Big Update on Vote To Remove Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar From Congress By Republican Congressman
St. Paul, Minnesota - June 11, 2026
Minnesota House Committee Falls Short on Subpoena for Rep. Ilhan Omar in Feeding Our Future Fraud Investigation
A Minnesota House committee voted 5-3 in favor of issuing a subpoena to Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) but fell one vote short of the six votes required under the chamber’s bipartisan operating agreement.
The subpoena would have compelled Omar to testify and provide documents related to her connections to the Feeding Our Future federal child nutrition fraud investigation, one of the largest pandemic-era fraud schemes in the country.
Committee Chair Kristin Robbins argued the subpoena had become necessary after Omar declined multiple invitations to testify and failed to respond to document requests.
“We have reached out to Representative Ilhan Omar on multiple occasions, inviting her to testify and inviting and requesting documents,” Robbins said. “The only tool left for us as a committee if we want to get these documents is to issue a subpoena.”
Republicans on the panel have focused on Omar’s sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act in March 2020, which they argue loosened oversight requirements in federal nutrition programs and created conditions that enabled large-scale fraud.
“Representative Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,” Robbins said. “She passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.”
Federal prosecutors have charged dozens of individuals in the scandal, including nonprofit founder Aimee Bock and numerous associates tied to Minnesota’s Somali community. Republicans sought communications between Omar and individuals connected to the investigation, as well as records tied to her public promotion of Safari Restaurant, a Minneapolis business later linked to the scandal.
Democrats on the committee opposed the subpoena, accusing Republicans of politicizing the investigation and questioning the timing with only days remaining in the legislative session.
Dave Pinto, the committee’s lead Democrat, argued that even if information were received, the committee would not have time to act on it.
The failed vote blocks the Minnesota House committee from compelling Omar’s testimony before the session ends later this month. Robbins indicated Republicans are exploring other options, including asking members of Congress to issue a subpoena.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
