbowl News was the first to report the letter.

“What I am doing with the Intel Committee [is] bringing it back to the jurisdiction it’s supposed to do. Forward-looking to keep this country safe, keep the politics out of it,” McCarthy told reporters at a press conference earlier this month.

“So yes, I’m doing exactly what we’re supposed to do,” he said.

Separately, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., will be named by her party this week to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, according to Democratic sources.

McCarthy has also promised to keep Omar off of that committee, citing some of the controversial statements she has made, which could set up a House vote this week to remove her assignment.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A Washington, D.C., jury on Monday convicted four more members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group for engaging in a seditious conspiracy to stop the certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory on Jan. 6, 2021.

Roberto Minuta, Joseph Hackett, David Moerschel and Edward Vallejo were the second set of individuals associated with the Oath Keepers to be convicted in connection with the insurrection.

All four men were found guilty of conspiring to disrupt the electoral college certification, preventing a member of Congress from discharging their duties and conspiring and obstructing an official proceeding.

The group’s leader, Stewart Rhodes, was convicted of seditious conspiracy along with another associate in November.

Three other members were found not guilty of seditious conspiracy in that trial, but were found guilty on a host of other felony charges connected to their actions around the Jan. 6 attack.

The Civil War-era sedition charge was rarely brought in the U.S. until Jan. 6 and carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.

Members of the group have maintained their innocence throughout the trials and have vowed to continue fighting the judgments against them.

The jury’s decision is the latest victory for the Justice Department, which has brought cases against more than 900 defendants in connection with the Jan. 6 assault over the past two years.

The jury returned a mixed verdict on charges the defendants wiped cellphone evidence to throw off investigators, acquitting Minuta and Moerschel on those charges.

While he was never accused of being at the Capitol on Jan 6., prosecutors alleged that Vallejo was “on standby” at a nearby Virginia hotel waiting for the orders from Rhodes to bring firearms into the city. Vallejo and another member discussed the possibility of “armed conflict” and “guerilla war” on a podcast the morning of Jan. 6, according to evidence produced by prosecutors.

Defense attorneys stressed that those who amassed a cache of firearms at the Virginia hotel were mindful of Washington’s strict gun laws and were merely exercising their rights in self-defense.

Hackett and Moerschel were seen in images as part of the now-infamous military style “stack” formation of Oath Keepers who moved throughout the mob together during the riot.

Minuta was previously been identified as having served as a bodyguard for Donald Trump adviser Roger Stone on Jan. 6 before he and another member of the Oath Keepers rushed to the Capitol in a golf cart to join other members of the militia.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MONTEREY PARK, Calif.) — As investigators continue to search for answers in Saturday’s shooting at a dance studio that killed 10 people and wounded 10 others, the Monterey Park, Calif., community has come together to try and heal from this tragedy, according to community leaders.

The mass shooting comes as the community is still on edge over the recent years of anti-Asian harassment and violence in the country, Rep. Judy Chu, who represents the area in the House, told ABC News.

The congresswoman spoke with GMA 3 on Monday to reflect on the shooting and how the community is healing from the incident.

GMA 3: We want to give our sincere condolences to the city and, of course, to the families of all of the victims there. How is the community doing this morning? What are you hearing on the ground there?

REP. JUDY CHU: Well, it’s been a horrific 24 hours. People were so fearful and anxious about an active shooter being out there in the community. But finally, there was relief when he was found and surrounded by law enforcement, causing him to shoot himself. So my message to the community is: You are safe, there is no more active shooter. And it’s so important for people to heal and to go to the Lunar New Year celebrations that they have been looking forward to all year long. So it’s not going to be easy, but yes, we are beginning the healing process.

GMA 3: Again, our condolences to you and your community there. The suspect is seen stopping at a second dance studio in neighboring Alhambra. An individual there was able to disarm and preventing more harm. We don’t know the suspect’s motives just yet, but how important is it to you and the community that we find out?

CHU: I have many questions in my mind. I want to know what the motive is. I want to know whether he had a mental problem. I do understand that he does not have a criminal history, but I also want to know what the weapons were, whether they were illegal and then how he got them. And so we need to see what his background is.

What caused him to target the people? We do not know. Nonetheless, for him to do this right after we had our opening celebration of Lunar New Year was just horrific. There were thousands of people that were only one block away celebrating the — this — this very, very important holiday. And we had so many elected officials. It was a joyous time that immediately turned to tragedy.

GMA 3: The Asian American community has really experienced so much trauma by violent crimes, especially during the pandemic [in] the last few years. There were some early worries that this might be a hate crime, and while the suspect was an Asian man, we don’t know his motive just yet. What does it say that this was the first thought that came to a lot of people’s minds after an incident like this?

CHU: Well, the feelings of Asian Americans are very raw right now because we’ve just come from three years of anti-Asian hate due to COVID and there have been 11,500 anti-Asian hate crimes and incidents. There were so many incidents that we heard about at one point that every AAPI who walked out on the sidewalk wondered, will I be next? And so when those of us heard about this shooting, the first thing that came to our minds was, was this an anti-Asian hate crime? Well, it wasn’t. But still, the tragedy is overwhelming and these 10 lives should not have been lost, and especially at a time that should have been so joyous and should have been celebratory.

In fact, the reason that everybody was so enthusiastic about this Lunar New Year is that it was on hiatus for three years due to COVID. This was the first time it was being done in three years where everybody was together and in person. So it should have been a wonderful time for our community.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Arizona Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego announced Monday he is launching a bid for U.S. Senate to unseat independent Kyrsten Sinema.

“I have been deeply humbled by the encouragement I have received from the people of Arizona, and today I am answering the call to serve,” Gallego said in a press release.

In a video announcement, Gallego shared his vision for Arizona and went after Sinema, who has yet to announce if she’ll seek reelection.

“She’s repeatedly broken her promises and fought for the interests of big pharma and Wall Street at our expense,” he said. “I’m running for the U.S. Senate because the rich and the powerful don’t need any more advocates in Washington — but families who can’t afford groceries do.”

Gallego has spoken out against Sinema in the past for holding back several key pieces of Democratic legislation during her time in office. Most recently, he has come after her for switching party affiliation, leaving the Democratic Party and registering as an independent ahead of the 2024 elections.

Last week, Gallego’s fellow Arizona Democratic Rep. Greg Stanton announced that he would not seek to run for Senate next year, forging the path for Gallego to win the Democratic primary.

Gallego said in December some senators and representatives have privately urged him to run against Sinema.

A Gallego-Sinema matchup would make for an important campaign, given Arizona’s battleground state status. Meanwhile, on the Republican side, reports have circulated that former gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake is also mulling a senatorial run following her loss to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs by less than a percentage point.

Gallego, a former Marine, represents Arizona’s 3rd Congressional District, which includes parts of Phoenix and Glendale. He won reelection in 2022 with 77% of the vote, defeating Republican challenger Jeff Zink. He was first elected to Congress in 2014.

He currently serves on the House Armed Services Committee, the Committee on Natural Resources and the Committee on Veterans Affairs.

Gallego, a first-generation American, is of Colombian and Mexican descent. If elected, he would be the first Latino senator to represent Arizona.

“The odds that a single immigrant mom with a Latino boy, statistically, I was never supposed to end up, even in college. I slept on a floor, on a couch, on a roll-out mat,” Gallego said in the announcement video. “Hearing her cry, like, every night, being stressed out about how she was gonna raise like four kids on a secretary’s salary, you know, with an absent father.”

Gallego and his wife Sydney have a 6-year-old son and are also expecting a baby girl in July.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.