‘They Picked the Wrong Candidate’: 12 Texas Swing Voters on the Paxton-Talarico Race

Report on an interview of twelve Texas voters: six Republicans, four Independents, and two Democrats, who voted for Trump in 2024, by Kristen Soltis Anderson for The New York Times.

S

For years, Democrats have hoped to win a Senate seat in Texas, which has not elected a Democrat statewide since the 1990s. According to polling, that hope appears to be closer in reach this year than any other time in recent memory. Why?

This month, Times Opinion spoke with 12 Texans who voted for President Trump in 2024 and now either were considering voting for James Talarico, the Democratic candidate for Senate, or were undecided about whether to vote in that race at all.

Many spoke of their love of Texas and its commitment to a strong economy and hospitality, but this group of voters was broadly dissatisfied with the state of the country, the economy and especially politics. Many talked about both major parties being captured by extremes and incapable of working together or speaking well of others. Several participants said they were glad that border security was tighter, but several were unhappy with the way Immigration and Customs Enforcement has operated under Mr. Trump. A few said they couldn’t understand the choices Mr. Trump was making; some feel burned by promises he made in 2024.

“You used to think that you could count on the Republicans to be able to help out with the economy, and that they would be the ones to fix it,” one participant said. “But now it’s more a feeling of, it’s going to fix it for a certain few.”

Mr. Talarico, a state lawmaker, in turn, received a range of reviews. Some found him “fresh” and “inspiring,” while others disapproved of his social views.

If Texas does turn blue, this group’s heated and highly negative stance on Mr. Talarico’s opponent — Ken Paxton, the state attorney general, who survived an impeachment effort in the Texas legislature last year over corruption allegations, which he denied — would likely provide a window into that victory. “They picked the wrong candidate,” one participant said of the Republican Party. “It’s him. If they picked anybody else, they would have won.”

All of you have lived in Texas for 10 or more years. What has changed the most about Texas in the time that you have lived in the state?

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

The real estate prices have shot up like crazy in the last decade or so. So has the cost of living.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

Twenty years ago, you didn’t have half the infrastructure you do now. You didn’t have half these shopping malls and stuff like that. There’s been a lot of development.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I think that the culture of Texas has changed. It’s gotten a lot more diverse, I would say, in the last 10 to 20 years.

Jeffrey, 34, independent, Latino, school counselor

The initial joy of living here over the last decade has definitely deteriorated. I don’t love living here anymore. I don’t like the weather. It’s like a desert seven months of the year. Initially, I thought I could deal with it. Now it’s like I’ve got to hibernate for a few months of the year.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

I agree about the weather. Everything west of I-35 feels like desert conditions. Everything east of 35 feels like a swamp, as far as humidity.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

And has that changed in the last 10 years? Is that different?

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

It feels like the summers are hotter and the winters are colder. And the cities have grown so much. When I was a kid, San Antonio to Houston seemed so far away. Now you’re at the edge of one and into the other within about two hours.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What is the top issue you think Texans are facing right now?

Vince, 48, Democrat, Asian, auditor

I consider myself kind of upper-middle class, I guess. So I feel like right now the buying power of middle-class America is really shrinking. The cost of living here is so high, and it’s probably on par with other cities, like Chicago and New York and L.A. I feel like that’s a problem because a lot of people here are basically living paycheck to paycheck and they don’t have savings because, like I said, the higher cost of living, layoffs. The buying power of the middle class is not as strong as it used to be back in the 2010s.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

Minimum wage is so low here. And property taxes just keep getting higher and higher. I own my house. Just with the property taxes alone, it’s still expensive, even though it’s paid off. Everything’s going up except for our paychecks.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

I say the top issues are immigration, border control and homelessness. In the past five, seven years, it’s just gotten so bad.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I agree with the first gentleman who spoke: There is very little middle class anymore. And there’s so much poverty in this state. It’s either the haves or have-nots. We also face poor education. Our public schools are just getting worse. More people are leaving them. I don’t believe that we’re giving our students the education they deserve.

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

Well, there are several issues. Cost of living, immigration, the skyrocketing housing costs, insurance for these houses, health insurance. Everything is just priced out of range for the average American, for the average Texan, if you will. Education is getting worse.

Dennis, 62, Republican, white, retired

I’m going to agree with all the folks, and I’m going to add that over the last 10 years, we’ve seen a significant amount of negative rhetoric from our leaders. It’s causing people to be disrespectful of each other in Texas. They’re making rivals out of other people within our same state here.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What, if anything, do you think leaders in Washington should be focused on first when it comes to the issue of the economy?

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

I don’t understand the tariffs, but what I understand is that they will eventually come to affect me in cost of goods, including with the retaliation tariffs. Somebody needs to be looking at the economy as a whole and somehow address the rising cost of living, and the inflation that is going too fast to keep up with salary increases or pay increases. I feel like that needs to be addressed as more of a whole package than one-offs here and there.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

I think it starts with our national deficit and just government spending overall — get that under control. Because I think everything flows from that. I mean, we’re writing checks that somebody’s got to cash eventually, and we’re just spending money left and right. Our deficit is in the trillions now. That’s not sustainable for the future. And the fact that they’re not working together, just constantly — they can’t agree on the color of the sky.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

How would you describe the political culture of Texas? When you think about politics in Texas today, how would you describe it?

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

It’s definitely a very conservative state. I lived in Texas, and I was in California for 10 years and went back to Texas. It’s conservative, yet tolerant and accepting. There’s a strong resistance against immigration. And it should be legal. That’s how I came in. But at the same time, I think, with all the various cultures and different migration coming in, it has evolved in the last 20, 25 years. I’ve seen it move into a very, very endearing and educated and industrialized direction. But the economy is a big challenge. They’re encouraging manufacturing, which is good. But I need to see more.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

You’re either a Republican or a Democrat. Either you’re one or the other. You’re not going to sway to one side or the other, just because they’re very different here in Texas.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I think we are following the nation. We used to all have different opinions on politics, and we could still all get along. There were compromises, but we could be with family. One might believe in one thing and one might believe another, but we could all still be together. And as it is in the country, I think Texas is getting further and further apart. It’s gotten very nasty. We’ve always been a very kind state, I’ve always thought. And I don’t feel like we’re very kind anymore.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

To Jennifer’s point, are there ever people who switch parties when it comes to who they’re voting for? Or are people pretty set?

Jeffrey, 34, independent, Latino, school counselor

Texas voters just have so much pride. I think a lot of them are stuck in what they believe and are not open to potentially changing their points of view despite hearing credible information, opinions, life experiences. It’s really hard to change someone’s opinion on whatever topic it may be, especially those that are more historically conservative.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

For the most part, you’re not going to see a lot of flip-flopping. You’re either leaning on the conservative side, you’re leaning on the liberal side, or you’re all the way to the extreme. Being in the digital age, my fear is that people, especially us as older Americans, take what we see through digital media, the Facebooks and the TikToks and all that stuff, that they take that as fact more than an opinion. There’s probably not enough fact-checking in the world. And people just take what they heard, or pieces of what they heard, or what they think is, and they just run with it. Now that becomes their truth.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

I’m just going to speak on myself. I’m the type of individual who is going to vote for who I think would do a better job in the office. It doesn’t matter if they’re independent, Democrat, Republican. I just want to vote for the person I personally think is going to do the better job in the office.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

I just think, me being the same thing, I’m kind of down the middle, independent, lean more conservative most of the time. So most of the time, I vote Republican.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

In the 1990s, Texas elected statewide Democratic officials. Gov. Ann Richards was one of them. There have been a lot of high-profile races in the last decade, but Democrats haven’t been able to win statewide since then. Why do you think that is?

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

The Democrats always seem like they’re focusing on the wrong issues. Like, their big focus is on things that are not important to me, whereas Republicans are focused on the issues that I think are more a priority to people. Say what you want about Texas, but economically, we are a good, strong state. We’re one of the biggest economies in the world. I think the Republicans thrive on that because they are pro-business. They are anti-tax and anti-state-tax and all those things. So I think people who are open to business, they come to us, Texas, and they see that it’s really a true capitalistic state. They can start a life. Democrats focus on more social issues, which maybe are not as priority to the people living in Texas. They come here for the capitalism and for the success, the money, for the financial reasons.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

Redistricting plays a role. I think there’s a lot of redistricting that happens to keep Republicans dominating a certain area. Texas is also big on individual rights, and we don’t like a lot of government control. Typically, what comes along with Democratic policy or the party is a little bit more government involvement. So I think that’s part of the resistance as well.

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

One issue is Democrats are taking their cues from what’s happening in California, and they feel that that’s what a Democratic state, a dominant state, is doing, with welfare entitlements. And look at where they’re spending their money, and then they have to raise taxes.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

Are there issues where you feel more conservative or more liberal than the people around you? Are there issues that are divisive among the people you know?

Dennis, 62, Republican, white, retired

Immigration is a topic people get very emotional over. People have a lot of firsthand experience with it here. It’s much more accepting where I came from — having lived up north until I moved here 15 years ago — than it is down here. It’s one of those topics that I will hear other people talking about and I try to stay away from because I know that it has the potential to be explosive, especially in the last 10 years. It’s just gotten to be one of those: You’re either absolutely right or absolutely wrong. So it is one of those political topics that comes up that I wish didn’t and try to, whenever I can, stay away from it, because I come from a different perspective. And I see it to be very divisive here.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

Fertility issues are huge in Texas. Women cannot get fertility things done. They have to go to a different state, and that’s been a huge contention.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

And on that same thread, a woman’s right to choose.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

I agree, 100 percent.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

Are there national or state policy issues that you trust Republicans more than Democrats on?

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

I don’t trust anything that’s going on right now, Republican or Democrat. I mean, there’s so much wrong with our country.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

And are there any issues right now where you would say you probably trust Democrats more?

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

Like I said, I don’t think they can agree on the color of the sky. My only hope is it seems like every couple of generations, some young leader comes along and unifies people. I’m afraid the next unifying thing is going to be something tragic or something devastating, like a depression. I don’t have hope currently that either side can fix anything.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

There’s a lot of finger pointing. “Well, you said this. Well, you didn’t do this. Well, you said this. You didn’t do this.” I mean, there’s no meeting in the middle. There’s none.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

Very divided.

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

You used to think that you could count on the Republicans to be able to help out with the economy, and that they would be the ones to fix it. But now it’s more a feeling of it’s going to fix it for a certain few, that it’s going to be the top class or the certain friends that are getting the benefit of the economy, not the general folks.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I am someone who has voted for our current president twice because I didn’t feel like I had another choice based on the beliefs I have. But I do believe our current president has caused a lot of the extremes and a lot of the rhetoric and a lot of the issues where people cannot compromise and people can’t get along. I personally am just praying that we get better candidates in the future.

Jeffrey, 34, independent, Latino, school counselor

Commenting on if there’s something we trust Democrats more than Republicans: I would say if there’s one thing, it’s health care. And I just think Democrats have a better kind of plan with that than Republicans.

Moderator

Has the situation regarding immigration gotten better, worse, or is about the same as before Trump became president again?

Better: two, one Democrat and one Independent

Worse: eight

The Same: two, both Republican

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

I don’t think that there’s as many immigrants coming across now as when Biden was in office. I hate saying this, but I think ICE is doing somewhat of a good job. I don’t like the way that they’re going about their job and doing it. But it’s not a rotating door anymore.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

As far as the border is concerned in Texas, the previous administration, it was just open. I don’t agree with all the policies as far as ICE and those kinds of things, but as far as the border itself, I think it’s secure. I’m an immigrant to this country and have a family of immigrants, so this is something I feel strongly about. They really have to focus on cleaning up the legal way to do it. There’s too much bureaucracy in trying to get citizenship legally. And so it’s just becoming politicized.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

So I appreciate that the border has been secured; I know people who live along the border, all the way down the Rio Grande. I don’t like the methods used to do it. They’re very thuggish in nature. They’re deputized muscle instead of military or some properly trained law enforcement. I’ve seen families torn apart. I’ve seen hard-working people jailed because they’re not documented. Meanwhile, the criminals are still running around. Now that’s starting to ripple into businesses starting to shut down because those were their dishwashers and those were their cooks, and those were the reliable people that they really had nothing else. They did the jobs that nobody else wanted to do. And I don’t necessarily condone that, but I mean, whose job did they steal, honestly?

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

No. They really should be going after the companies that are hiring these illegal immigrants. They’re attacking these hard-working family men. I mean, they’re painting immigrants to all be these pedophiles that rape and hurt children and women, when who wants those people here? I agree. We want those people out of here, whether they’re immigrants or Americans. But these people who are so pro-ICE and so pro “get these immigrants out of here,” they’re painting a picture that all these immigrants are monsters. And that’s not the case. Like he said, I’ve seen so many videos where these men are working hard.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

You all voted for President Trump in 2024. When he won, what were you hoping was going to come from that?

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

The things that were promised, which was affordable living, cheaper groceries and a better cost of living. Day one, eggs will be affordable. I think a lot of us believed him. I believed him. And unfortunately, what he said is no different than what a lot of other politicians say. They’re saying the right things to get your vote.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

Trump said that he’s going to do this. You know what? Every single president since I’ve been voting has said “I’m going to do this,” and none of them, literally none of them, held up their end of the bargain. For me personally, I believe that the crisis with Iran and all that craziness and the shutting down of the Strait of Hormuz, that’s blown up our fuel prices and everything else along with it. You know what I’m saying? You can’t get cargo ships through. Every president that I can remember — “Oh, I’m going to lower taxes.” Well, I’m still waiting, and you’re not even president anymore. But I don’t want to just say Trump is the only one who hasn’t lived up to his promises. Every single president that I can remember has not lived up to their promises.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

I wanted life to be affordable and for things to be “great” again.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

You put your hands up to do quotes around “great.” What would great have looked like to you?

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

Just affordable living at the cost of what they’ve said before, the cost of our groceries going down, just higher-paying jobs, better opportunities, health insurance.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

I was hoping he would learn from the first time. All politicians lie and tell you what you want to hear. But I voted for him because he was something different. He spoke the truth. He spoke what was on his mind. That’s what appealed the first time. I was hoping the second time around, he learned something from his mistakes and learned something from, OK, now I know how to really fix this and it’s not going to be the same old, same old. I felt like I was just picking the lesser of two evils. I went with the one that I was in line with more as far as economics. And was thinking that he would fix those, which doesn’t seem to be the case.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I just thought he was the lesser of two evils. I don’t like his rhetoric. And I don’t like that he doesn’t tell the truth a lot. But I thought he’s a business person and he would have a better way to fix our economy, or at least get it moving in the right direction.

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

In the first term, he was very business friendly. He reduced the corporate tax, which allowed a lot of companies to invest in the U.S. and grow their businesses, give more jobs. And they pumped that money back into the economy. As a result, things, the stock market, everything, the economy grew. I thought he would use the same business acumen to be business friendly. But starting with the tariffs, I’m like, man, this makes no sense what he’s doing. And then the war, the Iran war, all the issues that are trickling down from that decision into the energy crisis that we are going to be facing, and that’s — affordability? He promised there would be no more skirmishes that we’d waste dollars on and lives on.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What is it that you think Mr. Trump is really focused on achieving or is trying to do? What do you think his goals are these days?

Vince, 48, Democrat, Asian, auditor

I think he’s trying to distract a little bit from, honestly, the Epstein stuff. It’s like, oh, then we go into a war. As a byproduct now, we’re focused on these forever wars that he said that we were not going to do anymore. The people that are suffering are the middle class here. Like Robert was saying, the economy sucks right now. It’s hard to get a job. It’s hard to afford housing. That’s what we should be focused on. And I feel like that’s the messaging that he’s not doing, and neither are the Democrats. I have always been a Democrat my whole life until this last election, because I just couldn’t associate myself with that party anymore, because they just lost their way so much. I mean, they used to be the blue-collar party. They used to be the law and order party in the ’90s with Clinton. Maybe it’s naïve, but I thought, OK, maybe Trump could change things.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

I honestly don’t know what Trump is focused on. I mean, I pay attention. And I still don’t know what his intentions are anymore. There seems to be a power trip that drives a lot of his decisions. Maybe that’s not true, but that’s what it feels like. It feels like a lot of his attention is foreign now, rather than domestic, and improving what the current state is today. So I mean, honestly, I don’t know what he’s trying to do.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I will concur with Lisa. We don’t need to name new lakes. We don’t need to change the name of the Kennedy Center. Those things to me are a waste, instead of spending time on what’s going on here in the U.S. and the fact that people are struggling. People can’t afford insurance, they can’t afford homes, they can’t afford their families.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Think about how you’ll vote in the midterm elections. Is your vote more about sending a message about what’s going on in Washington or based on the individual candidates?

More about sending a message: two, one Republican, one Independent

More about the candidates: the remaining ten

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

For me, it’s both. Ken Paxton and James Talarico — I mean, yeah, the two candidates, they couldn’t be any different. It was really crazy that Trump stood behind Paxton. I’m like, what in the world? And he just swung away from John Cornyn, and at the last minute. It was done. And now, since my time in Texas, I’ve seen him do a pretty good job since he’s been here. And going with a candidate that has such a shady background, I’m like, what the heck?

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

OK, let’s get into the specific candidates. When you hear the name Ken Paxton, what comes to mind?

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

Crook.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

Criminal, crook, all those. Yeah.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

Crooked.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

Bad.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

Amoral.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

Disgusting.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

Two words: morally corrupt.

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

Disgusting.

Vince, 48, Democrat, Asian, auditor

Corrupt.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

Womanizer. Crook.

Dennis, 62, Republican, white, retired

Crook is the word that comes to my mind.

Jeffrey, 34, independent, Latino, school counselor

Controversial. There’s just so many things that he’s been accused of and acquitted of. And I took a more neutral approach to your question. So controversial, but more in a negative way.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Why crook or crooked?

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

Just a lot of things that he’s done with his power as attorney general. There are criminals that he’s let off the hook, so to speak. It’s just a lot of different things like that.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What’s one word that comes to mind when you hear the name James Talarico?

Jeffrey, 34, independent, Latino, school counselor

Progressive.

Dennis, 62, Republican, white, retired

Neutral.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

Same-sex bathrooms in high schools and grade school.

Vince, 48, Democrat, Asian, auditor

I’d say inspiring.

Hitesh, 57, Republican, Asian, looking for work

Fresh.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

I’m going to use the same word: progressive.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

New.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I can’t do one word. I don’t agree with his morals. Even though he acts like that’s a big deal. I don’t believe it is.

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

Young.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

Ineffective.

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

Fresh. Hopefully my message to Washington.

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

Yeah, I agree with the fresh — the fresh air part.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What is fresh to you about Mr. Talarico?

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

Listen, at least in his campaign so far that I’ve seen, it’s like he’s trying to stay away. At least he’s trying to stay away from the negativity and pointing fingers. Whether you believe in them or not, he’s actually trying to come up with solutions. And it’s just getting away from the corruptness of Paxton and the Republican Party, which I’ve been a long supporter of. There’s nothing wrong with Cornyn. Why we would support Paxton over Cornyn is crazy to me. If it was Cornyn versus him, I would be with Cornyn. But because it’s Talarico versus Paxton, I will be voting for Talarico.

Moderator:

Would you vote for John Cornyn over James Talarico if he were the Republican in this race?

Yes: seven

No: five: two Democrats, two Independents, one Republican

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Lisa, you used the word “ineffective” to describe Mr. Talarico.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

He hasn’t proven himself in the Senate. I know Paxton hasn’t either, but I think he’s had more years in politics. I know sometimes that can be good and bad. I just don’t trust that he can go up against these politicians who play dirty and win.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Jennifer, you said “same-sex bathrooms.” Tell me more about why that comes to you.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

That’s what he wants to do in schools. I’m totally against that.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Pam, you said something about Mr. Talarico’s morals. Tell me more.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I am a Christian. I think he’s trying to bring people like me who can’t stand the crook that’s the Republican candidate over to his side by having all these commercials and things about his morals. He and I don’t have the same beliefs, whether it’s same-sex beliefs, whether it’s religious beliefs. I don’t like that he keeps talking about that more than he’s talking about, to me, the issues. But that’s my personal opinion. And that’s why I am in horrible turmoil, because I will not vote for Paxton.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

I’m not voting for anybody. Nobody. I’m not voting for that.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

Vince, you said Mr. Talarico was inspiring. What do you find inspiring about him?

Vince, 48, Democrat, Asian, auditor

Well, I think he strikes me as more of a moderate Democrat. He believes in border control. And he also believes in job creation. I’m also a moderate, even though I voted for Trump. I want the best of both worlds. I saw him on “Kimmel,” and he’s a very well-spoken gentleman. I do believe he’s a Christian. That does mean a lot. He went to seminary. Maybe it’s an act, maybe it’s not. For me, it works. He’s inspiring, well spoken. I think he wants the best for middle-class Texans. To me, I think he’s the better candidate versus Paxton. To me, it’s a no-brainer between the two. He’s into border control, which — it’s weird for a Democrat to be so pro that, to me. It’s usually they rail against that stuff. So it’s like, I’m glad he’s more of a down-the-middle Democrat. I can relate to him more. He’s speaking more to me and what I need.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

Let’s talk a little about candidates and values in the big picture sense. Would you rather vote for a candidate with good character but policy positions you disagreed with, or a candidate with questionable character who champions policy you agree with?

I’d rather vote for a candidate with good character but policy I disagree with: six.

I’d rather vote for a candidate who champions policy I agree with, even if he has questionable character: five.

[There seems to have been one abstention.]

Erica, 40, Republican, Latino, customer service

No one’s perfect. And like, going back to Trump, his delivery wasn’t always the greatest. But I like how he was proud to be an American. Now, of course, my mind has changed, but there are people who are not going to act the way you would like them to act. But deep down, you have the same beliefs. I’d prefer that than someone maybe being fake — you’re being more transparent. You’re not acting, putting on this fake picture of what everybody wants to see. So that’s why I say that.

Becky, 51, Democrat, white, retail

For me personally, I’d rather have somebody in office who aligned with what I’d like to see them do in office. Whatever they do behind their closed doors at home, that’s their own business. But if they go to work and they fight for what I want them to fight for to help out the state and then even the country, that’s who I’m going to vote for. I chose Talarico over Paxton just because I think Talarico is young blood. We need something new, somebody new, young, somebody who’s going to get in there and fight.

Robert D., 63, independent, white, retired

There were so many promises that Trump made when he was running for office. And there are so many things that he’s done since he got into office that are against what I believe in. I thought he was going to change the economy and make it better for our 401(k)s, which he has. But we’re getting to the midpoint of his presidency and I’m questioning what are his objectives, and how are they going to affect us as common people.

Moderator, Katherine Miller

What are these midterm elections really about? Is there one issue or question that’s bigger than everything else?

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

It’s about people going out to vote and using that power to make a statement that the economy is going in a direction that’s not acceptable, that this is an opportunity to change that.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

Yeah, the economy is going to be a huge one.

Lisa, 53, independent, white, technology consultant

I think immigration continues to be a hot topic.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

What might somebody who’s not in Texas not understand about voters picking a Democrat? Why might this election be different?

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

It might be a kind of referendum for people just to say, historically, Texas has always voted Republican. It’s a red state. I think there’s a lot of people who are more independent, more in the middle, maybe like I am. This is saying: Hey, you’ve gotten your chances. So you know what? I’m going to try something else, and see what the other side can do. So it’s maybe a message to Washington. Maybe if Texas does flip and does turn blue, then maybe you’ll wake up and start worrying about the state and worrying about the people of the state and worrying on doing things, communicating, compromising to get things done, versus just these extremists on both sides.

Pam, 66, Republican, white, retired

I just want to say I totally agree with Sebastian. I hope that the country, the Republican part of the country, wakes up after this election. And if Talarico is elected in Texas, I think it will wake up some parts of the country that are not worried about the economy and the things that Trump ran on before. People need to wake up.

Moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson

There have been a couple of elections in the last few years where Democrats did think they could win Texas. You had Beto O’Rourke running for Senate, then Colin Allred, as well. There are these other Democrats who said: I’m going to be different. I can be a Texas Democrat. I can do this. And they didn’t win. What makes this time different?

Sebastian, 50, independent, white, utility manager

One word: Paxton. They picked the wrong candidate. It’s him. If they picked anybody else, they would have won. But because they picked him, they stand to lose the state.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

Yeah. Cornyn had Talarico beat over Paxton. It’d be, hands down, Cornyn would have won it.

Robert S., 52, Republican, Latino, human resources

Yep. Landslide.

Jennifer, 50, Republican, white, stay-at-home parent

You are three months out, but yeah, he’ll win it. But now it’s between Talarico and someone people think is a crook with bad morals. People won’t vote for him. And I think Talarico probably will win it.

New Mexico jury finds Meta violated consumer law

Judge will decide financial penalty based on millions of violations of state law

BY OLIVIER UYTTEBROUCK / ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

September 26, 2026

SANTA FE — For the second time this year, a New Mexico jury found that Meta Platforms violated a state consumer protection law, in this case by making false promises to protect Facebook users from harmful content and data misuse.

The verdict came Friday following two weeks of testimony in 1st Judicial District Court in Santa Fe before Judge Francis Mathew. Jurors began deliberating Wednesday afternoon after more than four hours of closing arguments.

Jurors were given the task of weighing the truthfulness of 29 statements made by Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, and deciding whether the company violated New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. The law is intended to protect consumers from false, deceptive and_“unconscionable” trade practices.

Jurors found that in 26 of those 29 statements, Facebook was_“false or deceptive” in its assurances to users about issues ranging from removal of hate speech and misinformation from the platform to users’ ability to control their personal data from use by third parties.

Randi McGinn, New Mexico’s lead attorney in the case, celebrated the verdict as a win for the state and for all users of social media.

“What a great verdict,” McGinn said after Mathew read the verdicts from the bench. “My word to all the social media companies that would not be truthful to New Mexicans is like, ‘Don’t mess with New Mexico.’” Jurors also found Meta responsible for five “unconscionable” trade practices, including failure to notify users that their personal data was accessed by a third-party app developer and Facebook’s failure to remove hate speech and misinformation from the platform.

“Facebook has been lying for 16 years to everybody about protecting their information, all the while stealing all their private thoughts and dreams and hopes,” said McGinn, who was hired by the New Mexico Department of Justice. “It’s about time that somebody stood up to them and I’m just glad it’s New Mexico.”

A spokesperson for Meta responded Friday that the company disagrees with the verdict.

“Meta’s platforms are forums for free expression,” the company said in a statement. “We have a First Amendment right to manage those platforms in a way we believe best serves the interests of our community. This means prioritizing free speech, protecting our users’ information, and giving them control over their data.”

Meta will continue “to defend ourselves against efforts to distort our record,” the statement said.

The 26 statements jurors considered to reach their verdict included a statement that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg published in The Washington Post in May 2010. It said: “You have control over how your information is shared. We do not share your personal information with people or services you don’t want. We do not give advertisers access to your personal information. We do not and never will sell any of your information to anyone.”

Jurors found that the statement was false and a violation of New Mexico’s consumer protection law.

In addition, jurors found that each statement applied to at least 1.4 million New Mexicans — the estimated number of New Mexico Facebook users in 2020.

That number potentially results in tens of millions of individual violations of the Unfair Practices Act, which has a maximum penalty of $5,000 per violation. McGinn estimated the total number of separate violations at 43,899,720.

It’s now up to Mathew to determine how much money Meta must pay New Mexico. Mathew plans to hold hearings to allow the two sides to argue the potential judgment.

McGinn said Meta is almost certain to appeal the case and that New Mexico is unlikely to get a paycheck until the appeal is resolved. “We aren’t going to see the money for four or five years” while the appeal plays out, she said.

McGinn told jurors in closing arguments Wednesday that Meta made false assurances that it would protect the personal data of Facebook users. Instead, she argued, Facebook profited by selling users’ data to third-party app developers.

“ They turned our dreams into data that they could sell to advertisers,” McGinn told jurors. Meta officials lied when they told Facebook users that their data would not be sold to third-party app developers, she said.

Meta’s attorney, Dane Butswinkas, said in closing arguments this week that New Mexico’s case is based on a data breach that occurred more than a decade ago and doesn’t reflect safeguards Meta implemented in recent years to protect users from data misuse and harmful content.

“We’ve heard a lot of talk about Cambridge Analytica,” Butswinkas told jurors. “That was a sale by an app — a legitimate app, a teacher at Cambridge (University), to Cambridge Analytica in 2014. Here we are in 2026.”

The trial stems from a 2021 lawsuit filed by then-New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas in response to the decade-old Cambridge Analytica data breach scandal.

The suit was part of a wave of data-privacy actions filed by state attorneys general after news broke in 2018 that London-based Cambridge Analytica had used Facebook data for political campaigns. Clients of the now-defunct firm included the 2016 presidential campaign of President Donald Trump.

The trial marks the third time New Mexico and Meta have faced off in a Santa Fe courtroom this year.

In a 2023 lawsuit filed against Meta Platforms and Zuckerberg, Attorney General Raúl Torrez alleged the company failed to protect children from sexual abuse, online solicitation and human trafficking. That lawsuit led to two high-profile trials this year in 1st Judicial District Court in Santa Fe.

On Aug. 6, Judge Bryan Biedscheid ordered Meta to pay $567 million to help repair harm caused by the company’s platforms. That order followed a jury verdict in March that ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties to New Mexico for violations of the state’s Unfair Practices Act.

In August, Meta reached a landmark settlement agreeing to pay $17 billion to 47 states to settle lawsuits alleging harms against children. Within that 130-page settlement was a separate settlement in which Meta agreed to pay nearly $460 million to settle lawsuits filed by 47 states related to Cambridge Analytica.

Meta agreed to make “Cambridge Payments” ranging from about $4 million to Alaska to over $18 million to Massachusetts, the settlement shows. The deal releases Meta from all claims related to Cambridge Analytica, including any future claims.

But New Mexico declined to join the multistate settlement and instead has followed its own path in litigation against Meta, including claims related to Cambridge Analytica.

Texas woman triumphs as court upholds acquittal in voting error case

Crystal Mason has spent nearly a decade fighting conviction for casting provisional ballot that ultimately wasn’t counted

By Sam Levine for The Guardian

September 24, 2026

The nearly decade-long case of a Black Texas woman who was sentenced to five years in prison in a controversial illegal voting case will end with an acquittal, the state’s highest criminal court said in a 5-4 decision on Thursday.

The woman, Crystal Mason, has been appealing against the case ever since her 2018 conviction for casting a provisional ballot that ultimately wasn’t counted. In 2024, the Texas court of criminal appeals acquitted her in the case. The local prosecutor handling the case appealed that ruling to Texas’s highest criminal court, which initially agreed to hear it. But on Thursday, the court reversed itself, and said it would not hear an appeal, letting the acquittal stand. It did not offer any explanation for why.

“After 10 long years of fighting, I am overwhelmed with joy and gratitude. It’s hard to put into words how excited I am right now. This journey has been long, exhausting, and emotional, but God has carried me through it all,” Mason, 51, said in a text message.

Phil Sorrells, the Tarrant county district attorney, said in a statement: “Illegal voting remains a crime in Texas.

“If there is evidence that someone knowingly violates our election laws in Tarrant County, we will investigate it and, when the evidence supports it, prosecute it,” he said.

Mason was on supervised release – which is like probation – for a federal tax felony when she went to her polling place on election day in the 2016 presidential election. When she arrived, officials could not find her on the list of registered voters and offered her a provisional ballot, a safeguard required by federal law, to cast her vote. Mason decided to do so. Poll workers testified that they had Mason swear everything in the affidavit was true, though Mason has always disputed this occurred.

Texas, like many US states, prohibits people with a felony conviction from voting if they are on probation. Even though Mason signed an affidavit saying she was eligible to vote, she maintained she did not actually read the language on it and was never told she could not cast a ballot. Federal probation officials testified at her 2018 trial they never told her she couldn’t vote.

Prosecutors nonetheless argued Mason knew she was ineligible because she signed the affidavit and had sworn to poll workers that the information in the ballot was true. Mason has always maintained that testimony poll workers gave at her trial was not true. A judge found her guilty and sentenced her to five years in prison.

The case triggered outrage because Mason consistently maintained it was an innocent mistake and the severity of her sentence. As Donald Trump sought to escalate claims about voter fraud after the 2016 race, many also saw the case as a local effort to make an example of Mason.

“Civic participation without fear of imprisonment is a cherished right that is critical to our system of democracy. The highest criminal court in Texas affirmed that right by letting the lower court’s acquittal stand,” said Thomas Buser-Clancy, an attorney with the Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped to represent Mason. “Ms. Mason has spent nearly a decade defending her rights in Texas and today we see that her efforts have been successful not only in defending her own freedom, but also in protecting the ability of Texans across the state to participate in our democracy without fear.”

Alison Grinter, another one of Mason’s attorneys, said the ruling was important given the upcoming midterm elections.

“This really is a great day for Texas voters who can finally celebrate their right to go to the polls unafraid and undeterred by partisan intimidation and scare tactics,” she said.

Because Mason was convicted of a criminal offense while on supervised release, she returned to federal prison for 10 months. During that period, she nearly lost her home to foreclosure and her teenage daughter was entrusted with running her household. Her college-age son left a football scholarship to return home and help with costs around the home. Mason has three children and also raised four of her brother’s children. She has 10 grandchildren.

Four of the justices on the court wrote dissenting opinions, saying they believed there was sufficient evidence Mason knew she was ineligible when she cast a ballot.

“The evidence presented by the State at Appellant’s trial for illegal voting was sufficient to show that Appellant ‘actually knew’ that she was ineligible to vote,” judge Lee Finley wrote in a dissent that was joined by judge Gina Parker. “The provisional voter affidavit, corroborated by the additional evidence presented by the State, leaves no doubt whatsoever that the trier of fact was presented with sufficient evidence to sustain Appellant’s conviction. This is not a close case.”

Mason was not particularly political before 2016, but since her conviction, she has become much more politically engaged. In 2022, she opened a rally for Beto O’Rourke and worked to educate voters about their rights.

Recently, she said, the wife of the current district attorney, Phil Sorrells, knocked on her door and asked her if she would consider voting for him this year.

“The irony of that moment is something I will never forget,” she said.

ICE shoots, then medically abuses, an unarmed and erroneously designated fugitive in Austin

[Compiled by Heather Cox Richardson from reports from the AP, the Washington Post, and The Atlantic, from her September 23 newsletter]

On Sunday an agent from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shot Wilber Rafael Garcés Pérez, a Venezuelan food delivery driver, in the back in Austin, Texas. With a bullet still lodged in his body, he was discharged from a hospital to ICE custody, where he spent the night in pain on a cold floor. Nick Miroff of The Atlantic reported yesterday that the officer was a recent hire who was not wearing a body camera, despite the promise of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin that all ICE agents would wear cameras. News outlets reported that the officer had been issued one.

Officials told Miroff that the agents who stopped Garcés Pérez used a commercial database and federal immigration file that identified the man’s plates as belonging to someone with an outstanding deportation order; his lawyer said he had a valid work permit and is an asylum seeker, and that the deportation order came because notice of his immigration court hearing was sent to the wrong address. After a public outcry, officials took Garcés Pérez back to the hospital on Monday.

The White House banned Politico, citing anonymous sources. It provided the quotes.

In a letter defending its ban of Politico, the White House critiqued a report based on a press call it conducted, in which reporters were told not to name the speaker.

By Scott Nover for the Washington Post

September 23, 2026

The White House told Politico in a letter Tuesday that it had taken the unusual step of revoking its press passes last week because the news organization had violated professional standards, including by using anonymous sources and “trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security … and publishing sensitive or classified information.”

But among the examples the White House cited was an article based on a press call the White House hosted, according to an invitation reviewed by The Washington Post. In the call, reporters were instructed to cite an anonymous “senior administration official” in relaying the news to the public, according to a recording reviewed by The Post.

The letter citing the report was one of three submitted by the government in court Tuesday in defense of its ban of Politico, along with CNN and MS NOW, from the White House grounds.

One of Politico’s six alleged offenses, according to the White House letter, is a June 2026 article that begins by quoting a “senior administration official” who details a push to end the war in Iran.

“In June 2026, Politico cited a ‘senior administration official … granted anonymity’ said the odds of a preliminary deal to end the conflict with Iran were between 80 and 85 percent,” the White House letter reads, alongside a message that unauthorized leaks can harm national security.

“Publication of sensitive security information, and misinformation about national security information, diverts White House resources and those of the national security team in particular,” the letter said. “The spread of misinformation, especially relating to national security, is a threat that undermines the President’s ability to safeguard the national security.”

The source in Politico’s story was not speaking against the White House’s wishes, but spoke in an authorized call during which reporters were instructed to attribute information to a “senior administration official.”

The White House did not provide comment. Politico did not respond to a request for comment.

After this article published, the media newsletter Status reported that the senior administration official who spoke on the call was Vice President J.D. Vance. The Associated Press reported earlier Wednesday that the letter “appeared to reference a background briefing set up by the White House” and linked to its reporting from that briefing.

A White House aide began the June call by setting the terms of the briefing:

“Good afternoon, and thank you for joining this press call,” the aide said, according to the recording. “The contents of this call are on background, attributable to a senior administration official. By remaining on the line, you agree to those terms. There is no embargo for the contents of the call.”

Then, a senior administration official identified themselves and spoke of the possibility of a deal to end the war.

“I think the second thing is we do expect to be signing this agreement over the next few days,” the senior administration official said. “I can’t give you an exact date. And if I were to give you a confidence that we were going to be finding this agreement, I maybe would have said 75 percent this morning. It’s probably more like 80, 85 percent now, but it’s not 100 percent.” (The U.S. and Iran said days later that they reached an agreement.)

Around the six-minute mark, the press aide reminded participants of the terms of the briefing: “Just for new entrants to the call, I’d like to remind everyone these comments are on background attributable to a senior administration official.”

It’s commonplace for the White House to offer briefings about ongoing hot-button issues and, because of the sensitivity of the situation, shroud the speakers in anonymity. The Associated Press, Bloomberg and CNBC were among several outlets who reported on the call, citing a senior administration official, but were not banned from the White House.

The White House has given Politico until Friday at 5 p.m. to contest the contents of the letter.

Poster’s post script: Political did. A Trump-appointed judge sided with Politico and the other news media banned from the White House.

Trump Bans CNN, MS NOW, Politico From White House Press Pool. What Do YOU Think?

[From The Onion]

President Trump banned news outlets CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from participating in the White House press pool, citing what he considers fake news coverage of himself. What do you think?

Jonah Gardner, Topiary Consultant

“Yeah, lots of grandpas yell at cable news.”

Lia Rowe, Pastry Attendant

“He says that now, but he’s going to miss belittling them to their faces.”

Evan Cortez, Poster Hanger

“I’m sure Anderson Cooper could go undercover as a teenage girl to get in.”

Court Orders Kennedy Name Removed From RFK Jr.

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a bombshell ruling on Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the Kennedy name removed from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “immediately.”

“Henceforth, the former Mr. Kennedy will be known as Robert Francis Trump,” Judge Harland Dorrinson ruled. “Since Donald J. Trump has long wanted to put his name on something named Kennedy, this seems like the perfect resolution.”

In a dramatic unveiling in court, the judge ordered a tarp removed from the former Kennedy, who now had the word TRUMP tattooed on his face.

The renaming of the former Mr. Kennedy drew the unanimous approval of the Kennedy family, who said in an official statement, “Finally, our nightmare is over.”

Albuquerque restores Christmas Eve luminaria bus tour

Mayor Tim Keller reversed the city’s decision to cancel the annual tour, while officials seek ways to reduce its costs next year.

By Gregory R.C. Hasman / Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

September 24, 2026

For a few days, some thought the city of Albuquerque was stealing Christmas from fans of its luminaria bus tours.

Then, Wednesday, Mayor Tim Keller directed the city to bring the annual event back. The announcement came less than a week after it announced that the bus tour would not happen this year.

“It is good for the city of Albuquerque to recognize tradition because within our own neighborhood, there’s so much family tradition,” Huning Castle Neighborhood Association president Rudy Garcia said. 

“And it’s hard when traditions are taken away. So kudos with the turnaround on that. And kudos to Councilor (Joaquín) Baca for acknowledging that,” Garcia said.

The Journal reported that tickets for the event, which cost $1.50 in 2025, would often sell out quickly. But the city said that over the last decade, an average of 62% of reserved tickets went unused. In 2025, the tour cost about $200,000 to serve 586 attendees — a cost to the city of $341 per person. The cost includes transit operations, staffing, barricades, police traffic control and signage.

At Monday’s city council meeting, Baca said $200,000 is “not that big by city standards.”

“One of our big jobs here is finding money … and nobody came to me and said, ‘Hey councilor, we may have to cancel. There may be something going on. Why don’t you help us find some money?’” he said. “That would have been a great conversation to have.”

Baca said canceling the bus tour would have caused increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic in the area.

“So, to me, you decided to take out a fixed route and security, and we’re probably going to drop in 300-plus cars because that’s about 650 people who can’t now take the bus … which means we have got a ton of pedestrians out there with no security, with more traffic, with no control, right?” Baca asked city Chief Operations Officer Matthew Whelan, who said yes.

“What’s next? Are we going to take away the Christmas parade and not call Councilor (Nichole) Rogers?” Baca asked. “Are we going to stop the Sunday cruise and not talk to Councilor (Klarissa) Peña? Are we going to take away buses for the Balloon Fiesta and not call Councilor (Brook) Basaan?”

For Baca, the event is more than about money. 

“I grew up on the luminaria tour,” he said. “I rode those buses every Christmas because my dad drove the luminaria tour. He complained sometimes, but mostly he was happy. He was really happy because of the pay differential, right? We did not grow up wealthy. This is how my parents paid for Christmas.”

In a phone interview on Wednesday evening, Baca said he was glad “the mayor reversed course and he’s going to protect one of our long-standing traditions.”

While this year’s Christmas Eve event will happen after all, city spokesperson Dan Mayfield said in a news release the city will work with employees, neighborhoods and community partners over the coming year to develop a plan that preserves the tradition while reducing costs and operational demands.

“You know, we can always be more efficient with our resources,” Baca said, “but there is a difference between just putting a monetary value on something and actually understanding the value of one of our traditions.”

UNM is first known public target of rogue OpenAI hacking attempt

AI attempted to breach four university and government websites unauthorized

By Natalie Robbins / Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

September 24, 2026

An artificial intelligence system at OpenAI, the company operating the chatbot ChatGPT, went rogue in at least four instances this year and attempted to hack into government and university websites across the world, including a digital library at the University of New Mexico.

In all four incidents, which took place from May through July, users directed the AI simply to collect data. When it failed to do so through normal means, the technology attempted to hack into the websites, according to research lab Transluce, which identified the incidents.

UNM’s website was the first public data provider identified to have suffered an attempted hacking by OpenAI on May 25 and 26. AI tried repeatedly via multiple means to retrieve a photograph from UNM’s Valmora collection, which contains records from a tuberculosis sanatorium in Mora County, according to Transluce.

The technology probed the website for vulnerabilities, tried to disguise traffic via proxy services and sent a flood of 80 requests to the server, hoping to bypass security controls, though the attempts all appear to have been unsuccessful.

Days later, on May 28, the program attempted to hack into Data USA, a repository of public data from the U.S. government. This attempt was also presumed unsuccessful, researchers said.

OpenAI next hacked Australian government websites, breaching the country’s Medicare Statistics Reporting Service website and acquiring private health data on June 18, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Wednesday, the New York Times reported. 

On June 20 and 21, the software hacked into the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare’s website, though it did not obtain any private information, the Times reported.

A spokesperson for OpenAI told the Times it had reached out to UNM, Data USA and the Australian government.

The discoveries of the attempted hackings come after OpenAI officials revealed in July that a group of rogue ChatGPT bots carried out a cyber attack against the tech firm Hugging Face.

OpenAI did not immediately respond to a Journal request for comment. 

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Oracle invokes ‘force majeure’ on Project Jupiter, but says data center still on track

Official says mechanism is ‘often used to preserve contractual rights among project partners’

By Justin Horwath / Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

September 24, 2026

Oracle Corp., the Austin technology company set to be the largest tenant of the Project Jupiter data center in Doña Ana County, sent the center’s developer a “force majeure” notice, according to a Bloomberg News report. 

Force majeure — “superior force” in French — is a contractual provision a party may invoke to avoid contractual obligations because of unforeseen or unusual circumstances. 

Oracle sent a force majeure notice to Stack Infrastructure, the developer of Project Jupiter, according to Bloomberg.

Michael Egbert, an Oracle vice president, wrote in an email to the Journal on Thursday that the project “remains on our planned schedule.” 

“We are fully committed to New Mexico and confident in our path forward,” Egbert said. 

“Force-majeure notices are commonplace in developments of this scale and are often used to preserve contractual rights among project partners,” Egbert said. “They do not, by themselves, establish a project delay or change delivery expectations.”

Oracle executives have pointed to a challenging regulatory environment in New Mexico as Project Jupiter has become one of the top news stories — and a national flashpoint for pushback against data centers.

Last week, the New Mexico Supreme Court gave the project a regulatory victory, lifting stays that had paused an air quality permit application and blocked water pumping for the construction site in Doña Ana County. 

Project Jupiter is relying on a state air quality permit that allows a company to build a 2.45-gigawatt power plant to provide electricity to the data center. The court lifted another stay that had prevented the project from using a well for construction, which is ongoing.

Egbert, the Oracle spokesperson, said it hired more than 900 workers in August, and that more than 3,600 construction workers are building the campus.

Still, Wall Street reacted negatively to the force majeure notice. Oracle’s stock was down over 4% in the 24-hour market, trading at $138 per share as of 10:30 a.m. That’s more than a $100 drop from its 2026 peak — $248 per share in early June.

In a Sept. 10 earnings call, Oracle reported earnings per share of $1.56 for the first quarter of the company’s 2027 fiscal year. That adds up to $6.7 billion in profits for the quarter, up 57% from the year-ago period. 

Pressed by an analyst about potential data center delays in New Mexico and Wisconsin during the earnings call, Oracle co-CEO Clay Magouyrk said that “anyone that’s been in the business of doing construction or large-scale infrastructure development, if their plan relies on 100% achievement of every one of their deliverables, we have a term for that: It’s called a bad plan.” 

“New Mexico is an interesting location,” he added, citing regulatory proceedings. “We’re making very good progress in terms of construction, (the) data center is definitely on track.”

This story will be updated.