Voters are choosing 16 mayors and provincial governors, along with 14 lawmakers in parliamentary by-elections. Opinion polls indicate Lee’s liberal Democratic Party of Korea is favored to outperform the conservative People Power Party, which remains weakened following the removal and conviction of former president Yoon Suk Yeol over his 2024 martial law declaration.

Political analysts say the elections will show whether Lee’s strong approval ratings, currently above 60%, can translate into long-term political dominance. Particular attention is focused on the closely watched Seoul mayoral race, seen as a major indicator of public sentiment toward the government.

As of noon, voter turnout stood at 19%, according to election officials, with about 44.6 million eligible voters registered nationwide.

The results are also expected to shape the future of South Korea’s conservative opposition, which remains divided between reformists and supporters of Yoon.

Voting rights advocates and Democratic organizers in Alabama are intensifying grassroots mobilization efforts following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that has reshaped the political landscape surrounding congressional representation and electoral participation in the state.

At a rally in Montgomery, civil rights leaders, elected officials and longtime activists linked the court’s recent decision in the Callais case to broader concerns about voting access and minority representation in the American South. Organizers framed the event as both a response to the ruling and a continuation of civil rights activism rooted in Alabama’s history.

LaTosha Brown, co-founder of Black Voters Matter and one of the rally’s organizers, said voting rights advocates viewed the court’s action as a setback for decades-long efforts to expand Black political participation in the state.

“We have done so much work over the years in this state to make sure that there is a vibrant electorate, and we’ve been able to make some progress because of the representation we’ve gained,” Brown said during remarks at the rally. “The supreme court is undermining all those folks who fought and gave their lives in the voting rights movement.”

The comments came as advocacy groups and Democratic officials assessed the implications of the Supreme Court’s handling of the Callais decision, which has become a focal point in ongoing disputes over congressional district boundaries and minority voting strength in Alabama.The state has been at the center of repeated legal challenges over redistricting since the 2020 U.S. census.

Civil rights organizations and voting rights advocates have argued in federal court that district maps diluted Black voting power in a state where African Americans account for a substantial share of the population. Republican state officials have defended the maps as legally compliant and politically neutral.The dispute has carried national political significance because Alabama’s congressional boundaries could influence the balance of representation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Redistricting litigation across several Southern states has also become a broader test of the continued application of the federal Voting Rights Act.Speakers at the Montgomery rally repeatedly referenced the history of the civil rights movement in Alabama, particularly the campaigns in Selma and Montgomery that helped lead to passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Organizers emphasized the symbolic importance of continuing political organizing in a state that remains central to debates over voting access and racial representation.Attendees included veteran civil rights activists as well as younger organizers involved in voter outreach campaigns. Participants carried signs and addressed the crowd with speeches focused on electoral participation, district representation and community engagement ahead of upcoming elections.

Brown said organizers were increasingly relying on localized voter engagement strategies rather than national political infrastructure. According to Brown and other activists, recent legal developments reinforced the importance of sustained organizing in communities that receive limited national campaign attention.

Jackson, another organizer involved in the effort, said grassroots networks were returning to long-established organizing methods that prioritize direct voter contact and community-level engagement. He said volunteers were focusing on door-to-door outreach, voter registration efforts and maintaining a presence in neighborhoods often overlooked during election cycles.

The strategy reflects a broader shift among some voting rights organizations toward permanent local organizing operations rather than short-term election mobilization campaigns. Organizers at the rally argued that continued legal uncertainty surrounding district maps and voting regulations had increased the need for year-round engagement.

Representative Terri Sewell, who attended the event, said the public response to the court decision appeared to be generating increased political engagement among Democratic voters and civil rights supporters.Sewell said the turnout and atmosphere at the rally demonstrated heightened motivation among activists and community members.

“Instead of bemoaning the decision, people have become energized,” she said. “I expect more people to go to the polls. I expect a greater showing in November and a bigger victory for the Democrats.”Sewell has been one of Alabama’s most prominent Democratic voices on voting rights issues in Congress.

Her district includes Selma, a city closely associated with the 1965 voting rights marches that culminated in violent confrontations on the Edmund Pettus Bridge during what became known as Bloody Sunday.The historical connection to Selma remained a recurring theme throughout the Montgomery gathering.

Organizers and speakers linked current legal disputes over representation to earlier struggles over voter registration and racial discrimination in the electoral system.Representative Shomari Figures also addressed concerns about the legal and political uncertainty surrounding representation in the state. Figures said elected officials intended to continue legislative work despite the challenges created by ongoing litigation and court rulings.

“We have a term to represent,” Figures said. “We go to work, continue to do everything we can to squeeze every bit of good and every bit of progress out of the time we have left.”The remarks underscored concerns among some Democratic officials and civil rights advocates that future court decisions or redistricting outcomes could alter the state’s political balance and affect minority representation in Congress.

The event also highlighted the continuing involvement of veteran civil rights activists who participated in the original voting rights campaigns of the 1960s. Among them was Reverend Benny Tucker, who was beaten on the Edmund Pettus Bridge during the Bloody Sunday march in Selma and continues to live in the city.Tucker addressed rally participants with a message centered on sustained civic participation and continued activism. “Keep marching,” he said.

“Our voice is going to be heard.”Civil rights organizations involved in the rally said they plan to continue voter registration drives, community outreach operations and public advocacy campaigns throughout the election cycle as legal disputes over representation and voting rights continue in Alabama and other Southern states.

The Louisiana legislature approved the revised congressional plan despite objections from civil rights advocates and Democratic lawmakers, who argued the changes would weaken Black voter representation in a state where African Americans make up nearly one-third of the population.

The redistricting dispute has emerged as part of a broader nationwide fight over electoral boundaries, voting rights and partisan control of Congress, with both Republicans and Democrats increasingly using state legislatures and courts to shape district maps.

Newsom criticized Republican efforts during public remarks Thursday, accusing the party of attempting to dilute minority voting power through aggressive redistricting strategies.“This is stone-cold racism,” Newsom said, according to remarks carried in U.S. political coverage of the debate.

Republican lawmakers in Louisiana defended the plan as legally permissible and consistent with broader constitutional requirements governing congressional districts.The revised map is expected to face legal challenges from voting rights organizations and civil liberties groups, particularly under provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act designed to protect minority representation.

Redistricting battles have intensified across several U.S. states following recent court rulings and demographic shifts reflected in census data, with disputes often centered on whether district boundaries unfairly favor one political party or diminish the electoral influence of minority communities.

The issue has become especially contentious in southern states where changing population patterns and polarized voting blocs have heightened scrutiny of congressional maps.

Civil rights advocates argue that reducing majority-Black districts could undermine decades of protections established under federal voting rights legislation, while Republicans in several states maintain that race should not be the dominant factor in drawing district boundaries.

The Louisiana decision is likely to increase pressure on federal courts already weighing similar challenges involving congressional and legislative maps nationwide.

The proposed “Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of the Office” would create a 17-member body empowered to assess whether a president is fit to remain in office under criteria including physical or mental incapacity, or impairment due to substance use.

The initiative revives legislation first introduced by Raskin in 2020 during Trump’s first term.The move comes as some Democrats in Congress have renewed discussions about possible impeachment proceedings or invoking the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides a mechanism to transfer presidential powers if a leader is deemed unable to perform official duties.

Raskin’s proposal is unlikely to advance in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where Speaker Mike Johnson has been a strong supporter of Trump. Republican lawmakers in both chambers have also blocked separate Democratic efforts to pass a resolution aimed at ending recent U.S. military actions in Iran that were not formally authorized by Congress.

Political tensions have escalated following Trump’s recent warning that “a whole civilization will die” unless Iran permits free passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global shipping route. The statement came after U.S. forces, alongside Israel, launched military operations against Iran beginning February 28, raising concerns among lawmakers about the scope and objectives of the intervention.

Trump, who is serving his second term, was impeached twice during his first presidency but was acquitted on both occasions by the Senate.

While many Democrats had previously avoided renewed impeachment efforts, recent developments have prompted some within the party to revisit options for challenging Trump’s continuation in office, though views remain divided within the caucus.