Minimum Wage To Change in 15 States, Cities on July 1: Here's Where
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Hundreds of thousands of workers across the U.S. are set to get a pay bump starting July 1, as minimum wage increases take effect in more than a dozen states, cities, and counties.
According to the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), more than 800,000 workers in Alaska, Oregon and Washington, D.C. alone will see their baseline pay go up next month. Another dozen local jurisdictions—mostly in California—will also implement increases.
Why It Matters
The pay hikes come as the federal minimum wage remains stuck at $7.25 per hour, unchanged since 2009. With the cost of living continuing to rise, many states and cities have raised their own minimums through legislation, ballot measures or inflation adjustments.
This Oct. 24, 2016 file photo shows dollar bills in New York.
This Oct. 24, 2016 file photo shows dollar bills in New York.
Mark Lennihan/AP
What To Know
In Alaska, the minimum wage will rise by $1.09 to $13.00 an hour, an increase approved by voters through a ballot measure. EPI calculates the boost will affect 19,400 workers—about 6.3 percent of Alaska's workforce—and add an average of $925 per year to their paychecks.
Washington, D.C. will raise its minimum by 45 cents to $17.95 an hour due to an automatic inflation adjustment, impacting an estimated 62,200 workers, or 7.5 percent of the city's workforce. The average worker there will earn about $727 more per year.
In Oregon, about 801,700 workers—roughly 9.4 percent of the state's workforce—will see their minimum wage climb 35 cents to $15.05 an hour, also tied to inflation. That's an average annual increase of $420 per worker.
Beyond those statewide and D.C. changes, minimum wages will increase in 12 cities and counties next month.
That includes 10 cities and counties in California, with increases ranging from 45 to 59 cents an hour. New hourly rates will range from about $17.46 in Alameda to nearly $20 in Emeryville—one of the highest local minimum wages in the country. Cities including Berkeley and San Francisco will see their wages climb to $19.18 an hour, while workers in Los Angeles and surrounding areas will earn just under $18.
Outside California, Chicago, Illinois, will boost its minimum wage by 40 cents, bringing it to $16.60 an hour.
And in Maryland, Montgomery County will increase its minimum wage by 50 cents to $17.65 an hour.
The EPI estimates that about 58 percent of workers benefiting from the July 1 hikes are women, while Black and Hispanic workers will also disproportionately gain.
What People Are Saying
"These minimum wage increases will put more money in workers' pockets, helping many of them and their families make ends meet," EPI state economic analyst Sebastian Martinez Hickey said. "The average increase in annual wages for a full-time, year-round worker resulting from these minimum wage hikes ranges from $420 in Oregon to $925 in Alaska."
What Happens Next
Calls to raise the federal wage persist. This month, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri and Democratic Senator Peter Welch of Vermont introduced a bipartisan bill to lift the federal minimum to $15 per hour—more than double the current rate.
Starting July 1, employers will have to ensure they review the changes made in different cities to minimum wage rates and pay their employees accordingly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
What's next for birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court's ruling
WASHINGTON — The legal battle over President Trump's move to end birthright citizenship is far from over despite his major Supreme Court victory Friday limiting nationwide injunctions. Immigrant advocates are vowing to fight to ensure birthright citizenship remains the law as the Republican president tries to do away with a more than century-old constitutional precedent. The high court's ruling sends cases challenging the president's birthright citizenship executive order back to the lower courts. But the ultimate fate of Trump's policy remains uncertain. Here's what to know about birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court's ruling and what happens next. Birthright citizenship makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The practice goes back to soon after the Civil War, when Congress ratified the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, in part to ensure that Black people, including formerly enslaved Americans, had citizenship. 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,' the amendment states. Thirty years later, Wong Kim Ark, a man born in the U.S. to Chinese parents, was refused reentry into the U.S. after traveling overseas. His suit led to the Supreme Court explicitly ruling that the amendment gives citizenship to anyone born in the United States, no matter their parents' legal status. It has been seen since then as an intrinsic part of U.S. law, with only a few exceptions, such as for children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats. Trump signed an executive order upon assuming office in January that seeks to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. The order is part of the president's hard-line anti-immigration agenda, and he has called birthright citizenship a 'magnet for illegal immigration.' Trump and his supporters focus on one phrase in the amendment — 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' — which they contend means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally. A series of federal judges have said that's not true and issued nationwide injunctions stopping his order from taking effect. 'I've been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' U.S. District Judge John Coughenour said at a hearing this year in his Seattle courtroom. In Greenbelt, Md., a Washington suburb, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship. The high court's ruling was a major victory for the Trump administration in that it limited an individual judge's authority in granting nationwide injunctions. The administration hailed the ruling as a monumental check on the powers of individual district court judges, whom Trump supporters have argued are usurping the president's authority with rulings blocking his priorities on immigration and other matters. But the Supreme Court did not address the merits of Trump's bid to enforce his birthright citizenship executive order. 'The Trump administration made a strategic decision, which I think quite clearly paid off, that they were going to challenge not the judges' decisions on the merits, but on the scope of relief,' said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi told reporters at the White House that the administration is 'very confident' that the high court will ultimately side with the administration on the merits of the case. The justices kicked the cases challenging the birthright citizenship policy back down to the lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the new ruling. The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days, giving lower courts and the parties time to sort out the next steps. The Supreme Court's ruling leaves open the possibility that groups challenging the policy could still get nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits and seek certification as a nationwide class. Within hours after the ruling, two class-action suits had been filed in Maryland and New Hampshire seeking to block Trump's order. But obtaining nationwide relief through a class action is difficult as courts have put up hurdles to doing so over the years, said Suzette Malveaux, a Washington and Lee University law school professor. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem of not having nationwide relief,' said Malveaux, who had urged the high court not to eliminate the nationwide injunctions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who penned the court's dissenting opinion, urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court's prompt review' in cases 'challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order.' Opponents of Trump's order warned there would be a patchwork of policies across the states, leading to chaos and confusion without nationwide relief. 'Birthright citizenship has been settled constitutional law for more than a century,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and chief executive of Global Refuge, a nonprofit that supports refugees and migrants. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear.' Sullivan and Richer write for the Associated Press. AP writers Mark Sherman and Lindsay Whitehurst in Washington and Mike Catalini in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
California Closes $12 Billion Budget Deficit With Hit to Migrants
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a $321 billion budget on Friday that closes a $12 billion deficit by scaling back several progressive priorities, including a landmark health care expansion for undocumented immigrants. Newsweek reached out to the governor's office via email on Saturday for comment. Why It Matters The budget agreement between Newsom and Democratic leaders marks the third consecutive year the nation's most populous state has been forced to reduce funding for programs championed by Democratic leadership. The governor and legislative leaders framed the budget as a response to what they describe as economic challenges stemming from President Donald Trump's tariff policies, immigration crackdowns and rising costs tied to increased enrollment in Medi-Cal, California's state-funded healthcare program for low-income residents that was expanded last year to include undocumented adults as part of the state's universal healthcare goals. The cuts to immigrant health services represent a significant retreat from California's universal healthcare ambitions, affecting hundreds of thousands of residents. With projected annual deficits of $17-24 billion in coming years and potential federal revenue losses of $16 billion, the state faces sustained financial pressure that could force deeper cuts to essential services. What To Know The budget addresses the deficit primarily through state savings withdrawals, borrowing from special funds, and payment delays rather than implementing new taxes on families or businesses. The most significant immigrant health program changes target Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program. Starting next year, the Golden State will halt new enrollments for undocumented adults in Medi-Cal, effectively capping the program's growth. Additionally, beginning July 2027, the state will implement a $30 monthly premium for immigrants currently enrolled in the program, including some with legal status, affecting adults under 60 years old. These changes represent a scaled-back version of Newsom's original proposal from May, which would have imposed deeper cuts to the landmark program that began just last year. The Medi-Cal modifications mark a retreat from California's ambitious universal healthcare expansion, which had made the state a national leader in providing comprehensive health coverage regardless of immigration status. The program cuts come despite California's role as home to the nation's largest immigrant population, with undocumented residents comprising a significant portion of essential workers in agriculture, construction, and hospitality sectors. Healthcare cuts extend beyond immigrant services, eliminating $78 million in mental health phone line funding that served 100,000 people annually and removing dental service funding for low-income residents in 2026. However, lawmakers successfully preserved funding for in-home care services, Planned Parenthood, and reproductive health programs. A Napolitan News/RMG Research poll released in May, conducted between February 10–12 among 800 registered California voters, found that 60 percent of Californians think illegal immigrants living in America should not be provided with taxpayer funded health care. The poll also found that 72 percent believe illegal immigration is harmful to the country. The poll had a margin of error of ±3.5 percentage points. RMG Research is a Republican-leaning pollster. California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard on April 16 in Ceres, California. California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard on April 16 in Ceres, People Are Saying Governor Gavin Newsom in Friday's press release announcing the balanced budget: "As we confront Donald Trump's economic sabotage, this budget agreement proves California won't just hold the line — we'll go even further. It's balanced, it maintains substantial reserves, and it's focused on supporting Californians — slashing red tape and catapulting housing and infrastructure development, preserving essential healthcare services, funds universal pre-K, and cuts taxes for veterans." Speaker of the California State Assembly Robert Rivas in Friday's press release: "This is an incredibly difficult time for Californians. Trump is undermining our economy with reckless tariffs, harsh cuts, and ICE agents terrorizing our communities. At a moment when so many are already struggling, he's adding fear and instability. In contrast, Democrats have delivered a budget that protects California. It cuts red tape to build more housing faster — because housing is the foundation of affordability and opportunity." He added: "It preserves critical investments in health care, women's health, education, and public safety. And it honors our commitment not to raise taxes on families, workers, or small businesses. In unprecedented times, under painful circumstances, Democrats are delivering for Californians." Republican state Senator Tony Strickland told reporters prior to the vote on Friday: "We're increasing borrowing, we're taking away from the rainy day fund, and we're not reducing our spending." He added: "And this budget also does nothing about affordability in California." Senate President Pro Tempore Mike McGuire in Friday's press release: "The State is delivering a responsible on-time budget in a challenging year focused on fiscal restraint and investing in the people and programs that make this State great. This budget prioritizes record funding for our kids and public schools, protects access to health care for millions of the most vulnerable, and will create more housing at a scale not seen in years." He added: "Thanks to this budget agreement, the state will help get more folks off the streets and into permanent shelter, and we'll expand the ranks of CalFire, deploying hundreds of additional full-time CalFire firefighters, which will save lives and make us all more wildfire safe. And this agreement helps prepare our state for the ongoing chaos and massive uncertainty caused by the Trump administration. Thank you to our Senate Budget Chair Scott Wiener, Speaker Rivas and Governor Newsom and their staffs for their hard work for the people of California." Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Washington state Democrat, wrote on X in May: "Immigrants aren't making health care more expensive – Republicans are. Trans people aren't making health care more expensive – Republicans are. Poor people aren't making health care more expensive – Republicans are." What Happens Next The budget's implementation depends entirely on lawmakers passing housing legislation (AB 131 or SB 131) by Monday's deadline, or the entire spending plan becomes void. Reporting from the Associated Press contributed to this article.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mamdani heads to Harlem after stunning New York City primary results
Zohran Mamdani spoke at a rally in Harlem on Saturday as he sought to build on momentum from New York City's Democratic primary, telling the crowd that people struggling to pay for housing, groceries and bus fare are hungry for change. Mamdani appeared at a National Action Network rally days after declaring victory over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo , the presumed favorite in the primary. Results will be finalized after the city's ranked choice vote-counting resumes Tuesday. 'What our victory showed on election night was less a victory between one man and another, but a victory for a city that New Yorkers can afford,' Mamdani said at a rally attended by Black clergy and filmmaker Spike Lee The Rev. Al Sharpton, the influential leader of the network, praised Mamdani for coming to the rally, despite reports that he lost some of the city's most solidly Black neighborhoods in the primary. 'He could have went the other way and said, 'It's me against them.' But he came this morning and he proclaimed something. And I gave him a lot of credit for that,' Sharpton said. The winner of the Democratic primary advances to November's election. Mayor Eric Adams is running for reelection as an independent candidate. Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the crime-fighting Guardian Angels, is running as a Republican. Cuomo, who has conceded defeat in the primary, also could run as an independent candidate. In Harlem, the 33-year-old state lawmaker stuck to a cost-of-living theme that skyrocketed him to political stardom, weaving in quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. , the Bible and the city's first Black mayor, David Dinkins. He said people question whether the city will become 'a museum' of a place where working people could once thrive. 'What we have seen in the last two weeks is a hunger from New Yorkers to move beyond the days of museums and relics and make this city a living, breathing testament to what is possible.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
