Madison’s Black community more than a century ago was concentrated in a neighborhood just blocks from the Capitol, where business owners, church leaders and civil rights advocates built institutions that helped shape the city.

On Thursday evening, participants in a Wisconsin Historical Society walking tour retraced that history, stopping at homes and businesses tied to Black Madisonians.

A group of about 12 Wisconsinites gathered on the corner of E. Dayton and N. Blount Street, near a white house that belongs to the Hill family early Thursday evening. 

Jenny Peterson of the Historical Society led the tour.

“We know from Census records and data that African-Americans have lived in the county as long as Europeans have since before the Civil War,” Peterson said. Dane County’s early Black residents included free and enslaved individuals. “There were African-American men, women and children that were settled in the community and after the Civil War, they experienced many of the increasing freedoms.” 

In 1910, there were about 143 Black people residing in Madison and Peterson said that 19 out of the 39 Black households in Madison lived in the neighborhood near East Dayton Street. 

Peterson said that area of town was accessible for Black families looking to establish themselves in Madison. 

The water in the area was swampy,  Peterson said. “The prices were a little bit cheaper,” which made it possible for African-American families and other groups with few resources to settle the area. 

John and Amanda Hill moved to Madison from Atlanta in 1910 and bought a grocery store on Dayton Street that served the neighborhood for generations. A sign for the store still hangs in the building’s window.

“In addition to running the store, John was also appointed to several city committees, including the committee on minority housing and the advisory committee, which encouraged citizen participation in community improvement projects,” Peterson said. 

Throughout the tour, Peterson passed around photos of the Black Madisonians whose lives she described and pictures of the places as they used to look. 

“We have this photo of [John] standing in front of the store with his businesswear on and for the audience, it creates a moment where all of these connections are made,” Peterson said. “You’re like, OK, this helps me imagine what this would have been like in 1915 as community members are going in and out of this business, John is talking to his customers, asking them how their day was… It brings it to life.” 

A yellow and blue house next door was the home of William and Anna Mae Miller.

William Miller, who was from Kentucky and studied law, faced discrimination that prevented him from becoming a practicing lawyer. He moved to Milwaukee with his wife and worked as a waiter until he met Wisconsin Gov. Robert M. La Follette, who took him on as an aide. 

Miller went on to help found the St. Paul African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church in the community in 1902. He and Anna Mae also helped establish the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

Peterson noted that the family owned multiple buildings and rented out rooms to other Black people who needed a place to stay as there weren’t many places in Madison that were open to Black people. 

Peterson also noted that William Miller tried to help save documents from the state Capitol building when it caught on fire in February 1904. 

“He was one of those brave individuals who went up to the Capitol to do what he could to save documents to save materials from the Capitol on that cold night,” she said. 

Two books served as the starting research for the Madison Black History walking tour: “Settlin’: Stories of Madison’s Early African American Families,” by Muriel Simms and “Make Way for Liberty: Wisconsin African Americans in the Civil War,” by Jeff Kannel. 

Peterson also pulled out Settlin’ throughout the tour, using photos from the book to illustrate the stories she shared including one of Leo Vinton Butts, the first Black man to play in a University of Wisconsin-Madison football game. His father, Benjamin Butts, was enslaved as a child in Virginia before moving to Wisconsin after the Civil War at age 11, and the home where the elder Butts raised eight children is also a stop on the tour.

“At the height of the Civil War, he reportedly hung around the camp,” Peterson said, of the 5th Independent Battery Wisconsin Light Artillery, which was stationed in Virginia. Butts “started helping out with different tasks and responsibilities and chores, became very well beloved by and well regarded by the soldiers in the unit, and when the regiment decided to return home to Wisconsin following the war, Butts decided to follow.”

Peterson said he worked as a clerk and porter before securing a job at a barber shop, which she said was among the few jobs that African-Americans could access at the time. Butts then bought his own barber shop on the Capitol Square where he made connections, including with Gov. La Follette. 

“By 1895, Butts was an established and influential leader within the Madison African-American community,” Peterson said. 

Renee Moe, the CEO of United Way of Dane County, who joined the tour, she had wanted to attend for several years.

“So many of the issues that all of us are facing today in our communities, in our country and our world, have deep historic roots. And the more we can understand about our communities and build relationships with those stories and with each other, I think the better context we have to actually work together to improve the quality of life for everyone.” 

Moe said she was struck by how geography and housing has shifted since the 1800s. Most of the neighborhood on the tour is made up of student housing these days. She said she remembered that “there used to be some nonprofits there, like Access Community Health, and Urban League, and they’ve moved to the south side or to the east side.”

The tour ended outside of the state Capitol by the statue of Vel Phillips, the former Secretary of State who was the first Black statewide official in Wisconsin and the first Black judge in the state  and who worked to fight against racially restrictive housing covenants. The statue honoring her outside the Capitol was unveiled in 2024.

“Vel Phillips’ work was talking about housing access and fair housing practices,” Moe said. “Today we’re still working on housing access and affordability, so that’s what struck me was how neighborhoods shift, how wealth and opportunities shift over generations, and the fact that we need to stay committed to making sure that all community members and neighbors have access to that opportunity to rise.” 

Peterson, who was born and raised in Madison and has worked for the Historical Society for two years, said she has learned a lot of history that she didn’t previously know from conducting the tour. 

“The people that are part of this tour, and the families that they created, and the community institutions that they created, and the businesses that were part of this neighborhood, like this thriving space, the complexity and the nuance of that — I didn’t know about,” she said. “I also have felt very grateful to be able to learn and take this in and continue to ask questions about it.”

The Madison Black History walking tour is just one of the walking tours that the Wisconsin Historical Society offers. Recent additions include  an LGBTQ+ history tour and a “Democracy in Action” tour, added for the 250th anniversary of the United States.

“What’s important is making sure we share these stories now, and that we continue to ask questions, so that we can learn more about these people and their contributions to Madison’s history,” Peterson said.

The Trump administration U.S. Justice Department has no authority at all to demand Wisconsin voter records that it has sought in federal court, the Wisconsin Justice Department said in federal court papers filed Thursday.

In addition, Attorney General Josh Kaul and assistant AG Charlotte Gibson wrote, the federal government has shown no evidence to justify assertions that a flood of ineligible voters could receive absentee ballots to vote in the coming August primary election and November general election.

Representing officials with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, the Wisconsin DOJ filed a five-page response Thursday with the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, opposing the U.S. DOJ demand for Wisconsin’s unredacted voter list.

U.S. District Judge James Peterson dismissed the Trump administration’s lawsuit seeking the list May 21. The U.S. DOJ appealed the dismissal more than three weeks later with the 7 th Circuit on June 12, and the appeals court directed Wisconsin to file its response by Thursday.

In his dismissal ruling, Peterson declared that the unredacted voter list the DOJ has demanded isn’t a record the federal justice department can demand under the Civil Rights Act of 1960. The list contains voters’ personal information including birthdays, Social Security numbers and driver’s license details.

The Trump administration filing  asked for “an expedited appeal” in order “to investigate Wisconsin’s compliance with federal law regarding voter registration under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).”

Wisconsin’s reply Thursday said Congress hasn’t granted the U.S. DOJ the power to “regulate Wisconsin’s voter list” under either the NVRA or HAVA. The feds have no regulatory authority under those two laws, the Wisconsin reply states.

Moreover, where Wisconsin is concerned, “US DOJ has even less to say: Wisconsin is exempt from NVRA’s list maintenance provisions because Wisconsin has offered same-day voter registration since 1994,” the Wisconsin response states.

In its appeal, the U.S. DOJ declared that among the hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots that will be sent to voters for the Nov. 3 elections, “many of those ballots” would go “potentially … to ineligible voters, fraudulent registrants, or other individuals who should not have been registered. Wisconsin voters need to know that their election is secure and that non-citizens, deceased individuals, former residents, non-residents, and voters with multiple records are not registered to vote in that election.”

Wisconsin dismissed that claim as unsubstantiated.

“US DOJ has presented no evidence that Wisconsin is rife with ineligible voters. Its motion asserts that ‘potentially’ ineligible people may vote.” Such “an unsupported, potential harm” doesn’t justify an emergency action such as the feds are seeking, the Wisconsin response declared.

The response said that with only a few months before the election, the U.S. Supreme Court has warned against “modifying election procedures this close to elections” to avoid voter confusion and to avoid discouraging voters from going to the polls.

Groups intervening in the cases responded as well on Thursday.

Law Forward, the Wisconsin democracy-focused nonprofit law firm, said in its response that the U.S. DOJ failed to show “good cause” for its demand.

“And despite the Appellant’s fact-free innuendo,” the U.S. DOJ “does not allege — let alone provide any actual proof of — any supposed ‘ineligible voters remaining on [Wisconsin’s] voter rolls,’” stated Law Forward’s response, representing the nonpartisan voting rights group Common Cause.

A response for the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans and Forward Latino argued that the U.S. “DOJ’s lackadaisical pace in this litigation belies any need to expedite” the case. The groups are represented by Elias Law Group in Washington, D.C., an election- and voting rights-focused firm that works with progressive organizations.

The U.S. DOJ has made “baseless insinuations that upcoming elections will not be ‘secure’ if it does not get unprecedented access to personal voter information,” the response stated. “That unsubstantiated allegation is absurd.”

The federal lawsuit against Wisconsin “is one of 31 similar lawsuits commenced by [U.S.] DOJ as part of its unprecedented campaign to amass personally identifying information about every registered voter in the country,” the interveners’ response stated. “All eight federal courts to address DOJ’s claims to date have dismissed them,” with the dismissals now under appeal.

Final peace negotiations between the United States and Iran officially began Thursday, Vice President JD Vance said at a late morning press conference in Washington, starting a 60-day countdown for the Islamic Republic to safely open the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. to lift a blockade on Iranian oil, and for the two nations to hammer out a nuclear deal.

The agreement is “a win-win situation” for the U.S., Vance said.

“If they change their behavior, big things are going to happen for Iran and for the world,” Vance said. “If they don’t, no skin off our backs” because Iran’s nuclear program and military are “still destroyed.”

The agreement immediately stops hostilities that began Feb. 28. The war claimed the lives of 13 U.S. service members, thousands of civilians in Iran, Lebanon and across the Gulf region, and disrupted the global economy. 

Vance said the “Israelis, just like everybody else, have to respect this process,” highlighting that the agreement binds Israel to ceasing its bombing campaign in Lebanon against Iranian-backed Hezbollah fighters.

Without specifying a date, Vance said he expects to brief Congress but is “quite confident” the administration does not need congressional approval on terms of the deal that will lift sanctions on Iran, despite the claims of some U.S. senators.

‘Just signed it’

Vance was slated to finalize the 14-point memorandum of understanding in Switzerland Friday, but President Donald Trump unexpectedly announced early Thursday morning that he had signed the deal while attending a state dinner hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron at the Palace of Versailles after the G7 summit among the world’s wealthiest nations concluded.

“Just signed it,” Trump told journalists after hugging and saying goodbye to France’s president and first lady Brigitte Macron just after 1 a.m. local time, according to the traveling press.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian posted images on social media early Thursday of the signed agreement in English and Farsi. 

“This text is the reflection of the voice of a nation that did not trade its dignity and independence for any threat or pressure. What was recorded today was the result of national resilience, political rationality, and responsible diplomacy,” he wrote, according to a translation on X.

Trump posted a series of messages about the signed memorandum on his own social media site, Truth Social, Thursday morning, including a link to a news article about Pope Leo commending the deal. The Trump administration engaged in a public war of words with Leo in April.

“These fools, who think I haven’t been tough enough on Iran, when the Stock Market Just Hit A RECORD HIGH, and Oil prices are ‘tumbling’ down, are either jealous, bad people, or stupid. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!! President DJT” the president posted online early Thursday.

Hours later, in all caps, he wrote: “OIL IS FLOWING, IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON (THE WORLD WILL BE SAFE!), THE STOCK MARKETS ARE ROARING, JOBS ARE AT RECORDS, AND PRICES ARE DROPPING (AFFORDABILITY!). OUR COUNTRY IS STRONG, SAFE, AND RESPECTED LIKE NEVER BEFORE. ‘YOU’RE WELCOME!’ President DJT”

‘Foreign policy blunder’

Several, including some from the president’s own party, have been critical of the agreement.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican who recently lost his primary after Trump endorsed an opponent, said in a statement on social media the deal “is the worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”

“Reagan is rolling over in his grave. Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal.

“Before the war, the strait was open, Iran was being crushed by sanctions, and 13 service members were still alive. Now, 13 Americans are dead, families have paid billions at the pump, sanctions will be lifted, and the bombing has stopped.”

Sen. John Kennedy, also a Louisiana Republican, said on the Senate floor Thursday morning “We ought to give peace a chance. It’s only 60 days and we’re going to just have to trust the president on this one.”

Jonathan Shorman contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education will temporarily reduce interest rates for federal student loan borrowers enrolled in auto pay starting July 1, the agency announced Thursday. 

Borrowers who enroll in auto pay — the optional feature that allows a borrower to have their monthly loan payment automatically deducted from their checking or savings account — will see a reduction in their interest rate by one full percentage point from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2028. 

The change means a 6% interest rate would drop to 5%, for instance. 

Federal student loan borrowers currently enrolled in auto pay already receive an interest rate reduction of 0.25 percentage points from their servicer. Those borrowers do not need to take any additional action and will automatically receive an extra interest rate reduction of 0.75 percentage points, the department said. 

“This temporary incentive is designed to help borrowers pay down their balances more quickly, take full advantage of new repayment benefits, remain on track toward loan discharge opportunities and to strengthen the overall health of the federal student loan portfolio,” Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said during a Thursday call with reporters. 

Kent said the benefit is estimated to cost the agency $6 billion.   

Changes coming

The announcement came ahead of major changes for the federal student loan system — with many provisions slated to also begin July 1 — stemming from congressional Republicans’ mega tax and spending cut bill that President Donald Trump signed last year.

The overhaul includes new loan limits for graduate and professional students, a restructured repayment system that gives new borrowers only two plans to choose from and the elimination of a key loan program for graduate and professional students that allowed for unlimited borrowing.

Meanwhile, millions of borrowers under the now defunct Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, plan will receive notices from their federal loan servicers starting July 1 that instruct them to enter into a legal repayment plan within 90 days. 

Auto pay enrollment halved

The federal student loan portfolio stands at a “staggering $1.7 trillion,” with about 37% of borrowers currently in repayment, according to Kent.

The under secretary noted that at the end of 2019, nearly 83% of borrowers were enrolled in auto pay but that the figure stood at just 40% by the end of 2025.

There are also 9.16 million borrowers in default as of April, per the latest available department data.  

Borrowers have until Sept. 30, 2026, to opt in to auto pay to be eligible for the two-year benefit. 

The benefit is open to borrowers whose federal student loans originated after July 1, 2012, the department said. 

Kent encouraged borrowers to “take advantage of this opportunity and enroll in auto debit as soon as possible.” 

Borrowers can enroll by logging in to their loan servicer account and selecting “auto pay” from a navigation bar, he said.

The department clarified that borrowers will need to stay in auto pay to continue receiving the reduced interest rate.

WASHINGTON — When the overhead lights turn off at the Farmville Detention Center in Virginia, it not only means that night has arrived for Aliaksei Scharbachenia, but that panic attacks will soon follow.

The attacks, which started after his detention began last August, he said, have only grown worse, stemming from the fear that he will be returned to his country of Belarus and face persecution due to his opposition to the authoritarian government.

“With the panic attacks, I was able to take care of myself before,” he said in Russian. “But now it’s kind of getting worse, so I really need some medication, which will help me.”

States Newsroom interviewed Scharbachenia by video with the help of an interpreter.

As the Trump administration increases the scale of its immigrant detention program, now up to 68,000 immigrants in custody, reports have surfaced of inhumane conditions and inadequate medical care at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities like the one housing Scharbachenia. Congress recently boosted funding for immigration enforcement by $70 billion over three years, through the end of President Donald Trump’s term.

ICE acknowledged receiving, but did not respond to, a detailed list of questions from States Newsroom regarding Scharbachenia’s treatment at Farmville.

Ailments ignored

The nightly panic attacks, and the lack of medication to treat them, are not the only health issues that 37-year-old Scharbachenia said he has brought to medical staff at the Virginia facility.

He’s lost feeling in his right pinky and ring fingers, which he attributes to an-egg sized mass that developed on the back of his biceps during his 11-month detention. The few items that he purchased at the center – earplugs and a small blanket – were confiscated after he spent two weeks in solitary confinement after sharing know-your-rights information to newly arrived immigrants, he said. 

“I totally understand that’s another way of punishment to beat me, you know, so I will be quiet,” Scharbachenia said of his two weeks in solitary confinement.

Scharbachenia told States Newsroom that on May 20,  ICE agents tried to deport him to Belarus, despite his active legal petition challenging his detention. He said he was eventually placed on a deportation flight back to the United States from Turkey, his hands and feet bound for the nine-hour journey, and returned to the Farmville detention.  

States Newsroom could not independently verify the May 20 deportation attempt, and ICE did not respond to questions about it.

Poor conditions at multiple facilities 

Scharbachenia’s complaints fit a pattern of reports from independent government inspectors that have found unsafe conditions and inadequate medical care provided to immigrants detained in facilities in Texas and Louisiana.  

A recent report from the Department of Homeland Security’s internal watchdog found a detention center in Louisiana failed to ensure sanitary conditions, properly store perishable food, report use-of-force incidents and maintain medical records of detainees. 

Congress this month passed the three-year, $70 billion immigration enforcement package that contains no restraints on ICE activities. The tens of billions in funding is on top of roughly $170 billion provided to DHS last year for detention and deportations. 

Democratic lawmakers conducting oversight visits at some facilities have raised concerns about poor conditions and lack of medical care provided. 

U.S. Rep. Adriano Espaillat, a New York Democrat who chairs the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said during a recent press conference that the additional $70 billion in funding will only continue a “detention and deportation industry that profits from human suffering.” 

New Jersey facility

Civil rights groups have filed two major lawsuits charging poor and inadequate conditions at detention centers in Texas and New Jersey run by ICE and private contractors.

In New Jersey, Sen. Andy Kim called for the Delaney Hall facility to be shut down after detained immigrants went on a hunger strike to protest their conditions. While Kim and dozens of advocates demonstrated at the facility, he was hit with pepper smoke deployed by immigration officers. 

“At Delaney Hall, we learned of unsanitary living conditions, lack of adequate medical care and unhealthy food,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said after conducting oversight at the facility. “The situation is unacceptable. Delaney Hall must be shut down immediately.”

In response to the criticism of poor conditions at Delaney Hall, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin argued before lawmakers that the detention centers have higher standards than jails and prisons. He described the complaints about food as detainees wanting “ethnic food.”

With House Democrats in the minority, the authority to make unannounced oversight visits at any federal facility that houses immigrants is one of the few tools they have. The power is codified in a 2019 appropriations law, but the Trump administration has not adhered to that policy. 

Democrats have sued to regain access in a case now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Outbreaks at Farmville

Prior to Trump’s current deportation push, lawmakers had raised concerns about issues at the detention center where Scharbachenia is held. In 2019, a mumps outbreak started at the facility, and in 2020, 93% of the detained population contracted the coronavirus.

Roughly now three-quarters of the immigrants detained at Farmville, nearly 500, have no criminal record, according to the most recent government data. On the campaign trail, the president vowed to focus enforcement on immigrants with criminal records, but those in detention are there on a civil charge of violating U.S. immigration law. 

Virginia Democrats have continued to conduct oversight of the facility. 

U.S. Sen. Mark Warner went last August to visit Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was transferred to Farmville after the Trump administration brought him back to the U.S. after erroneously deporting him to a brutal mega-prison in El Salvador.

Warner also raised concerns about the facility during the coronavirus outbreak in 2020. 

During his August visit, Warner’s office said he “secured a commitment from the facility’s private operator to work with legislators to address concerns regarding food quality and access to health care.”

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine also visited the facility in March and his office said he “continues to track conditions there closely.”

Scharbachenia, who is still detained at Farmville, has a pending habeas corpus petition, which is challenging his detention. 

He has a final order of removal from an immigration judge, but said if he is removed back to Belarus, the country’s special police force will be waiting for him, “along with electric shock torture and death.” 

Salah Sarsour, a Muslim leader in Milwaukee and the president of Wisconsin’s largest mosque, who was arrested by immigration agents in late March, has been ordered released by a federal judge. The news comes after sustained pressure from Sarsour’s family, his community and elected officials. 

“We are ecstatic for Salah Sarsour and his family that they will soon be reunited,” Sarsour’s lawyers said in a statement. “In issuing this order, the federal judge made clear that the government cannot detain a lawful permanent resident for speaking out about Palestinian rights.” 

In his 29-page decision, U.S. District Judge James P. Hanlon, an appointee of President Donald Trump, ruled against arguments by prosecutors that the federal court had no jurisdiction over immigration detentions. Hanlon sided with Sarsour’s attorneys who charged that Sarsour’s arrest was based on his speech supporting Palestinian human rights. Hanlon wrote that Sarsour “has presented a substantial claim of First Amendment retaliation” that his detention is unlawful. Hanlon’s decision has no sway over his pending immigration proceedings for possible deportation, the judge wrote. 

The Trump administration maintains that Sarsour should not have been granted legal residency in the U.S. in 1993 because of a decades-old conviction by an Israeli military court of attacking Israeli soldiers in the West Bank.

While lawyers “continue to fight these baseless claims in court, today is about celebrating a family being reunited,” Sarsour’s lawyers said in their statement. “It is also a sober reminder that, if the government can target Mr. Sarsour, everyone’s free speech rights are at risk.”

Sarsour’s oldest son, Kareem, praised the news. “We’re getting our dad back!” he said in a statement. “This experience has been a nightmare to wake up to every day, with his health at risk in a cruel basement cell simply for speaking up for Palestine. But we know who my dad is, he’s been a voice for the voiceless and the heart of our family and our community. I can’t wait to hug him, and I hope everyone like him will be released.”

Earlier this month, Sarsour’s attorneys also said that staff at the jail had impeded his religious liberties by interrupting or blocking his ability to pray. Jail staff offered Sarsour pork rinds — a food that is forbidden under Muslim dietary laws — his attorneys and family say, and did not provide adequate treatment for his type 2 diabetes, causing him to lose over 30 pounds while in detention. The Department of Homeland Security has denied the accusations.

U.S. Rep.  Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) applauded Sarsour’s release. Moore visited Sarsour at the Clay County Jail in Indiana last Sunday as an interfaith rally of supporters gathered outside and to protest.

“Over the course of two visits, I observed troubling signs of declining health and raised serious concerns about the conditions of his confinement,” said Moore. “No person in ICE custody should be denied adequate nutrition, medical attention, or humane treatment.”

Targeted First Amendment retaliation

Judge Hanlon acknowledged in his decision that Sarsour was born in the West Bank, where he was convicted in 1989 “by the Israeli Ramallah Military Court” of throwing Molotov cocktails and stones at Israeli forces, and of attempting to possess weapons in 1995. Sarsour became a conditional lawful U.S. resident in 1993, and became a full lawful permanent resident in 1998. Under Republican president George W. Bush, Sarsour’s naturalization application was approved by immigration authorities in 2002. Sarsour has not had a criminal record of any kind since arriving in the U.S. over 30 years ago.

Since his arrest, the Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly brought up Sarsour’s conviction by the Israeli military. Sarsour’s family and supporters, however, say that such convictions are often based on coerced confessions and should not be given weight. Sarsour often told stories of being detained and tortured by Israeli forces, his family members said. United Nations experts found that Israel has denied due process rights to Palestinians in the West Bank for the last 60 years, and there are pervasive reports from Palestinian prisoners of torture, sexual abuse, and maltreatment by Israeli authorities. 

Hanlon noted that Sarsour is president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, the largest mosque in Wisconsin, and is also a board member of American Muslims for Palestine. “Mr. Sarsour speaks openly about his support for Palestinian human rights,” Hanlon wrote. For this, Sarsour was added to the Canary Mission, an Israel-based doxxing website with “anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian animus,” Hanlon wrote. 

In October 2024, American Muslims for Palestine was labeled as part of a terrorist network which supports Hamas in a report authored by the conservative Heritage Foundations’ called “Project Esther: A National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism.” Hanlon noted that the New York Times reported on Project Esther’s plan to brand “a broad range of critics of Israel as ‘effectively a terrorist support network,’ so that they could be deported, defunded, sued, fired, expelled, ostracized and otherwise excluded from what it considered ‘open society.’” 

 

Video of Salah Sarsour being reunited with his family. (Video courtesy of Yaseen Najeed)

 

Shortly after Trump was reelected, “government agents arrested or attempted to arrest noncitizens who had spoken publicly in support of Palestinian rights or critically of the Israeli government,” Hanlon wrote. In June 2025,  Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a Homeland Security memorandum stating that Sarsour was eligible for deportation “because his actions undermine U.S. foreign policy to combat antisemitism around the world as well [as] U.S. foreign policy to combat activity that supports foreign terrorist organizations.” 

Hanlon highlighted that in early February 2026 the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for civil rights announced that the department would “investigate,” “prosecute” and “dismantle” organizations like American Muslims for Palestine. Sarsour’s profile on the Canary Mission was updated on March 26, followed by his arrest by armed plainclothes agents four days later on March 30.

The judge denied requests from prosecutors to impose a $25,000 bond and an ankle monitor on Sarsour. 

“Such conditions are not necessary here,” Hanlon wrote. “Mr. Sarsour has no history of non-compliance and is well established in the Milwaukee community.” Sarsour’s family members all live in the U.S. and he has not traveled outside the country since 1998. Hanlon ruled that Sarsour had “provided voluminous evidence demonstrating that he is not a risk of flight.” 

Sarsour was ordered to be released on his own recognizance with the conditions that he remain in Wisconsin, attend all court hearings and participate in his removal proceedings.

“The court’s ruling affirms what many of us have been saying for months,” said Moore, “Mr. Sarsour’s continued detention is unjustifiable.” She expressed gratitude “to the legal advocates, community leaders and family members who fought tirelessly for Mr. Sarsour’s release.”

Nihad Awad, national executive director for the Council on American Islamic Relations, called the court decision “a welcome and long-overdue step toward justice for Salah Sarsour, a respected Muslim community leader whose detention has caused immense pain to his family and community.” 

Awad said that “no one should be punished for their faith, advocacy, or identity. We urge ICE to immediately comply with the judge’s order, reunite Mr. Sarsour with his loved ones, and end the disturbing pattern of targeting Muslim, Palestinian, and other community members for detention and intimidation. This case is a reminder that due process, human dignity, and constitutional rights must never be optional.”

Moore visits Sarsour in jail  

In an interview on Wednesday, before Hanlon issued his order, Moore told the Wisconsin Examiner that she believed Sarsour had become a “high value target for censoring people” as the Trump administration carried out its mass deportation campaign and the targeting of pro-Palestine activists. She visited Sarsour Sunday at the Indiana Clay County Jail, where he was detained. 

“It’s not a rundown place,” Moore said, adding that some of the facility was “definitely a new construction.” However, during her visit, she said, “I didn’t go back into the area where the prisoners live.”

After surrendering her phone, Moore sat with Sarsour, who she said appeared surprised to see her. 

Sarsour hugged her, Moore said. He’d clearly lost weight, even since her last visit in late April, she noted. 

“His health is at risk,” said Moore. “He has diabetes, as has been reported. And you know, I’m not a doctor, I’m not in a position to diagnose anything, but he has continued to lose weight. And he says that’s because he tries to exercise to manage his blood sugar.”

She added that she saw “other things that I noticed that I reported to his doctor, and I think he needs to see a doctor about his diabetes.”

Moore said that since Sarsour’s health began deteriorating, the facility had been asked to change his diet to accommodate his diabetes. She said jail personnel didn’t change his diet but simply gave him smaller portions of food. 

“If they served bread they just gave him a smaller piece. If they had mashed potatoes, they served him a smaller portion of mashed potatoes,” she said. “He hasn’t seen a fresh fruit or vegetable since he’s been in there.”

 Moore stressed that while in custody Sarsour “had earlier episodes of illness and he had to just wing it on his own.” She said that neither his doctor nor a jail doctor have visited him.

While Moore was visiting the jail on Sunday, a large Jewish-led interfaith rally uniting 150 supporters had gathered outside, Moore said. They chanted so loud that Sarsour could hear the commotion from inside the facility. 

They chanted “Free Salah Sarsour!” “No ICE Terror!” “You can’t deport a movement!” Kareem Sarsour was also outside the jail in support of his father’s release. 

“We never imagined we would be placed in the situation we are today,” said Kareem, according to a press release from the group that led the rally. “Every day is nerve-wracking knowing my father is only a few hours away, suffering, and we can’t reach him.”

Moore said she told Sarsour about the rally. “I told him that indeed there were people out there and described the crowd, and he was very — he said that it gave him hope for justice,” said Moore. 

The rally demonstrated how important Sarsour is to his community as a leader, activist, business owner and bridge builder, Moore said.

Moore said she met a minister outside the rally who told her he was a Trump supporter. “He was just hanging around,” said Moore. “Before that was over we had him praying for justice for Mr. Sarsour.” 

Like Sarsour’s attorneys, Moore said she believes Sarsour is a victim of retaliation by the Trump administration for speech. 

“Nobody gets to speak against the Trump deportation strategy,” she said. “We know that he told people who voted for him that he was going to target the murders and the rapists and the gang members. And these are people that no one has any problem with him removing. But no, people like teachers — like Yessenia Ruano —  people like Abrego Garcia, people like Salah Sarsour.”

Administration officials, Moore charged, are “thinking that they can create an inflammatory environment to cover up the outrageous immigration raids and programs that they’re conducting.”

Wisconsin must stop awarding small-dollar grants to help deter students from dropping out of college under a program available only to specific racial and ethnic groups, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Although unanimous in part, the opinion also included concurrences by three of the Court’s liberal justices. They sharply critiqued a U.S. Supreme Court opinion that set the stage for the ruling, while acknowledging that its precedent required them to follow its contours.

At issue is the Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant Program operated by the state Higher Educational Aids Board. The program, established in 1985, provides grants from $250 to $2,500 for students who are Black, Hispanic, Native American and for immigrants or descendants of immigrants from Laos, Vietnam or Cambodia following the end of the Vietnam War in 1975.

Eligible recipients are students at Wisconsin’s technical colleges, private universities and tribal colleges. The program and a companion program for University of Wisconsin students were both created “to reduce the financial burden which causes many minority students to leave school,” then-Gov. Tony Earl wrote in the 1985 budget proposal that led to their creation.

A 2023 Wisconsin Examiner analysis found that the money in the program largely went to Black students at Milwaukee Area Technical College who got training and jobs in building and construction and other trades.

In a February 2025 ruling the Wisconsin 2nd District Court of Appeals sided with the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, overturning a lower court and ruling that the retention grant program violates the Equal Protection Clause in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. WILL filed the lawsuit with a group of families.

The appeals judges cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, issued in June 2023. That opinion, referred to as SFFA for short, held that the consideration of race in college admission policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina “cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause” in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Thursday’s opinion, written by Justice Annette Ziegler, affirmed the appeals court decision and cited the SFFA U.S. Supreme Court opinion.

The Higher Educational Aids Board argued that the retention grants were needed to help maintain student diversity.

Ziegler wrote, however, that when trying to ensure a diverse student body, race cannot be a defining factor. Rather, it can be one of  many factors in a flexible process that evaluates each applicant as individuals, she wrote.

“Under the Grant Program, race is not but one factor in a ‘highly individualized, holistic review.’ Race is the only factor,” Ziegler wrote. “Either a student is, or is not, a member of the preferred racial group.”

When the Wisconsin law that established the grant program was enacted 41 years ago, “the record does not reflect that Wisconsin’s technical or private colleges needed the legislature to enact a race-, national origin-, ancestry-, or alienage-based remedy in the 1980s,” Ziegler wrote. Lacking such evidence, “we cannot assume that the legislature enacted [the program] to address an unidentified retention and graduation problem at private and technical colleges.”

Ziegler was joined in the main opinion by Justices Rebecca Bradley, Brian Hagedorn and Janet Protasiewicz.

In a concurrence, Chief Justice Jill Karofsky acknowledged that “I am bound” by the 2023 SFFA opinion and that the grant program cannot survive as a consequence. But Karofsky described the SFFA opinion as part of a broader trend that was turning the 14th Amendment in the opposite direction from its original intent.

“Rather than turn a blind-eye to the scourge of racism and slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause faces it head-on by demanding change and requiring equal protection of the laws for all people. Inherent in its language is a recognition of the wrongs of prejudice, discrimination, and injustice,” Karofsky wrote.

“Why, instead of wielding the Equal Protection Clause as a sword against racism, do we employ it to shield against the promise of equality for all?” Karofsky asked rhetorically. “The answer appears to be that we have failed to fully recognize how societal and governmental practices have long continued to enforce a preference for White Americans and to burden Black Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds.”

She was joined in the concurrence by Justice Susan Crawford.

Citing arguments made by dissenting justices in the 2023 SFFA opinion, Karofsky wrote that in Wisconsin, disparities between students of color and white students when they enter college “[are] about a reality where past state-sponsored racism continues to affect educational opportunities, and systemic racism continues to rob non-White people of equal educational opportunities. And as difficult and uncomfortable as that may be for some to acknowledge, it is the truth, and it cannot and should not be ignored.”

In the second concurrence, Justice Rebecca Dallet wrote that under current U.S. Supreme Court rulings that the Wisconsin Court must follow, the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause now imposes “substantial barriers to the adoption of race-conscious laws — even ones that seek to remedy the deep, structural inequalities in our society.” Karofsky and Crawford joined her concurrence.

The Higher Educational Aids Board’s defense of the grant program failed because there was “no evidence in the record establishing a problem with retention at Wisconsin’s private and technical colleges, or that race cannot be separated from that problem,” Dallet wrote.

Nevertheless, she suggested that it might yet be possible to redirect the Court with the production of “greater factual support” in the future.

State lawmakers react

Thursday’s ruling drew contrasting reactions from Wisconsin lawmakers.

Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee), chair of the Wisconsin Legislative Black Caucus, criticized the decision for applying the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to a different set of circumstances.

“That federal case was based on admissions while this program is about a student retention enacted by the state legislature and funded since 1985,” Drake said in a statement. The state Supreme Court justices “are setting a dangerous precedent by applying this federal ruling to distinctly different programs.”

Drake said she was a recipient of the grant when she attended Marquette University as a first-generation college graduate. She said she would introduce new legislation in the next two-year legislative session to replace the program with one that would support students based on income and zip code. “Disadvantaged communities need more resources, not fewer,” she said. “We can’t continue to make the same mistakes like our nation did post reconstruction and Jim Crow if we do we will never achieve true equity in our democracy.”

Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett) praised the ruling in a statement. Wimberger authored a bill that would have changed the retention grant and several other programs, redefining them to apply to students who were identified as “disadvantaged” while excluding race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or religion, or to “a student’s identity as a member of a group without regard to individual qualities.” The measure passed the Legislature on party-line votes and was vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers.

“Today, the state Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the policy outcome of my bill,” Wimberger said. “Giving benefits based solely on race presumes someone has individual personal characteristics simply because they belong to a race category. That is stereotyping and racism at their plainest and simplest.”

Wimberger said that there are “other state programs that give benefits based on race” and that he would “continue to fight against those policies and pursue equality under the law.”

This report has been updated with statements from Wisconsin lawmakers. 

A federal poverty-fighting program focused on reducing unintended pregnancies is about to undergo a major overhaul.

Reproductive health clinics use Title X federal grant money to provide birth control, cancer screenings and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections to people with little or no health insurance. Title X money cannot be used for abortions.

The Guttmacher Institute estimates that Title X, which was signed into law by Republican President Richard Nixon in 1970, has prevented almost 20 million unintended pregnancies and 9 million abortions. It has also helped reduce child poverty, according to the group, which supports abortion rights.

But President Donald Trump has taken aim at the program, which has long been a target for abortion opponents. Since regaining the White House, Trump has temporarily blocked and then restored grants to certain reproductive health clinics, and proposed a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services budget with no funding for the program.

The department’s recently issued funding guidelines for Title X grants represent a significant mission shift.

Instead of expanding access to contraception, the focus of Title X will be “to strengthen family formation and assist clients in achieving healthy pregnancies,” according to the new guidance. That will align the program with the administration’s efforts to increase the U.S. birth rate.

The new rules say Title X will prioritize educating Americans about natural methods to avoid pregnancy and overcome infertility, and will promote “body literacy education” and “informed, preventive, and restorative approaches to reproductive health.” Some conservative groups tout an obscure alternative treatment for infertility called “restorative reproductive medicine,” which is based on the idea that the underlying causes of infertility can be treated through lifestyle changes and improving a person’s overall health.

The guidance directs Title X clinics to promote “fertility-awareness-based methods,” such as period-tracking apps, which the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says can be helpful for getting pregnant but less effective at preventing pregnancy. It also calls on clinics to offer counseling on male fertility issues and to address environmental causes of infertility, including pornography use. And it includes a prohibition on DEI efforts and warns grantees that federal money cannot be used to “facilitate or incentivize illegal immigration.”

Anti-abortion groups support the changes, but many health policy researchers say they will disproportionately harm low-income and minority women, who are more reliant on Title X services and are more likely to have unintended pregnancies. Researchers also say the new guidelines are unlikely to achieve the administration’s “pronatalist” goal of reversing declining birth rates.

Corinne Rocca, an epidemiology professor at the University of California, San Francisco, said the way to do that would be to spend more on childcare subsidies and other social programs to help new parents.

“Policies that help people and families feel supported to meet their childbearing preferences … would actually help people who are open to the prospect of childbearing to do so,” Rocca said.

Rocca co-authored a study published in JAMA Network Open last fall suggesting Black and Hispanic women are less likely than other racial groups to be able to choose if, when and how to start a family.

Clinics must reapply for funding under these new guidelines by Jan. 9, 2027. HHS did not respond to a request for comment.

During his first term, Trump banned Title X clinics from referring patients to other providers for an abortion or even mentioning it as an option. He also prohibited grantees from offering family planning services and abortions in the same building. As a result, many grantees quit the program, including about a dozen state health departments and all participating Planned Parenthood chapters.

The program served about 844,000 fewer patients in 2019 than it did in 2018, when it served 3.9 million patients, according to HHS. About 225,000 fewer patients received oral contraceptives; about 50,000 fewer received hormonal implants; and about 86,000 fewer received IUDs.

The reframing of Title X that is reflected in the new guidelines was a recommendation laid out in the controversial blueprint known as Project 2025, created by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation as a guide for the second Trump administration.

In line with Project 2025’s recommendations, HHS says Title X grantees will no longer be required to counsel or refer for abortions, and tells applicants that relationship counseling should encourage marriage as a precursor to having children.

“In a time when we are facing a rapidly declining birth rate that falls far short of the replacement fertility rate, we should be doing all we can to encourage and support family formation and fertility,” Dr. Christina Francis, CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told MedPage Today in April.

“Women deserve accurate information about their fertility and their health — and this includes highlighting the many benefits of pregnancy and motherhood.”

Some abortion opponents have criticized Title X for promoting certain forms of contraception, such as IUDs, that they view as abortifacients. A spokesperson for the National Right to Life Committee said the organization does not take a stance on contraception that prevents fertilization, “however, National Right to Life does oppose any device or drug that would destroy a life already created at fertilization.”

“If there is any doubt, we recommend that a woman speak with her doctor to determine if an agent would cause an abortion,” the spokesperson said in an email.

But Leonard Lopoo, a professor at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University who has studied fertility and family policies for the past three decades, said the federal government could help families achieve their family planning goals by expanding pregnancy prevention and infertility treatments at all income levels.

“When you’re trying to take away the funding for someone who doesn’t want to have a child, that’s not the same as providing funding to support someone who does,” Lopoo said.

As a Black woman and researcher focused on Black maternal health at Ibis Reproductive Health, Terri-Ann Thompson is better informed than most on the ways having children can be disproportionately more dangerous and less affordable for women who look like her.

But she says what she wasn’t expecting to uncover — during research for a study she co-authored in the journal Frontiers in Public Health this spring — is how much the fear of negative medical and criminal justice outcomes makes many Black women in Georgia and North Carolina scared of pregnancy.

“I was very surprised to see that folks were actually thinking about the context within which a Black child is born and raised well before they even contemplated starting a family,” Thompson said. “We had a lot of, just, stories of folks saying, ‘Why would I want to bring a child into this context; how does one prepare Black women to bring a child into this context?’”

Thompson said her team’s findings show how much Black women depend on low-cost access to long-acting reversible contraceptives such as IUDs.

“We have people who drove very, very far just to get a sliding scale to either get an IUD placed, an IUD removed, or to even get on birth control pills,” Thompson said.

“If the administration moves forward with these restrictions, what we are doing is we are removing access to contraceptives for a population that is at higher risk.”

Stateline reporter Sofia Resnick can be reached at sresnick@stateline.org.

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s unemployment rate dropped to 3.4% in May, down from 3.5% in April.

(The Center Square) – A Wisconsin college grant program that sent financial aid to students based on specific race, national origin and ancestry cannot legally operate because it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, the Wisconsin Supreme…

(The Center Square) – The future of property taxes in Wisconsin remains one of the largest topics along with affordability heading into this fall’s elections.

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction framed its new Portrait of a Graduate initiative from a steering committee that included employers and those in Wisconsin’s industries that would help frame what graduates need to know.

(The Center Square) – Many of Wisconsin’s representatives in Congress spent Wednesday talking about something other than Iran.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Two 2025 studies found the majority of calories consumed by U.S. residents comes from ultraprocessed foods.

From August 2021 to August 2023, the mean percentage of total calories consumed from ultraprocessed foods among people age 1 and older was 55%, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found.

Top sources included sandwiches, sweet bakery products, savory snacks and sweetened beverages.

Ultraprocessed foods typically are low in dietary fiber, contain little or no whole foods and have high amounts of additives like salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats, the CDC said.

From 2003 to 2018, over 50% of the calories consumed by adults age 20 and up were from ultraprocessed foods, according to a study led by Johns Hopkins University researchers.

A University of Wisconsin-Madison nutritional sciences professor recommends choosing instead foods lower in added sugars, sodium and saturated fats, and higher in dietary fiber and whole food ingredients.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• National Center for Health Statistics Ultra-processed Food Consumption in Youth and Adults: United States, August 2021–August 2023
• The Journal of Nutrition Trends in Adults’ Intake of Un-processed/Minimally Processed, and Ultra-processed foods at Home and Away from Home in the United States from 2003–2018
• University of Wisconsin-Madison Nutritional Sciences Ultra-Processed Foods
• Newswise It May Not Just Be What’s in Ultra-Processed Foods, But How They’re Made
• JAMA Trends in Consumption of Ultraprocessed Foods Among US Youths Aged 2-19 Years, 1999-2018
• American Journal of Clinical Nutrition Ultra-processed food consumption among US adults from 2001 to 2018

Do over half of calories consumed by Americans come from ultraprocessed foods? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Wisconsin dairy farmers may have a new avenue to hire workers under new seasonal labor visa rules the Trump administration announced Wednesday.

The U.S. Department of Labor and Department of Homeland Security will give dairy farmers broader access to the federal H-2A program, through which farmers can secure temporary visas for seasonal agricultural workers. 

The dairy industry has lobbied for years to ease program rules barring visas for ostensibly year-round farm roles like milking; those rules also exclude many livestock and mushroom farms from the program. 

“This is a welcomed policy change for our dairy members, and we are hopeful it is just the beginning of continued H-2A program expansion,” John Hollay, president of the National Council of Agricultural Employers, wrote in a press release. “By opening the door for the dairy industry to take advantage of the only legal program for foreign agricultural workers, President Trump continues to move us in a direction of needed reform.”

The administration’s initial announcement was light on details about which dairy farm roles now qualify for H-2A visas.

The updates to the H-2A program are dairy-specific, and the USDA made no indication of changes to the visa’s one-year duration, or a maximum of three years with extensions.

Wisconsin’s agricultural sector increasingly relies on the H-2A program to meet its labor needs. Wisconsin farmers’ annual H-2A hiring increased at least six-fold over the past decade, and the White House’s ongoing immigration crackdown has amplified the program’s importance as a source of workers with legal status. 

Some dairy farms already hire H-2A workers for non-milking jobs; at least 14% of Wisconsin farms approved for visas this year have dairy herds, U.S. Department of Labor and Wisconsin milk producer license data shows. 

Calumet County dairy farmer Amy Woldt hired three H-2A workers from South Africa this year as heavy equipment operators. “We don’t really need them for working with the cattle,” she told Wisconsin Watch, but they do need a crew to run the farm’s skid steers and other farm machinery.

So far, nearly all H-2A workers on Wisconsin dairy farms are heavy equipment operators, at least according to farmers’ applications to the Department of Labor. Many, including the workers on Woldt’s farm, are from South Africa.

Fellow Calumet County farmer Kurt Schneider also hires South African H-2A workers to harvest his feed crops. “It’s because they speak English,” he said, and the ease of communication justifies the cost of flying in a crew from across the Atlantic. South Africans make up the second-largest cohort of H-2A workers after workers from Mexico, outnumbering the third-largest nationality — workers from Jamaica — more than 3-to-1 in 2024.

Schneider added that he would be thrilled to hire for his milking operations through the H-2A program. His current 35-person milking crew is mostly Spanish-speaking, so Schneider would favor H-2A workers from Mexico to supplement his dairy workforce. “That’s our culture,” he said. “We don’t want to change our culture.”

For Schneider, the H-2A program could offer a more stable workforce than the current cutthroat competition between farms allows. The pool of often-undocumented immigrant dairy workers is shrinking, in part because some workers are opting to return to their home countries amid the immigration enforcement push, and remaining workers can now hop between farms to earn higher wages. “I’m getting really sick of (it),” he said. “Somebody’s paying 50 cents an hour more and they jump ship.” 

The Trump administration cut the program’s minimum wage last year; workers on Wisconsin farms classified as “less-skilled” now receive a minimum $12 per hour this year, down more than a third from their 2025 minimum wage. Woldt says she hasn’t cut her crew’s wages, hoping “to keep the guys we have” rather than competing with other farmers for new workers next season.

The USDA’s announcement didn’t specify where dairy workers will fall on the wage scale.

While a seasonal H-2A crew would also require regular turnover, Schneider said his farm’s current attrition rate justifies the switch. “We’re having bottom 10% turnover anyway,” he said, as new dairy hands move along in search of higher wages. “They’re only there two weeks or a month, and they leave, and you’re constantly training.”

But he isn’t inclined to let go of his current crew. If the new rules allow him to hire dairy hands through the H-2A program, Schneider said he would apply for enough visas to backfill openings as they arise, even if that means some visas go unused. 

That strategy could also limit the risks of relying entirely on the H-2A program. A backlog at an American consulate in South Africa delayed the arrival of Schneider’s harvest crew this spring. Farmers pay steep overhead to secure H-2A visas, and when delays force workers to book last-minute flights, costs often skyrocket. Program rules require farmers to cover workers’ plane tickets and lodging, so delays can inflate the up-front costs of participating in the program — or, if a farm relied entirely on H-2A workers, possibly leave cows unmilked. 

Processing delays also hit Woldt’s team this year, forcing one of her workers to return to South Africa while awaiting approval of his visa extension. She has no immediate plans to hire dairy hands through the program. “We’re good in that department,” she said. 

National agricultural groups also tempered their praise of the new rule change with acknowledgement of the H-2A program’s capacity problems. 

“For this expansion to succeed and the H-2A program to work as intended, our federal agencies must have the resources and regulatory structures necessary to handle the increased volume efficiently,” Hollay wrote. 

Republican U.S Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who represents western Wisconsin, introduced legislation last fall to create an alternative to the H-2A program by allowing some undocumented agricultural workers to self-deport, pay a fine and return to the U.S. through a legal port of entry to resume working in agriculture. “The H-2A program is broken and it sucks,” he quipped during a presentation on immigrant labor at the World Dairy Expo in Madison last fall. Van Orden’s bill did not advance out of committee.

The Trump administration suspended Biden-era rules intended to crack down on abuses of H-2A workers last June. Wisconsin’s migrant labor law preserves some protections the Department of Labor no longer guarantees, including workers’ rights to invite legal aid providers and clergy into their employer-provided housing. 

Wisconsin dairy farms could gain new hiring option under visa changes is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

The president of Wisconsin’s largest mosque has been released from immigration detention, after a federal judge’s order Thursday.

Salah Sarsour, who has been in custody in Indiana for more than two months, was released on personal recognizance because of “extraordinary circumstances,” wrote Judge James Patrick Hanlon, an appointee of President Donald Trump in the southern district of Indiana.

That includes concerns over Sarsour’s health as well as the possibility, raised by his attorneys, that he was targeted for immigration action on the basis of his pro-Palestinian advocacy.

Hanlon wrote that Sarsour, president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, must be returned to Wisconsin while his broader habeas petition moves through federal court and his immigration case moves through immigration court. In the habeas petition, Sarsour is alleging that his detention is unlawful.

“The Court does not decide the ultimate outcome of Mr. Sarsour’s First Amendment habeas claim or the merits of the charges of removability against him,” Hanlon wrote. “The Court only concludes, on the present record, that Mr. Sarsour has raised a ‘substantial’ First Amendment retaliation claim, which could render his detention unlawful.”

Lawyers for the government argued that, if Sarsour were to be released, it should be on cash bail and with an ankle monitor. Hanlon determined that “(s)uch conditions are not necessary here.”

“Sarsour has no history of non-compliance and is well established in the Milwaukee community,” Hanlon wrote. His “entire family lives in the United States and he has not traveled outside the United States since 1998.”

Sarsour, who has lived in the United States for more than 30 years, was arrested on March 30, and held in the Clay County Jail in Indiana.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security accused Sarsour of lying on his immigration forms after he immigrated from Ramallah in Palestinian territory. In a statement, DHS called Sarsour a “terrorist” who had thrown Molotov cocktails at Israeli military members and lied about it on his green card application.

His lawyers argue that Sarsour is being targeted for protected speech, including being a leader in Palestinian activism in recent years. Sarsour’s supporters acknowledge that he was convicted on those charges as a teenager growing up in the West Bank, but argue that the details were fabricated by the Israeli government.

In his order for release, Hanlon said those long-ago charges do not justify the government’s claim that Sarsour is now a risk to American safety. The government has “known about those charges for decades yet took no action to detain” Sarsour earlier, Hanlon wrote.

“Given Mr. Sarsour’s decades of living a law-abiding life in the United States and the long passage of time between his prior convictions, the Court finds Mr. Sarsour does not present a danger should he be released,” Hanlon wrote.

In a statement, Salah’s legal team said they are “ecstatic” about the decision.

“We will continue to fight the hyperbolic and ridiculous claims against Mr. Sarsour in court,” the statement reads. “But this is a day both to celebrate a family being reunited. It is also a sober reminder that, if the government can do this to Mr. Sarsour, then no one is safe from being punished for their speech.”

Sarsour released as legal cases continue

According to Sarsour’s legal team, Sarsour was released from jail at about 2:40 p.m. local time, about seven hours after Hanlon’s order came down. He was picked up by two of his sons. In photographs shared with WPR, Salah is clad in black and noticeably thinner. His legal team previously alleged that Sarsour, who is diabetic, had lost about 30 pounds while in custody.

Samuel Cole, an immigration attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, which has supported Sarsour’s case, said that the judge’s order offers recognition of their argument that Sarsour is being targeted for free speech.

“I certainly think it’s a sobering reminder to all of us that this administration does not feel bound by the Constitution, and anyone who speaks out … is in danger of having their rights taken away,” Cole said.

Hanlon will consider Sarsour’s habeas petition next. He could either issue a ruling on its own, or call for an evidentiary hearing.

Separately, Sarsour’s next hearing in his immigration case is scheduled to take place in Chicago next week. In what Cole described as a highly unusual move, the judge in that case will be Jayme Salinardi, a Kansas City-based Assistant Chief Immigration Judge.

“I’m a former immigration judge myself, and the assignment of a new case to a very senior management judge in a different court — I’ve never heard of anything like this,” said Cole.

This story was originally published by WPR.

Milwaukee Muslim leader released from immigration detention after court ruling is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Employers must get your permission before they use a third-party company to run a background check. 
• Employers can use your credit history to make employment decisions, but experts say it’s important to know your rights. 
• If there’s false or inaccurate information on your credit report, notify the consumer reporting agency that generated the report. 
• Experts say you can protect yourself by checking your credit report annually and placing a freeze on your credit report to reduce the risk of identity theft.

When you apply for a job, you probably know that your potential employer will check your criminal record. But what about your credit history?

Employers in most states, including Wisconsin, are allowed to run background checks that show your debts, available credit and payment history. Wisconsin Watch asked experts what job seekers and employees should know about this process and their rights. 

We spoke to:

• Nick Raef, employment attorney at law firm Hawks Quindel. 
• Jeff Palkowski, state director of the Wisconsin State Council of the Society for Human Resources Management.
• Adriana Peguero, assistant city attorney for the city of Madison.

What kind of credit information can employers see?

Not all types of background reports show financial information. Those that do typically show your credit accounts, payment history, available credit, bankruptcies, liens and self-reported work history, NerdWallet reports.

The reports do not show your credit score, the three-digit number that lenders, landlords and insurers use to assess how creditworthy you are. They also don’t show your income, birth date, marital status or medical debts. 

Unlike when you apply for a credit card or a loan, this is a “soft inquiry,” meaning it won’t affect your credit score and it won’t be visible to other employers or lenders. 

Can an employer run a background check without my permission?

No. If employers want to use a third-party company to run a background check, they need written permission. That’s because of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a 1970 federal law created to protect consumers from false information being included in their credit reports. The law requires that an employer provide “clear and conspicuous” notice in a stand-alone document. 

“That means that if they throw the language into the boilerplate of an application, or scribble it in the margins of the position description, or fail to get your consent before pulling the report, then they are in violation of the law,” Raef, the employment attorney, said in an email. The employer can run the background check only if the employee or job applicant signs the document.

If employers want to run a background check later, like if they’re considering you for a promotion, they have to get permission again.

“It’s not the case that if you’re hired by a company that five years later they can go back and use the same acceptance of disclosure from when you were hired,” Raef said.

Notably, the protections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act apply only when employers use another company to run the background check, not when employers use the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access Program (CCAP) or other tools to check a person’s history themselves.

Can an employer use my credit history to make employment decisions?

Yes, though additional restrictions apply in the city of Madison.

If employers see something in the report that makes them choose to take an “adverse action” about your employment (for example, fire, demote or simply not hire), they must give you a “pre-adverse action notice,” along with a copy of your background report, details about the Fair Credit Reporting Act and an explanation of your rights, including the right to dispute the accuracy of the report and get another free report within 60 days. 

“The notice must inform an individual that their decision was influenced by the report, but does not have to clarify what exactly within the report has led to the employer’s adverse decision,” Raef said. That, he said, can “leave individuals with little clarity as to the employer’s reasoning.” 

The employer must allow time for the employee or applicant to respond before sending a final notice indicating the action the employer took. 

Still, Raef said, employers might say they had other reasons for choosing a different candidate. 

“Employers have the leeway to base their decision on a multitude of factors,” Raef said. “Oftentimes it can be really hard to sort of draw out what exactly happened here, and that’s where an employment attorney can be really helpful.” 

In Madison, employers face stricter limits on how they can use credit history. That’s because credit history is one of the 30 characteristics denoted in the city’s equal opportunity ordinance, alongside homelessness, citizenship status, source of income and physical appearance. 

“We have a very large, expansive number of protected classes,” said Peguero, the assistant city attorney. 

Employers in Madison can make employment decisions based on credit history only if one of the following is true: 

• They can demonstrate that the person’s credit history is “substantially related” to the job.
• The job requires that the person be bonded and the person’s credit history makes them ineligible. Some jobs, especially ones that involve handling money, valuables or proprietary information, require that employees be covered by a fidelity bond that will reimburse the employer if the employee steals or commits fraud. (Note: The federal government operates a little-known alternative bonding program for people who might otherwise struggle to find work, including those with poor credit. You can learn more about that program here.)

The ordinance applies within the city, so it covers Madison employers. It’s less clear whether it would apply to the growing number of Madison residents who work remotely for employers based elsewhere, Peguero said.

“That analysis would have to be done by the hearing examiner, but it is possible it could extend to an employer that is outside of the city of Madison,” Peguero said.

Why do employers check credit? 

Employers may use credit history to assess how trustworthy or responsible a person is, Raef said. An employer may assume that an employee or applicant who has lots of debt, for example, may be more likely to commit fraud, embezzle funds or accept a bribe, especially if the person is in charge of company funds. 

But Raef questions whether credit reports are useful in most employment decisions. “There’s not clear evidence that credit history is an indicator of an employee’s capacity to perform well in their job,” Raef said, pointing to a 2012 study that found no correlation.

“Someone might have poor credit on paper because of a domestic abuse situation in their home, or because they were born into really unfortunate circumstances that don’t reflect on their ability to be a great employee,” Raef said.

He worries that credit checks will create a “toxic loop” where the people who most need jobs can’t get them, which only makes their financial situation worse.  

“I can see the employer’s side where there are limited and specific circumstances where these checks make sense, but as a broad application, I think that it leads to a lot of unfair employment practices and probably exacerbates existing biases that are systemic within our society,” Raef said. 

A 2023 report by the Urban Institute, a national think tank focused on economic and social policy, echoes those concerns. 

“Research suggests that workers with low wages are among those harmed by preemployment credit checks, in part because workers with low incomes are the most likely to have imperfect credit records,” the authors write, though they note there’s limited data on low-wage workers specifically.

How common is it for employers to run credit checks?

About half of U.S. employers conduct credit checks when hiring for at least some of their positions, according to a 2021 survey by the Professional Background Screening Association.   

Jeff Palkowski leads the Wisconsin State Council of the Society for Human Resources Management. He has worked in human resources in Wisconsin for more than 20 years, mostly in the public sector in Madison. The closest he’s come to an employment credit check was when a friend applied to work at the FBI. 

“Anecdotally, I have heard of instances where a credit check may be part of the pre-employment process, but only in rare cases … Personally, I have never filled a role that had a pre-employment credit check as part of the recruitment process,” he said. 

Do all states allow employers to do credit checks?

No. As of 2023, 11 states had restricted the practice, according to the Urban Institute. Wisconsin has no state law restricting these checks.

What can I do if I think my credit report is wrong or if I think an employer used my credit history illegally?

If you believe there is a mistake on your credit report, you can dispute it by contacting the consumer reporting agency whose report showed the mistake. The agency must investigate. 

“If they can’t verify the accuracy of the information, then they have to remove it,” Raef said.

If you believe an employer used your credit history inappropriately, Raef recommends contacting an employment lawyer. 

“If they fail to notify you of a negative decision based on a report, or if they refuse to identify the source of the information that they obtained about you, or if they fail to get your permission at all, then you might be entitled to recover damages,” Raef said. 

If you or the employer is located in Madison, you can also file a complaint with the city of Madison’s Department of Civil Rights, which investigates alleged violations of the city’s equal opportunity ordinance. You must file the complaint within 300 days of the incident. 

Complaints are far less common than allegations of other kinds of employment discrimination, Peguero said. Of the 805 employment complaints submitted to the office between 2020 and 2025, just eight mentioned credit history.

How can I protect myself?

There are proactive steps you can take now to reduce the chance that a credit check will cause you unnecessary trouble.

 “You shouldn’t wait until you have signed something allowing your employer to look into this,” Raef said. 

He recommends the following actions:

• Request your own credit report to check for errors. You can do this for free once a year at www.annualcreditreport.com. If you find a mistake, report it. 

• Place a freeze on your credit report to reduce the risk of identity theft, which can damage your credit. A credit freeze blocks anyone from opening a new credit account in your name. You can place a freeze for free online, but you’ll need to do it separately for each of the three nationwide credit reporting agencies: Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. You’ll need to lift the freeze any time you want to apply for credit. “It’s kind of a pain … but it’s worthwhile to do with the amount of pain that it could cause if not done,” Raef said.

Natalie Yahr reports on pathways to success statewide for Wisconsin Watch, working in partnership with Open Campus. Email her at nyahr@wisconsinwatch.org. 

Can Wisconsin employers check your credit? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Green Bay leaders are moving toward creating a registry of vacant buildings and charging fees in the hope of encouraging redevelopment.

The post Green Bay looks to create policy addressing vacant buildings through registry, fees appeared first on WPR.

Some Wisconsin communities are looking to place more restrictions on electric bikes and scooters due to accidents.

The post Some Wisconsin communities considering restrictions on use of e-scooters, e-bikes appeared first on WPR.

Two Democrats vying for a shot at defeating Republican Congressman Derrick Van Orden courted party activists during a Thursday Democratic Party forum in Platteville.

The post Democrats vying for 3rd US House District face off in candidate forum appeared first on WPR.