Leavitt Set to Depart Trump Admin For Brief Maternity Leave
The most prominent figure in the White House briefing room is expected to step back temporarily in the coming months. Karoline Leavitt, who became the youngest press secretary in U.S. history, is expecting her second child, a daughter, due in May.
Her anticipated leave has prompted speculation in Washington about who will assume briefing duties in her absence, with several potential successors emerging from within the press office.
Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly is widely viewed as a leading internal candidate. She joined the White House in January after serving in senior communications roles at the Republican National Committee and in the House of Representatives, according to a Saturday report.
Kelly also serves as a special assistant to Donald Trump, a role noted on her social media profile and one that places her in close proximity to senior decision-making within the administration. Her background extends beyond government and political communications. In 2019, Kelly was crowned Miss State Fair of Virginia, a title she used to promote civic engagement among young Americans.
“In today’s polarized political climate, it is our job to step up to the plate and work to ensure the government we receive is a good one,” she told the Fairfax Times.
“It is my goal as Miss State Fair of Virginia to show young people that, contrary to what they might believe, we do have a voice and it’s about time we used it,” Kelly, a graduate of Auburn University in Alabama, added.
Assistant Press Secretary Taylor Rogers is also viewed as a potential option. A graduate of Clemson University, she joined the White House at the start of Donald Trump’s second term after working for nearly two years at the Republican National Committee.
Rogers has been seen working closely with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, including appearances in the Oval Office, and maintains an active social media presence documenting her role in the administration.
Regional Press Secretary Liz Huston represents another potential candidate. An Indiana University graduate, she joined the administration from StateRAMP, a cybersecurity organization where she worked as a program manager following an internship.
Leavitt has not publicly outlined a timeline for her expected leave from daily briefing duties, offering no formal announcement on when she plans to step back. She has, however, shared some personal updates.
According to the UK’s Daily Mail, Leavitt recently celebrated her baby shower and posted photos from the event, including an image with her mother, Erin, alongside close friends.
“My beautiful friends threw me a beautiful baby shower, and I couldn’t be more grateful,” she wrote. “I feel blessed to have so many strong and loving women in my life and can’t believe we will welcome our little lady into the world in a few weeks.”
In December, Leavitt announced on Instagram that she and her husband, businessman Nicholas Riccio, are expecting a girl. She described the news as “the greatest Christmas gift we could ever ask for.”
“My husband and I are thrilled to grow our family and can’t wait to watch our son become a big brother,” Leavitt wrote. The couple’s first child, a son named Niko, was born in July 2024.
Leavitt took the opportunity to publicly thank the administration’s leadership when announcing her pregnancy. She credited President Trump and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles with building “a pro-family environment in the White House.”
She then closed the post with a note of personal anticipation: “2026 is going to be a great year, and I’m so excited to be a girl mom.”
After the announcement, the president’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, told Fox News that Leavitt had no plans to leave the administration. “Karoline Leavitt is a machine, she’s going nowhere,” Lara told host Lisa Booth, going on to say that Leavitt quickly returned to the Trump campaign after the birth of her son last year.
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.
