Republicans can lose three Senate seats tonight and still run the chamber. Lose a fourth, and Democrats take it. That narrow margin is why Tuesday’s midterm elections, held November 3, are being watched so closely.
Voters are deciding control of both the House and the Senate, along with a slate of governorships. Results will arrive through the night, and some races may stay undecided into Wednesday.
The Senate math
Republicans hold a 53-47 Senate majority. Because Vice President JD Vance can break a tie, they keep control even if they drop to 50 seats. Democrats therefore need a net gain of four seats to flip the chamber.
Republicans are defending seats in Iowa, Texas, Ohio, Alaska, Maine and Kansas. Democrats are defending open seats in Minnesota and Michigan, which means they must hold their own ground while reaching into Republican territory.
Seven states are considered especially competitive, and two of them use ranked-choice voting, a system that can stretch out the counting. Alaska’s Senate race is among those where a ranked-choice tally could delay a final call. If the chamber comes down to one or two close contests, the country may wait a while to learn who controls it.
Why the House and Senate tell different stories
The two chambers are not viewed the same way. The House is widely expected to flip to Democrats, and because margins there tend to be larger, its outcome could become clear sooner. The Senate is seen as closer to a toss-up. One forecasting model gives Democrats strong odds in the Senate, but that figure sits against the view of forecasters who widely describe the chamber as a true toss-up, so it is best treated as one projection rather than a consensus.
The consequences of a Senate flip reach well beyond the chamber floor. According to a Yahoo News analysis, a Democratic Senate would gain an effective veto over high-ranking Cabinet nominees and could block new Supreme Court appointments. Control of key committees would also let Democrats open investigations of the administration.
A last-minute fight over California’s ballots
While campaigns made their final pushes, the Supreme Court weighed in on a dispute that touches the mechanics of voting itself. On Monday, November 2, the Court turned down a Trump administration request to temporarily block California from counting mail-in ballots from more than 20,000 registered voters. Federal officials allege those voters are likely non-citizens.
The order was brief and unsigned. It offered no reasoning, and no justice publicly dissented.
How the case got there
The Justice Department sued California and Los Angeles County officials in mid-October. It alleged the state had obstructed enforcement of a 1996 federal law that bars non-citizens from voting. The list of roughly 20,000 voters was compiled by the Department of Homeland Security and sent to state and county officials.
Lower courts had already said no. A district judge denied the request first. A federal appeals court rejected it on Friday, October 30, with a third appeals judge, also a Trump appointee, dissenting. By then, voting had been under way since early October. The Supreme Court had also rebuffed an administration effort to restrict mail voting back in September.
The Justice Department was not limiting itself to California. It made a similar request in Washington state, seeking to sequester ballots from hundreds of people it suspects are non-citizens.
What is actually in dispute
The list itself is contested. California says its safeguards are robust and that the list is inaccurate. U.S. District Judge Carter, according to reporting on his ruling, noted that people flagged as non-citizens in other states have repeatedly turned out to be naturalized citizens. Reuters reports that confirmed instances of non-citizens voting remain rare. The Justice Department, for its part, argued in its emergency application that once challenged ballots are mixed in with lawful ones, they cannot be retrieved.
The Supreme Court’s order does not settle the larger argument about federal versus state authority over how elections are run, including federal oversight of voter registration. Only the immediate request was denied, and the California case continues. The Court’s official orders and docket are posted at supremecourt.gov.
What to watch as the results come in
The House is likely to be called first, if forecasts hold. The Senate is the harder call. Watch the competitive states where Republicans are defending seats, the two Democratic-held open seats in Minnesota and Michigan, and any race that goes to a ranked-choice count. Official Senate composition is listed at senate.gov, and the Associated Press maintains running Supreme Court coverage for the legal fights that may follow.
Race calls will shift through the night, so the only calls worth trusting are those from established outlets that say plainly who made them. If control of the Senate hangs on a count that takes days, the next two years of nominations, investigations and court appointments will hang with it.