Gov. Tony Evers signed bills into law this week that will legalize sports betting, provide funding to the University of Wisconsin system to help student athletes get paid for the use of their name, image and likeness as well as measures that address internet crimes against children. 

AB 601, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 247, will legalize online sports betting in the state. This will be an expansion of access to sports betting, which has been legal in Wisconsin since 2021, but only in person at tribal casinos. 

Following a legal framework first used in Florida, the law will allow for the servers that manage the bets to be housed on tribal land. The law was designed this way because the Wisconsin constitution requires that any legal gambling be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes.

The bill faced a complicated path through the state Legislature. At first it sped through the hearing process, only to be pulled from the Assembly floor calendar. It finally received  a vote about three months after it passed committee. When it passed the Senate in a 21-12 vote, with some opposition from both Democrats and Republicans, one Republican senator said the bill would be the reason Republicans lose their majority in this year’s midterm elections. The bill also faced opposition from lobbying groups representing the country’s largest online sportsbooks. 

Evers said he signed the bill because it is his obligation to “always to respect the sovereignty of Tribal Nations in Wisconsin,” and because it will provide an opportunity to put revenue paid into the state into mental health programs and efforts to combat the opioid crisis. However, he said, he also had “reservations” about signing the bill. 

“This legislation is the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one,” Evers said in a statement. “The real work begins today.” 

Online sports betting will not become immediately available since  the tribes and the state will need to renegotiate their gaming compacts. The governor is tasked with the responsibility of negotiating compacts with the tribes under the Wisconsin Constitution. A new agreement would then need approval from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

Before the bill passed the Legislature, Evers had expressed concerns about getting support from all of the tribes. 

All 11 tribes then signed a letter saying that each was on board with the legislation, according to WisPolitics.

“Each of the 11 Tribes must now work diligently — and together — to shape the future of sports betting in Wisconsin,” Evers said. “What I will not accept is a plan that fractures this opportunity into unequal pieces, allowing some Tribes to reap great benefits while leaving only crumbs for others. An approach that exacerbates long-standing inequalities among Tribal Nations is not good for Wisconsinites or Wisconsin.” 

Wisconsin is the 33rd state to legalize online or mobile sports betting since a 2018 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a 1992 federal law that had barred betting on football, basketball, baseball and other sports in most states.

“A joint venture — with each Tribe contributing, and each Tribe benefiting in equal shares — is gaining traction in these discussions, and I strongly support pursuing this or a similar model,” Evers said in his statement. “This is an opportunity to avoid the mistakes of past compact amendments that left some Tribes and their members in poverty while only lifting up a few.”

Student athlete name, image and likeness

Evers also signed a bill this week to help University of Wisconsin student athletes in getting paid for the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) and to provide the UW system with funds so it can help provide NIL opportunities to those athletes.

AB 1034, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 203, provides $14.6 million annually in state funds to go towards debt service for the costs of UW-Madison’s athletic facilities, $200,000 for the UW–Milwaukee Klotsche Center and $200,000 for the UW-Green Bay soccer complex. Providing the state funds is meant to free up other funds so the UW can provide students with opportunities for NIL agreements. The bill passed with nearly unanimous support in the Assembly with a 95-1 vote, but in the Senate the margin was much closer with a 17-16 vote. 

Evers partially vetoed the bill to remove language related to the funds going to “maintenance costs” saying he wanted to allow greater flexibility in how the UW system can use the funds. 

“I object to the potential confusion created by referring to ‘maintenance,’ and my partial veto will better reflect the intent that the funding alleviate existing debt service. I also object to how this bill unnecessarily restricts the use of funds appropriated for athletic facilities within the University of Wisconsin System,” Evers wrote in his veto message. “I believe that greater flexibility is necessary to ensure this funding can be used effectively and allow the system to maximize the state’s investment.” 

The law codifies some policies that UW-Madison and other campuses already have in state law, including prohibiting NIL contracts that conflict with school policies and providing money in exchange for athletic performance, as well as those that require student athletes to endorse alcoholic beverages, gambling, banned athletic substances or illegal activities or substances. It also includes a requirement that student athletes disclose third-party NIL deals they enter. 

UW schools are also going to be able to contract with organizations that can help student athletes find NIL opportunities.

The law also includes language exempting records related to the “generation, deployment, or allocation of revenue generated by an intercollegiate athletic program” from the state’s open records law in an effort to “protect competitive interests and student privacy.” Open records advocates expressed concerns about the provision as the bill was debated. UW representatives said the provision would only be used to clarify what is already the UW’s existing practice of denying access to student athlete NIL agreements and certain university records that are related to NIL strategy, allocation, revenue generation. 

Addressing internet crimes against children

Evers signed four bills into law to help combat internet crimes against children.

The laws build on previous efforts to address online crimes affecting children. Last year Wisconsin passed a law that defined  “sextortion” as a crime. Lawmakers started working on that legislation after 15-year-old Bradyn Bohn from Kronenwetter, a village outside of Wausau, died by suicide after being targeted online by a perpetrator who convinced him to share nude photos of himself and told him that he needed to send money or face major consequences. He suffered through hours of threats and was coerced into sending money before his death.

AB 923, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 215, will allow for victims of a sexual extortion to sue their perpetrator for damages including for emotional distress, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and investigation costs. In the case that someone died by suicide due to sexual extortion, a victim’s family would be able to file a wrongful death suit. 

Sexual extortion has become a growing threat in the U.S. in recent years. From October 2021 to March 2023, the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations received over 13,000 reports of online financial sextortion of minors that included at least 12,600 victims, mostly boys, and led to at least 20 suicides.

The other bills give the DOJ additional resources and tools to address internet crimes against children. 

AB 957, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 216, provides $400,000 in each year of the 2025-27 state budget to the state Department of Justice (DOJ) to enforce laws against internet crimes against children and AB 958, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 217, provides four new DOJ positions that will focus on internet crimes against children. 

AB 964, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 21, gives the attorney general administrative subpoena authority in the case of a sextortion crime if the victim was a child at the time of the violation.

AB 966, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 219, will require the DOJ to conduct a children’s online digital safety awareness campaign and provide materials on digital safety awareness to schools for free.

Other bills Evers took action on 

• AB 1027 was vetoed. It would have instructed the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to turn over data related to SNAP to the Department of Health Services to provide to the U.S. Department of Agriculture information. Evers said in his veto message that he objected “to sharing Wisconsinites’ most sensitive personal data, including their Social Security numbers, without the federal government having to meaningfully demonstrate how Wisconsinites’ personal data will be appropriately secured, will not be able to be accessed by broad swaths of federal employees, and will not be shared inappropriately both within and outside of the federal government.”
• AB 759, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 240, was signed into law. It will make Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status holders in Wisconsin eligible to apply for occupational licenses.
• AB 373, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 241, was signed into law. It creates a $2,000 nonrefundable income tax credit for parents of a stillborn child. The credit is meant to provide financial relief to help parents with expenses associated with the stillbirth.
• AB 918, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 202, makes adoption a required topic to be covered for school districts that choose to offer human growth and development instruction, also known as sex education. Wisconsin school districts are not required to offer human growth and development instruction.
• SB 782, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 245, extends a penalty for falsely texting 911 to report an emergency. Violators could face fines between $100 and $600 and/or up to 90 days in jail for a first offense. A subsequent offense committed within four years of the first would be a Class H felony.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — Spikes in energy prices caused by the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran drove up inflation for Americans in March, according to the latest consumer price index figures released Friday.

Costs jumped 0.9% in March compared to the previous month — that’s up from the 0.3% increase in February. 

Prices for all items together, including food, energy, shelter and other commodities like vehicles, rose by 3.3% from a year ago. That’s the highest annual jump since May 2024, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics historical data. 

Fuel costs drove the spike, with gasoline and fuel oil together rising 10.9% in March compared to the previous month. Singled out, gas prices jumped 21.2% in March. The cost for airfare, largely driven by jet fuel prices, rose 2.7% in March, up from the 1.4% jump in February.

President Donald Trump launched the joint war in Iran with Israel on Feb. 28. In response to the intense bombing campaign that killed the country’s supreme leader and numerous senior officials, the Iranian regime effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow passage in and out of the Persian Gulf vital to the transport of one-fifth of the world’s petroleum.

As of Friday, Americans were paying $4.15 on average nationwide for a gallon of regular gas, according to AAA. The average for diesel across the U.S. is $5.68 per gallon.

Prior to the war, a gallon of regular hadn’t topped $3 all year.

Iran’s de facto takeover of the Strait of Hormuz by threatening to strike any tankers, other than a handful from friendly countries, has caused the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market, according to the International Energy Agency.

Despite a tenuous ceasefire agreed to Tuesday evening Eastern time, Iran is still controlling the strait. Ten oil tankers transited the waterway Tuesday, and only one on Wednesday, according to the latest figures available from the Joint Maritime Information Center, which tracks tankers and cargo ships worldwide that are transmitting location data.

Prior to the war, roughly 140 vessels daily flowed freely through the Strait of Hormuz.

Dems pounce on affordability issue

Democrats blamed Trump Friday for higher inflation, as affordability is emerging as perhaps the single-most important issue ahead of the 2026 midterm elections in November that will determine control of Congress.

Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said the president is “pushing working families to the brink.” 

“Trump promised to ‘lower prices on Day One,’ and instead he waged an unhinged trade war and started an unpopular war with Iran — and what have Americans gotten in return? Nothing except even higher prices. Americans are sick and tired of this president putting his own interests first and using their hard-earned dollars to fund his war instead of making health care more affordable or expanding access to child care,” Martin said in a statement Friday morning.

White House senior deputy press secretary Kush Desai responded to the inflation figures, saying the president “has always been clear about short-term disruptions as a result of Operation Epic Fury, disruptions that the Administration has been diligently working to mitigate.”

“Although gas and energy prices are seeing volatility, prices of eggs, beef, prescription drugs, dairy, and other household essentials are falling or remain stable thanks to President Trump’s policies. As the Administration ensures the free flow of energy through the Strait of Hormuz, the American economy remains on a solid trajectory thanks to the Administration’s robust supply-side agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, and energy abundance,” Desai wrote in a statement Friday morning posted on social media. 

Other costs

The price index for food consumed at home decreased 0.2% compared to the previous month, but increased 1.9% from a year ago. 

The costs of fruits and vegetables rose 1% in March compared to the previous month, but prices for meat, poultry, fish and eggs declined 0.6%, according to the latest BLS figures.

The price index for items minus food and energy rose 0.2% in March, matching the increase in February. The cost of all items, less food and energy, rose 2.6% over the past 12 months.

A state Senate committee put off taking action despite threats from lawmakers to fire unconfirmed members of the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents after two regents shared more details Thursday about the decision to fire former UW President Jay Rothman. 

While the regents were legally prevented from sharing specific details about the firing, they said, they described their sense that Rothman moved too slowly to act on pressing issues including developing a UW policy on artificial intelligence.

The UW Board of Regents voted unanimously in a virtual meeting Tuesday to fire Rothman, who had refused to leave his position voluntarily. The decision took effect immediately and the the search for the next leader has already begun. Rothman, who will get six months of severance pay, told the Associated Press after the vote that he was “blindsided” by the ousting but wasn’t going to challenge it.

Republican lawmakers had come to the defense of Rothman after the news broke about the effort to oust him. Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) said lawmakers should reject the regents’ nomination if they fired Rothman without cause. The Senate Technical Colleges and Universities committee quickly scheduled Thursday’s public hearing and executive session on the consideration of the nominations of the ten unconfirmed Gov. Tony Evers’ appointees, including Bogost and Nixon. 

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) said at the start of Thursday’s meeting that the decision required an explanation.

“Transparency is the foundation of public trust, and when decisions are made without explained justification, it further erodes confidence, not just to the Board of Regents, but in the institution itself,” Hutton said, adding that lawmakers could provide oversight of state entities. “We are faced with a sudden leadership shake-up at risk, creating instability at a time when the chancellor turnover is high and our flagship university is losing its CEO.”

Regent President Amy Bogost and Regent Timothy Nixon said that Rothman had been told about the changes the regents wanted to see. Their decision to let him go, they said, was not made lightly and came after he failed to make those changes. They also said that his decision to take his complaints public was harmful to the UW system.

Bogost has served on the Board for the last six years, including as president since 2024. Nixon has served as a regent for the last two years. Neither has received a confirmation hearing, which has become standard procedure for the Republican-led Senate, which has left most Evers appointees unconfirmed. 

Until the meeting, the regents hadn’t given any additional details about the decision to fire Rothman, other than that the decision came after an annual review was conducted by Bogost and that Rothman was “not without notice” and the process was not “sudden.”

Evers stood behind the regents’ decision in a statement released during the meeting, saying the choice was their and that they decided to make a leadership change, “nothing more, nothing less.” 

“Republican lawmakers should resist their temptation to turn this into a political conversation, because it isn’t one,” Evers said. “The UW Board of Regents is not supposed to be an extension of any politician or political party. The Regents are responsible for doing what’s best for our UW System, and they should be able to do their jobs without political interference from elected officials.” 

Evers also warned it would be a “mistake” if the lawmakers used it as an opportunity to fire people and that that would “jeopardize our continued bipartisan work this session.” 

“It’s pretty simple: I trust that the Regents are doing what is best for students, faculty, staff, and our UW System — lawmakers should, too.”

At the start of the hearing, Bogost told lawmakers that she would be as transparent with them as she legally could. 

“President Rothman knows exactly what he is doing. He is a sophisticated professional who understands that personnel matters are confidential,” Bogost said. “The confidentiality surrounding his evaluation was not arbitrary… It is what law requires and is what our obligation is to these universities, and yet, President Rothman, who understands all of this, has chosen to use that constraint as a shield — making public statements, he knows I cannot deny, and framing a narrative he knows I cannot correct.” 

Rothman was a Milwaukee lawyer and CEO of the law firm Foley and Lardner before being chosen to serve as the UW president in 2022.

Bogost told lawmakers that she would also be willing to walk the committee through the details of the conversations held in closed session with Rothman and the decision to fire Rothman if he waived his confidentiality.

Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) asked why Bogost thought he hadn’t waived his confidentiality. 

“I believe that his objective is to be able to get his narrative out and be one-sided…He knows the truth, and he understands what this is all about, and we were hoping that he would move on,” Bogost said. “To do the media circuit that he’s on denigrates our wonderful universities, and that makes me really sad, because I know that he worked tirelessly for the universities, and I really was hoping to celebrate his past accomplishments… it’s unfortunate that he’s taking that path.”

Before firing Rothman, the regents had offered him the opportunity to resign. Rothman refused, saying he hadn’t been given clear reasoning for his firing and that he thought he had accomplished a lot during his tenure as president.

Nixon also said offering at-will employees the option to leave voluntarily is standard procedure within the UW system and in private businesses. As an example, he noted former Gov. Tommy Thompson, who served as interim president of the system between 2020 and 2022 and voluntarily stepped down from the position. He also noted James Langdon, who, according to WisPolitics, wrote in an email that Rothman fired him in a similar way from his position as vice president of administration. 

Nixon added that the same practice applies to corporate CEOs, who are routinely let go by companies that don’t want to harm their brands. “You try not to have these public blow-ups, alright,  and so nothing here in my mind [is] unusual, and not only that, it follows UW practice.”

In a statement, Rothman said his recent evaluation from Bogost was “overwhelmingly positive.” However, during the hearing, Bogost said that when giving reviews it is typical to “give at least four positives to every negative,” which is what happened with Rothman. 

“He was very disheartened by those… I was surprised. These were things that we tried to work on. It was not sudden,” Bogost said. “Mr. Rothman knows that it was ongoing situations that we had many discussions with him about.”

Bogost said there is not an evaluation document, but that she took notes and delivered the evaluation in person to Rothman.

Bogost said Rothman was the right person to lead the UW system as it sought to deal with a tough financial and operational situation. During his time as president, Rothman oversaw the “right-sizing” of campus budgets and the closure of campuses. Nixon said when it comes to other accomplishments Rothman has touted, he is “a bit like the rooster crowing and then taking credit for the sunrise after.”

As the UW system is addressing other pressing issues, the regents said Rothman was too slow to act. 

Nixon noted that U.S. News and World Report ranked the 50 most innovative universities in the U.S., and the only Wisconsin school on the list was Marquette University. 

“Thank God, one higher education institution in the state has made the list,” Nixon said. “Change is not Mr. Rothman’s strong suit, yet change is what we desperately need.”

Nixon said there was a “lack of urgency” coming from Rothman, adding that coming from a law background he tends to move deliberately to ensure that every i is dotted and every t is crossed. 

As an example, Nixon said the regents started asking for a system-wide policy on artificial intelligence in November, but they still had not received one. 

“We can’t take a year and six months to decide and think about every single issue. This is no different than moving on to a new quarterback — no matter what you thought of the previous quarterback or what they did,” Nixon said. 

Nixon said he had also spoken with Rothman about reassigning some of the over 500 employees who work for the UW system administration to campuses, but there had not been changes. 

Sen. Rachael Cabral Guevara (R-Fox Crossing) thanked Nixon for giving the committee some concrete reasons for its decision  rather than staying in the “gray zone.”

The regents said that the timing of the decision was partly the result of state budget negotiations and the implementation of the state budget. In the most recent state budget, the UW system received a boost in state funding, which came as a result of negotiations between Evers, Democratic and Republican lawmakers and advocacy efforts from UW stakeholders. Republican lawmakers had initially sought a cut to the UW budget. 

At the end of Thursday’s hearing, the committee delayed its vote on whether to recommend confirming the nominees.

Hutton told reporters afterwards that there was more information the senators needed to consider and it would have been “premature” to vote. He said that he wants to see more documents related to Rothman’s evaluation and hear from more of the regents. 

“Based on some of the information we requested from the board president, really thought that was beneficial to receive that information, let the committee go through that a little bit more, maybe ask some additional questions before we go to exec[utive session],” Hutton said, adding that Bogost was “very willing” and “cooperative” when it came to providing information. 

Hutton said that there would need to be a conversation with the Republican caucus leadership on whether the full Senate, which has adjourned for regular session work, will come back to take a long-delayed vote on the regents’ nominations.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Elliott Landrum, 46, has spent decades of his life in the Wisconsin prison system. He told the Examiner that he was a handler for Louann, a puppy who went on to graduate and become a hearing assist dog.

“We can still make something out of our lives, and still do something to help someone else, and I think that’s the biggest part about the PAWS program,” Landrum said, referring to Wisconsin’s Prisoners Assisting With Service Dogs (PAWS) program. 

Can Do Canines matches service dogs with clients to help with mobility issues, hearing loss, seizures, autism or type one diabetes, executive director Jeff Johnson told the Examiner last month. He said that the organization partners with five Minnesota prisons and four Wisconsin prisons.

“I also frequently hear from inmates that this is — I don’t know if redemption is the right word, but this is a way to give back that they haven’t really had before in their lives,” Johnson said. “They also get the unconditional love of a dog, and some of them haven’t had unconditional love from anything or anyone before this.”

Last month, Can Do Canines published an article about a woman named Colleen and her hearing assist dog Louann, who were matched together last year.

Colleen said that Louann loves people, the article states, and while Louann is trained to alert Colleen to a wide variety of sounds, her favorite alert is probably the doorbell. The article lists Jackson Correctional Institution, where Landrum participated in the dog training program, among those who made the partnership possible.  

“I’m grateful having her,” Colleen said, according to the article. “Besides having her helping me, she keeps me busy.”

Of the four prisons in Wisconsin that partner with Can Do Canines, Fox Lake, Stanley and Jackson Correctional Institutions are medium-security prisons, while Chippewa Valley Correctional Treatment Facility is minimum-security. Earlier this year, Stanley Correctional reached a milestone: a decade of training service dogs.

“For the inmate handlers, it teaches them people skills,” Johnson said. “They’re dealing with dogs — like patience and positive reinforcement and persistence and teamwork, ‘cause they have to work together as a team. And for many of these guys, those aren’t personal strengths of theirs going in.”

Johnson said there is essentially a separate part of each prison for the dog program and handlers. Each dog has two incarcerated handlers, who live together in a cell with the dog.

Lindy Luopa, puppy program manager at Can Do Canines, said over email that dogs are typically raised in a prison program for approximately eight months. At around the three and six-month marks in the prison program, they go out for two-week breaks in host homes, so they can hear the sights and sounds of a home environment and be exposed to a variety of public experiences.

Prison staff screen incarcerated people to decide who gets to be involved, Johnson said. 

Incarcerated handlers work on all of the foundation skills of a service dog, Johnson told the Examiner, including sitting, staying, retrieving items and cleaning up items and putting them in a container. 

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections stated in a 2018 press release that Can Do Canines was decreasing the cost to train service dogs by partnering with the DOC, increasing the number of dogs who could be trained and placed with people. 

“We serve far more people each year because of the prison program and save money because these volunteers provide valuable training that we might otherwise have to hire more staff to provide,” Johnson told the Examiner. 

Johnson said that after the dog’s prison stay, there is much more training involved to become a service dog, but the incarcerated handlers put them on that path. 

(Video uploaded April 13, 2017 to Vimeo by Barbara Wiener.)

Can Do Canines didn’t have a prison program for a period of time due to the COVID pandemic, Johnson said.

“That was very difficult,” Johnson added. “You only have so many volunteers.” 

William Ward, who is incarcerated at Stanley Correctional, said he participated in Stanley’s program from February 2020 to February 2025 and wants to see the dog program in more prisons. He said that while the dog program doesn’t involve a large percentage of prisoners, it provides the participants with something constructive to do at a prison where opportunities are limited. 

Dogs behind bars around the state

Since 2016, nearly 300 dogs have received service dog training at Stanley Correctional, according to a Facebook post from the Wisconsin Department of Corrections last month. 

For about three hours a day, handlers train the dogs on obedience and other skills with the help of Can Do Canines, the department said. More than 180 incarcerated people have volunteered in that role. 

The DOC reported an overall success rate of over 71% for those dogs. The 10-year anniversary was recognized earlier this year during a celebration with Can Do Canines clients, staff, volunteers and other guests, the department said. 

Chippewa Valley Correctional Treatment Facility reported that 31 puppies were successfully trained during fiscal year 2025. And in February of last year, six puppies came to Fox Lake Correctional Institution.

“We welcomed Shelby, Smudge, Skyler, Scout, Sailor and Solly to FLCI where they began their training,” Fox Lake reported. 

Jackson Correctional Institution in Black River Falls reported raising 36 puppies in fiscal year 2025. In addition, the prison has worked with 50 3-year-old “finishing” dogs for a three-month program, as of Jackson’s annual report for fiscal year 2025.

Staff and incarcerated people at Jackson celebrated the graduation of their first group of Can Do Canines dogs in 2018, according to a 2018 DOC press release.  

“The participating inmates feel a sense of pride in their accomplishments and are extremely grateful to others for the chance to give back,” Lizzie Tegels, the warden at Jackson at the time, said in the press release. “This program has also had a very positive effect on the climate at our institution.” 

Randy Forsterling, a formerly incarcerated man, connected the Examiner with Landrum and three other men who said they are current or former participants in prison dog training programs with organizations such as Can Do Canines. One of them, Michael Lappen, was released from prison in 2023 and is currently on community supervision.

Like Landrum, Lappen said he was in the dog program at Jackson Correctional Institution. He said he was also in a dog program at Prairie du Chien Correctional Institution, and plans to volunteer with R-PAWS, a wildlife sanctuary program involving volunteer members that cares for injured and orphaned wildlife for release back into the wild.  

Dogs for veterans

Can Do Canines isn’t the only group working with incarcerated people to train dogs behind bars. In 2022, WISN 12 News reported on incarcerated people volunteering with the Journey Together Service Dog program at Oshkosh Correctional Institution.

Shaun Lynch told the Examiner he was in Oshkosh Correctional’s Journey Together program from January 2017 until April 2019. 

“When I got to Oshkosh in 2016 I hadn’t seen a dog in nearly 20 years,” Lynch said in a message to the Examiner over the messaging app GettingOut. 

Lynch has been in the state prison system since 1998 and has a life sentence, according to online Department of Corrections records. He said that he is going to school for his associate degree in small business entrepreneurship so that he can start his own program if he ever gets out of prison. 

According to Lynch, he helped start a program called Paws for Patriots at Redgranite Correctional Institution, where he has been incarcerated since 2019. He said he started in March 2022 and is still in the program.

According to its most recent available report, Redgranite Correctional partners with Patriot K9’s, an organization that aims to help veterans “win the war against suicide, depression and anxiety” through service dogs and connections to needed resources. 

Patriot K9’s website says that the dog training programs provide incarcerated people with employable skills, such as social skills and problem solving, and help make the transition to life outside prison go more smoothly. 

“I hope I am able to inspire others to look beyond themselves and do something to give back, whether it’s training dogs or just giving back in some way that can help make a difference in someone’s life,” Lynch said. “I also hope that it shows people that no matter what you’ve done in your life you can change for the better and make a difference in someone’s life.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

(The Center Square) – The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of New Richmond Parents for Good Schools over the school district’s policy on gender identity and the use of bathrooms at the school.

(The Center Square) – No committee vote was taken Thursday as two of the 10 University of Wisconsin System Regents appeared before the committee for confirmation of their nominations to the board in the days following the board’s decision to…

(The Center Square) – The list of Wisconsin lawmakers who are not running again continues to grow.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Gov. Tony Evers announced April 3 that he’s reviving the state’s commutation process, allowing Wisconsin prisoners to apply to have their sentences shortened for the first time in 25 years.

Immediately, the news began echoing through the state’s prisons. 

Some people caught it on the 4 o’clock TV news. Some got texts from excited family members and friends. 

With the news came questions. Who exactly will be eligible? How will the process work? How will people behind bars get the records they’ll need to apply, especially those who don’t have outside help?

Without access to the open internet, it’s notoriously hard to get reliable information in prison and even more so on a still-developing issue. 

Incarcerated people began calling and texting the people they trust on the outside, looking for answers. Several wrote to Wisconsin Watch reporters, sharing questions and reporting misinformation they’d heard.

Here at Wisconsin Watch, we’ll be following this developing issue in the coming weeks and months. 

As a starting point, we asked advocates for incarcerated people what potential candidates for commutations most need to know right now. They told us they’re still waiting for details, but they offered tips on how people can start preparing. 

Here are our sources:

• Diego Rodriguez, coalition coordinator for Justice Forward Wisconsin.
• Beverly Walker, executive director of the Integrity Center and administrator of the commutations committee at WISDOM, a statewide network of faith-based organizations.
• Harm Venhuizen, government and public affairs specialist at the Wisconsin State Public Defenders Office.

How big a deal is this news?

The last Wisconsin governor to commute sentences was Tommy Thompson, who issued seven commutations during his 14 years in office. Gov. Evers has granted more than 2,000 pardons since taking office in 2019. Pardons restore some rights but do not shorten a person’s sentence. Currently, they are available only to Wisconsinities who have completed their sentence, including any required supervision. 

Walker, who leads WISDOM’s commutations committee and worked with the governor’s office for three years on reviving the commutations process, called last week’s announcement “life-changing.”

“People were excessively sentenced and they just deserve an opportunity to have freedom, if they’ve done the work, to have a chance to come home,” Walker said.

Rodriguez agrees. “This is huge news,” he said. “This is the time for people to celebrate because we can safely lessen our prison population in a way that can help promote community, promote family bonds.” 

Wisconsin’s prisons are over capacity. As of April 3, 23,554 people were behind bars, 32% more than the facilities were designed to hold. As Wisconsin Watch has reported, that crowding has combined with a shortage of correctional officers to create dangerous conditions. 

Meanwhile, politicians on both sides of the aisle want to close the 128-year-old Green Bay Correctional Institution. If it closes, officials will need somewhere to send its more than 1,100 prisoners. 

Rodriguez said the members of Justice Forward Wisconsin, who belong to various Wisconsin groups that advocate for current and formerly incarcerated people, are working to gather as much information as they can for incarcerated people and their loved ones. They’re looking for answers to the potential challenges that could keep people from applying, like if they can’t afford to send mail or make photocopies.

But overall, he said, “there’s a general level of excitement and hope.”

Venhuizen of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders said in an email that “establishing this board provides hope that people who have done all the hard work of rehabilitation won’t have to languish but can instead return to their families and communities.” The process offers a much-needed “second look” at convictions, he said, but it doesn’t address the reasons so many Wisconsinites are in prison. 

“Wisconsin’s epidemic of over-incarceration is complex and deeply entrenched,” he said. “On the individual level, it’s going to be life-changing for the people who will receive commutations. At the system level, this is a step in the right direction, but it’s not a cure-all.”

How can incarcerated individuals and their loved ones learn more?

• Read Gov. Evers’ press release and the executive orders on commutations and on commutations for people sentenced to life without parole as juveniles. 
• Monitor the governor’s office’s commutations page and read its frequently asked questions. Check back for announcements about who will be on the commutations board. “The governor’s office is the best source of information on this topic right now,” Venhuizen said.
• Attend Justice Forward Wisconsin’s commutations webinar 9:30-11 a.m. on Saturday, April 11. Click here to register.
• Join WISDOM Wisconsin’s “Advocating for Commutations” Facebook group or check the page for announcements about future information sessions.

What steps can incarcerated individuals take now if they’re interested in applying for a commutation?

“Start preparing now if you meet the initial eligibility criteria, as we expect this board to move quickly ahead of the gubernatorial election,” Venhuizen said. 

He recommends the following:

• Review the application requirements listed on the governor’s commutations website and begin compiling the required documents.
• Start making plans with the people you’d want to write letters of support for you. 
• Write a “clear and compelling story of your growth and rehabilitation.” 
• Draft a post-release plan that explains where you would live and work and what programs you would participate in.

For those who are incarcerated and want help with the process, Rodriguez recommends contacting ProSay, an organization advocating for people on parole in Wisconsin, by messaging hello@weareprosay.org through the GTL app.

“I would say the biggest advice is to reach out to a group that is doing this work,” Rodriguez said. “This work gets so much easier when you’re involved in a community of other people that are doing it … And then keep asking questions until you get the answers that you need.”

Commutations are back. Here’s what incarcerated people and their loved ones should know. 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: 6 minutes

A coalition of electrical utilities, including two major players in Wisconsin’s power supply, is seeking federal intervention to pause competitive bidding for transmission projects needed to meet the vast energy needs of the data center boom.

The coalition filed a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Tuesday asking the agency to exempt at least some major grid upgrades from bidding, arguing “bureaucratic red tape” can tack months onto project timelines and strain the country’s ability to “achieve dominance” in artificial intelligence. 

“This complaint is about whether our country will seize, or squander, a generational chance to own the next century,” the utilities wrote.

Among the companies behind the complaint are Xcel Energy, owner of Northern States Power Company-Wisconsin, and American Transmission Company (ATC), which owns and operates transmission lines across much of Wisconsin. 

National and statewide ratepayer advocacy groups reacted with alarm, casting the utilities’ request as a recipe for higher electricity bills. 

“Utilities rushing to catch a ride on the AI investment gold rush need to slow down and think about the impact their proposals are having,” wrote Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board Executive Director Tom Content, as customers “wake up like Groundhog Day to rate hikes well above the cost of living.”

The complaint and the pushback it prompted mark the latest phase in a long-standing fight over the benefits of opening the transmission market to competition.

Stiff competition

FERC first introduced competitive bidding for regional transmission projects in 2011 after ratepayer advocates lobbied for change, arguing that the earlier process — allowing local monopolies to control all projects within their territories — all but guaranteed inflated costs.

The shift set off a race between developers angling for a piece of the action. When a developer wins a transmission project, it also picks up a new revenue stream: Regulators pre-approve developers’ “return on equity,” or profit on each dollar invested.

Dozens of developers have lined up to bid since the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), a nonprofit that manages the wholesale electricity market and grid for much of the Midwest, approved more than $10 billion in new transmission projects in 2022. A new round of projects approved in December 2024 added about $22 billion to the total, and the list of prospective bidders grew once again.

Some are local utilities hoping to maintain control of their territory; others are powerful national utilities venturing outside of their turf, international developers wading into the U.S. market, and startup transmission developers backed by private equity firms.  

While the data center rush had already begun in the Midwest by the time MISO approved the latest set of transmission projects in 2024, the approved projects often couldn’t account for the scale and breakneck pace of the data center developments that emerged in the region soon after. With the boom now in full swing, the tenor of competition for transmission projects is changing.

Debate over bidding benefits 

MISO, which is also responsible for picking a developer for each project, has favored lower-cost bids with more substantial “cost containment” measures designed to shield customers from budget overruns. Ratepayer advocates say the lower bids are proof the bidding requirements are working, pushing even major national utilities to underbid competitors.

In their complaint to FERC, the coalition of utilities — which calls itself the “Grid Acceleration Coalition” — argued the benefits of competition are “unproven.” 

Projects entirely within one utility’s territory aren’t subject to competitive bidding; those projects routinely exceed initial budgets by millions of dollars. While cheaper bids tend to win competitive projects, the utility group argued that even those projects aren’t immune to budget overruns.

But the core of the utilities’ case is about time, not money. They argue the bidding process adds months to project timelines without clear benefits.

In their view, those delays harm customers, in part by slowing the construction of transmission lines that could expand access to cheaper electricity and prevent blackouts, and pose national security risks. 

“These projects — expressways for power — are as critical to meeting today’s challenges as the Eisenhower interstate highway system was to prevailing in the Cold War,” the coalition argued in its complaint. “China has devoted itself to overtaking America as the world’s AI leader and is just months behind.”

The utilities pointed to a recent example in Wisconsin: Last month, MISO reversed its decision to award three substations in Fond du Lac, Ozaukee and Sheboygan counties to private-equity-backed startup Viridon, instead handing the projects to ATC. 

ATC’s initial bid was more expensive than Viridon’s, but the company successfully argued it alone could build the substations in time to serve the nearby Vantage data center campus in Port Washington. 

MISO’s initial plans set a goal to complete the substations by 2033; the Port Washington data center plans to come online in early 2028. Though ATC emerged victorious, it told FERC that the 15-month delay between MISO’s initial approval of the substations and the reversal was “completely unnecessary.”

Ratepayer advocates and other observers, however, quickly pointed out that even noncompetitive projects run into delays. ATC’s Cardinal-Hickory Creek transmission line in southwest Wisconsin, for instance, came online in 2024 — more than a decade after MISO approved it — following prolonged legal battles with conservation groups. 

“All developers can experience construction delays,” said Claire Wayner, a senior associate with the clean energy nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute. “It’s not like there’s a silver bullet.”

Opponents also underscored that two competitively bid projects in the Southwest met their in-service date goals last year. 

“Competitive transmission projects have been shown to have a better track record of adhering to cost containment and completion schedules than noncompetitive projects,” said Paul Cicio, chair of the national Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition. “A moratorium would move us backward at precisely the wrong time.”

The back-and-forth over the merits of competition is nothing new, Wayner noted. “The tricky thing with transmission competition is that there are stories of projects from both sides of the aisle that support their positions.” 

The push to pause competition

The utility group proposed two options to FERC: Allow MISO and a Southwestern regional grid operator to exempt projects from competitive bidding on a case-by-case basis or suspend competition entirely for the next five years — “a period pegged to when our country must begin building the infrastructure that will decide which nation wins the AI race.”

The utilities added that they don’t intend to “claw back” other projects already awarded or interrupt ongoing bidding processes.

During that five-year period, national forecasts estimate data center electricity demand could reach up to 25% of the country’s total energy use. MISO alone projects that it may need to double its current pace of generation growth to avoid shortfalls in the near future.

MISO’s territory, stretching from the Upper Midwest to Louisiana, has seen by far the most dramatic increase in data center capacity since 2020 relative to other regional grid networks.

The right of first refusal fight

After FERC introduced competitive bidding in 2011, utility groups turned to state legislatures. The result: right-of-first-refusal (ROFR) laws that give established local utilities first dibs on transmission projects in their territories, including those planned by regional grid operators like MISO.

Utilities prevailed in Minnesota and Michigan; Iowa’s Supreme Court struck down its ROFR law in 2023 after a national transmission developer challenged its constitutionality, and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker vetoed an ROFR bill the same year.

But similar efforts have failed in Wisconsin. State lawmakers have consistently rejected ROFR proposals, including a 2025 bill sponsored by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester.

Wisconsin ratepayer advocates see the FERC complaint as a work-around. “It is another effort by the utilities to defeat competition,” Todd Stuart, executive director of the Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, wrote in an email to Wisconsin Watch. “When they lose in state legislatures and then lose out on competitive bids,” he added, “they go back to FERC.”

In the utilities’ complaint, Xcel Energy cited Wisconsin’s lack of an ROFR law, and the resulting bidding process for projects in the state, as posing a risk of delaying upgrades needed to serve a data center across the border in Minnesota. 

The company wouldn’t comment about the parallels between the options utilities suggested in the FERC complaint and ROFR laws. Instead, spokesman Kevin Coss pointed to permitting reforms in Minnesota — a 2024 law streamlining permitting for clean energy projects — as another example of the company’s efforts to “speed the buildout of critical infrastructure across our systems.” Xcel did not bid on any of the competitive projects in Wisconsin.

In a statement to Wisconsin Watch, ATC argued the options its coalition suggested to FERC “would not operate as a substitute” for an ROFR law, “even temporarily or on a case-by-case basis.”

Buildout costs fall to ratepayers

Regardless of who builds a transmission line, ratepayers cover the construction and maintenance costs through their electricity bills. We Energies estimates that transmission-related costs account for about 10% of customers’ bills. 

Customers across the Upper Midwest share the costs of MISO-designed projects across multiple states, spreading costs among a larger number of ratepayers.

But billing practices vary. In some cases, utilities can only bill ratepayers for the costs of building a transmission project after it comes online. When ATC builds a transmission line, FERC allows the developer to begin billing customers while the line is still under construction.

ATC says this approach saves customers money in the long term by reducing interest on construction costs.
Ratepayer advocates see it differently. “Consumers are paying for projects without receiving the benefits,” Cicio said. Transmission projects take years to complete, and short-term increases in monthly electricity bills don’t square well with concerns about affordability and the risk of stranded assets if the AI boom goes bust.

Adding to the frustration: a planned 9.2% electricity rate increase for We Energies customers in eastern Wisconsin over the next two years. That rate hike in part reflects the addition of generators, including new natural gas plants in Milwaukee and Kenosha counties, needed to meet data center demands.

Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission will soon decide how to divvy up costs of powering We Energies-served data centers — a decision that could set a statewide precedent.

Utilities seek federal pause on grid bidding amid AI-driven power demand 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.

Selle Anatomica saddles are available in shops around the world — stamped and developed in Elkhorn.

The post Made in Wisconsin: Selle Anatomica leather bike saddles  appeared first on WPR.

A newly signed state law could extend some federal health care coverage to Wisconsinites in the months before they're released from jail or prison.

The post It’s ‘life and death’: Wisconsin to extend Medicaid to those nearing release from prison appeared first on WPR.

There comes a time when maintaining a bed of annuals feels less like a hobby and more like a chore. But that doesn’t mean you need to abandon a lifelong hobby. It just means you need to change the way you curate your garden.

The post Growing old with your garden appeared first on WPR.

A new photobook from a longtime Milwaukee artist and photographer showcases years of pictures of live performances from a range of Milwaukee musicians. The photographer gives WPR’s “Wisconsin Today” insight into the music scene of Wisconsin’s largest city.

The post New photobook showcases the ‘hidden gem’ of Milwaukee’s live music scene appeared first on WPR.

From a field on an Illinois university campus, to rare, untouched land in Texas, here are some efforts to replant once-abundant prairie in the Midwest and Great Plains.

The post Most American prairies are gone. These people are working to bring them back. appeared first on WPR.

The Silent Book Club movement kicked off in 2015 in California. According to the organization’s web site, there are more than 2,000 clubs around the world, including more than 30 in Wisconsin.

The post Silent Book Clubs bring people together for reading and community appeared first on WPR.

Lawmakers have given final approval to a moratorium on data centers larger than 20 megawatts — the first statewide ban of its kind in the country.

“What we’re talking about here is an ability for us to absorb and understand the impact of data centers potentially on the State of Maine,” Sen. Mark Lawrence (D-York) said Wednesday ahead of the Senate vote. “The states that have had data centers come in have had tremendous impacts.”

The bill, LD 307, bans data centers larger than 20 megawatts until November, 2027. It also creates the Maine Data Center Coordination Council, and instructs the council to provide strategic input, facilitate planning considerations and evaluate policy tools to address data center opportunities.

“We’ve seen across the U.S. the rapid expansion of AI data centers, with few to no safeguards to insulate people from shocks to electricity demand, impacts to local water supplies, and more,” Maine Conservation Voters said in a statement. “LD 307 will help protect Maine people and the environment, pushing pause on large-scale data centers to ensure strategic and strong policies and protections are in place first.”

The bill was passed in both chambers this week, and is now awaiting funding on the special appropriations table.

“My point here is not that data centers should never happen,” said Sen. Nicole Grohoski (D-Hancock) Wednesday. “The point is we do not have the correct regulatory regime on the books to ensure that a decision like this isn’t neutral, at a minimum, or positive for everyone that would be affected by that decision.”

Discussion in both the Senate and Maine House of Representatives focused on the impact on proposed data center projects, primarily one in Jay and another in Sanford. Lawmakers volleyed back and forth on the potential benefits to a former mill town like Jay, and possible negative impacts to the surrounding areas. They also considered an amendment that would have created an exemption process to the moratorium that was ultimately rejected by both chambers.

“I’m not going to support something that doesn’t support business, the expansion of business in the State of Maine, especially in a community that’s dying for commerce and to get back on its feet,” said Sen. Jeff Timberlake (R-Androscoggin).

Republican lawmakers also raised concerns that Maine would lose out on economic opportunities, but would still feel the negative impacts when the data centers are built in other states.

“These projects are going to happen whether or not we pass this moratorium,” said Sen. Matt Harrington (R-York). “For those who care about the environment, they will be built in states that use 70% coal power, and we will be the tailpipe for that. These data centers will be built in groves in states that don’t have an economic death wish, and we will receive all the negative environmental impacts of that.”

Rep. Steven Foster (R-Dexter) said in March that any data centers are already subject to environmental and local regulations.

“This moratorium is not needed here in the state of Maine,” Foster said. “A lot of fear has been stoked up about an AI data center being built anywhere in Maine, which is contrary to reality. We would not see the facilities here the size of those being built in other states.”

But Democrats countered that Maine residents can’t afford the potential costs from the projects.

“We’re already seeing a tremendous impact from rising gas prices, rising oil prices, and how that feeds into also rising electric energy prices,” Lawrence said. “We don’t need to add an additional risk on energy costs for Mainers when we have time to reflect on this, study this and do this right.”

Grohoski also pointed to the local opposition to data centers, and said if the state doesn’t take the time to build intentional regulations, residents may just continue to stop projects at the local level.

“So I think if we do think that Maine is a place where we would like data centers at some point, if we don’t figure out how to do it right, they’re not going to happen anyhow, because people are concerned that we have not done our jobs to protect them,” Grohoski said.

In March, Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-Freeport) argued that the moratorium is not against innovation.

“Maine has always been a place that embraces new industries and new ideas, but we are also a state that understands the value of stewardship of our land, our water, our communities and our long-term future,” she said.

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, who is one of seven Democrats vying for the nomination in this year’s primary for governor,  is calling domestic violence a “public health emergency” after learning about the killing of a Kenosha woman, Makayla Plaza, 28, allegedly by her estranged ex-husband. Plaza’s attempts to get a restraining order against her ex-husband were shot down by a Kenosha County judge. 

In February, Plaza told the court she feared for her life and the lives  of her young children. But the judge denied her request for a restraining order. Markus Plaza, her 33-year-old ex-husband, was taken into custody after a 24-hour man-hunt following her death on April 1 TMJ4 reported that law enforcement found the man, Marckus Plaza, hiding in the basement of a salon. 

Makayla Plaza’s boyfriend said that her ex-husband would take her keys from her, lock her inside the house, and listen in on her phone calls. The Kenosha Police Department said that the husband had a history with the department, including an arrest for battery in February which resulted in no charges being filed. 

In a statement released through his campaign, Crowley said that “I have been sitting with this since I heard the news because I am also grieving,” recounting how his own friend Nancy Metayer — vice mayor of Coral Springs, Florida — was allegedly killed by her husband just days ago. Metayer was soon to announce her campaign to run for Congress. “Two women. Two states. The same devastating, preventable outcome. How many more?” Crowley said in his statement.

“I need Wisconsin to understand that this was not a fluke,” Crowley said. “This was not an isolated failure.” Rather, he said, tragedies like Plaza’s death are the result of underfunded shelters, understaffed courts and setting the legal  bar for protection “so impossibly high that a woman has to prove she is already in danger before we will act to prevent it.” He called for treating domestic violence as “the public health emergency it is.” 

Wisconsin has the tools and research it needs to make a difference, Crowley said, as well as the expertise of  social workers, survivors and advocates. “What we have lacked — what Wisconsin has lacked for too long — is the political will to act,” he added.  “I am done waiting.” If he is elected  governor, he said, tackling domestic violence would be a priority, including changing  how restraining orders are processed statewide, ensuring that survivors and their families have legal assistance and investing in mental health and substance use disorder treatment, as well as in domestic violence prevention and crisis support programs in all 72 counties. 

“So to the women of Wisconsin who are living this right now — I see you,” said Crowley. “If you are afraid, if you are trying to find a way out, if you have asked for help and been turned away or doubted or made to feel like what is happening to you isn’t serious enough — I want you to hear this directly from me: You are believed. What is happening to you is real. You deserve a system that fights for your life the way you are fighting for it every single day.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — First lady Melania Trump said Thursday she was “never involved in any capacity” with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and that “baseless lies” about her are being circulated.

In a rare solo statement livestreamed on the White House website, Melania Trump also called for a congressional hearing featuring the women who have shared stories of abuse by Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting federal trial on sex trafficking charges.

“I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors, to give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress,” the first lady said in her nearly six-minute remarks. 

“With the power of sworn testimony, each and every woman should have her day to tell her story in public, if she wishes, and then her testimony should be permanently entered into the Congressional Record,” she added. “Then and only then, we will have the truth.”

Since returning to office, President Donald Trump has repeatedly dismissed the government’s files related to Epstein as a “hoax.” However, throughout the 2024 campaign, Trump promised to make the investigatory materials public.

The scandal has followed the president through most of his first term. While Trump shared a well-documented friendship with Epstein, who pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor in Florida in 2008, he denies any knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activities.

The first lady also reproached individuals who she said are “devoid of ethical standards” for spreading “completely false” stories that she shared relationships with Epstein and convicted sex trafficker Ghislane Maxwell. 

“I was not a participant, was never on Epstein’s plane, and never visited his private island,” she said. “I have never been legally accused or (convicted) of a crime in connection with Epstein sex trafficking, abuse of minors and other repulsive behavior. The false smears about me from meanspirited and politically motivated individuals and entities looking to cause damage to my good name to gain financially and climb politically must stop.”

Free speech suit

It was unclear what spurred the first lady’s statement. 

She specifically mentioned the Daily Beast, James Carville and HarperCollins UK. The three are mentioned in exhibits attached to a lawsuit in New York against Melania Trump by journalist Michael Wolff, accusing her of seeking to intimidate him into retracting statements he’d made alleging a connection between her and Epstein. 

She also mentioned a 2002 email exchange between her and Maxwell that was revealed among the hundreds of thousands of records from the federal Epstein investigation that the Justice Department released beginning in December, as required by law. The first lady defended the email exchange as “casual correspondence.”

All but one member of Congress supported legislation compelling the Justice Department to release the Epstein files. 

The effort gained steam after the department, then under Attorney General Pam Bondi, said in July it would not release anything further related to the case. Bondi had previously claimed she had Epstein’s client list sitting on her desk.

Trump removed Bondi this month.

Dem endorses call for hearing

Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, lauded the first lady’s call for a hearing.

“We agree with First Lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. We encourage Chairman Comer to respond to the First Lady’s request and schedule a public hearing immediately,” Garcia wrote on X.

The Oversight Committee, led by Kentucky Republican James Comer, is conducting its own investigation into the files and has subpoenaed high-profile figures to testify, including former President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as well as Bondi.

The millions of migrants who were released into the country during the immigration surge that began in 2021 and peaked in 2023 caused a political firestorm when Republican states transported them to Democratic cities. Now, according to a new analysis, many of them are back working in the states that expelled them.

Many of the migrants turned themselves in to immigration officials when they entered the United States illegally, but avoided immediate removal by claiming a “credible fear” of persecution or torture if they returned home, giving them the right to seek asylum. It can take years to receive an asylum hearing. Others seeking asylum arrived with appointments made through a government app or relied on temporary parole programs while pursuing legal status in court.

Now, amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, these migrants are under increasing pressure, threatened with arrest and detention even when they appear for their court dates. Currently, they can begin to work legally after waiting six months, but the Trump administration is seeking to extend the waiting period to one year.

A Stateline analysis of court records shows that the largest numbers of recent asylum-seekers are in New York, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Utah, all of which have populations that are at least 1% higher than they were in 2020 because of the new migrants. Also in the top 10: Texas, Connecticut, California, Illinois and Colorado. Republican Govs. Ron DeSantis in Florida and Greg Abbott in Texas led the charge to transport migrants out of state. Stateline’s analysis counts only those migrants who are not being detained.

The country that is the single largest source of recent asylum-seeking migrants is Venezuela, with 363,000 as of February. The next largest is Mexico (251,000), followed by Guatemala (241,000), Honduras (240,000) and Colombia (235,000). But those nationwide numbers are scrambled in individual states: Ecuadorians predominate in five states, Nicaraguans in four, and Brazilians and Cubans in three each.

The influx of migrants that began escalating when President Joe Biden loosened immigration rules in January 2021 generated a political backlash that intensified after DeSantis and Abbott began busing and flying border migrants to Democratic-led cities, putting a significant strain on their finances. New York City, for example, spent a total of $8.13 billion on shelter and services for the more than 223,000 asylum-seekers and other migrants who arrived between the spring of 2022 and the fall of 2024.

Meanwhile, some established immigrant communities resented what they saw as lenient treatment of the newcomers.

Local news accounts reported anger over competition for jobs in Latino communities in New York City. But Ernesto Castañeda, director of American University’s Center for Latin American and Latino Studies, said interviews there showed more resentment over the aid that was offered to the new arrivals.

“For the first time in U.S. history, there were many big programs to temporarily house and feed the newcomers,” Castañeda said. “People (in New York City) talked about the food cards they got, or the free meals, or the hotel rooms, and that took a lot of the media attention locally.”

But many of the new immigrants also have provided much-needed labor, from the streets of New York City and its suburbs to the dairy farms of Idaho.

“All we can do is just work and hope for the best,” said a woman from Ecuador, who asked to be identified only as Rosa. Rosa works in a family food service business in suburban Spring Valley, New York, one of the top five areas in the country for the sheer number of the migrants, with most coming from Ecuador, according to court records.

“It’s hard here but in Ecuador it’s worse — there are gangs blackmailing you,” said another woman who works in a Queens store labeling packets of Ecuadorian herbs. She declined to identify herself.

In suburbs as well as cities, the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda has immigrants worried. About 22% of the newcomers around the country, in and out of detention, have orders of removal from immigration courts, meaning they could be arrested and summarily deported at any time.

“There were a lot of arrests right around here. People who did everything right got detained,” Rosa said in Spanish, glancing around nervously as she worked making traditional Ecuadorian dishes like corviches, fish fritters, and a fish and onion soup called encebollado.

Many of the new arrivals have stopped socializing and stay home when they’re not working, afraid to be caught up in raids that have swept thousands of them up into detention, according to interviews conducted in New York and the District of Columbia by the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies.

Even when much-hated Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro was arrested in January and removed to the United States for trial, many Venezuelan asylum-seekers stayed home rather than risk being arrested at public celebrations.

Ecuadorians got less media attention than Venezuelans because they came to a more established community in New York, Castañeda said.

“(Ecuadorians) already had networks, so they were not staying in shelters. They were not in the streets,” he said. “They could work and they were becoming part of the fabric of New York, but now they’re being deported by Trump because ICE knows who they are, where they live and their status is very easy pickings. They’re low-hanging fruit.”

Many Venezuelans would like to go home but face even more chaos after the fall of Maduro, said Héctor Arguinzones, organizer of a Venezuelan immigrant group in New York City.

“Many of us fled Venezuela because our own neighbors were our persecutors,” said Arguinzones. “We’re not trying to, you know, sneak into the United States. A lot of us want to go back. We are full of hope. But we cannot think that this crisis in Venezuela will be solved in three months. We must be patient. What we really need is humanitarian treatment.”

Texas has ended up with the largest number of Venezuelans, an irony noted in a book written by the American University research team. After initially receiving aid in more sympathetic areas such as Colorado, New York City and Washington, D.C., many of the Venezuelans traveled around the country looking for work, but trickled back to Texas where jobs were available and the cost of living was lower.

Living in the U.S. with an immigration court date is a tenuous existence for people fleeing gangs and political oppression in South America and Central America. Fear of returning to a home country can be a valid legal reason to avoid deportation, but it requires legal help and doesn’t prevent detention and pressure to “self-deport.”

“Unfortunately, having an asylum case is not a legal status,” Arguinzones said. “We tell people to keep up with their court cases and keep the paperwork with them, so at least they have something to show. At least it’s something.”

Robin Nice, a Boston attorney, said six of her clients with pending asylum cases were detained in a January sweep called Operation Catch of the Day, and only one had had a brush with the law in the form of a year-old traffic case.

“They were typically on their way to or from work, sometimes just getting into their car after finishing a shift,” Nice said.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in an unattributed statement to Stateline, said: “A pending asylum case does NOT confer any type of legal status in the United States. If a person enters our country illegally, they are subject to detention or deportation.”

Some of the asylum-seekers pursuing legal status through the courts have already been detained, but they make up a small fraction of the 2.8 million total cases.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Millions of women could face new challenges to voting under President Donald Trump’s SAVE America Act, which would require voters to prove their citizenship before casting a ballot.

The federal legislation would mandate that most Americans show a birth certificate or passport to register to vote. But people with names that don’t match their birth certificate in some instances could have to produce additional documents like a marriage certificate or divorce decree linking their past and current identities.

The proposal holds potentially outsized consequences for millions of married and divorced women, transgender individuals and others who have changed their names. 

As many as 69 million American women have birth certificates that don’t match their current name, according to an analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress. 

“The fact that the majority of women upon marriage do change their name already means that this is going to be completely unequal in how the law is applied,” said Letitia Harmon, senior director of policy and research at Florida Rising, a racial and economic justice nonprofit.

Harmon, 43, has personal experience with the issue because of state proof-of-citizenship laws, which have become more common in recent years. 

The Florida resident used to live in Kansas, which required individuals to show documents like a birth certificate or passport to register to vote until federal courts struck down the law as unconstitutional. Ahead of the 2014 election, Harmon was unable to locate her birth certificate before the registration deadline and couldn’t vote.

More recently, Florida, Mississippi, South Dakota and Utah have all enacted proof-of-citizenship measures this year, in addition to Wyoming in 2025. Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the Florida SAVE Act last week.

A dozen years later, Harmon worries she could again face additional hurdles to voting — this time because of multiple name changes. Harmon, who changed her name when she married but later divorced and changed it back, voiced concern that if election officials ever check her registration, it will be flagged.

“It’s heartbreaking and it’s infuriating. It feels like we’re going backwards,” Harmon said.

Debate in D.C.

In Washington, the U.S. Senate has been debating the SAVE America Act, Trump’s signature elections initiative, after a version of the legislation passed the House. The bill doesn’t appear to have enough support to survive a filibuster, but Trump and his allies have pressured senators to end the filibuster to pass it before the midterm elections.

Supporters of the bill describe it as an election integrity measure and say it’s necessary to prevent noncitizen voting, though studies have shown that’s extremely rare. The measure reflects a long-running effort by Trump to assert more federal control over elections that includes a campaign by the Department of Justice to obtain sensitive state voter data and an executive order signed last week restricting mail-in voting.

Opponents condemn the legislation as unneeded and poorly drafted. If enacted, the bill would take immediate effect, throwing the election process into chaos in a midterm election year as millions of people registering to vote attempt to prove their citizenship. The new requirements would risk disenfranchising American voters struggling to obtain the documents they need in time.

Disproportionate effect on married women

Critics have especially focused on the disproportionate effect the legislation could have on women. Eighty-four percent of women in opposite-sex marriages take either their husband’s last name or hyphenate their name, according to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey. By contrast, less than 6% of men took their wife’s last name or hyphenated their name.

“Given that 85% of American women change their name when they get married, the impact on women is going to be huge and it’s going to be very problematic,” Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat, said in a February interview.

The House-passed version of the bill says that when individuals applying to register have names that don’t match the name on their proof-of-citizenship documents, they could provide “additional documentation as necessary to establish that the name on the documentation is a previous name of the applicant” or sign an affidavit affirming that the name on the documents is their previous name.

According to the bill, each state would establish a process to carry out this provision, in line with guidance from the federal Election Assistance Commission, a bipartisan independent commission that aids election officials.

Affidavit provision unclear

Some election and legal experts have said the affidavit provision is unclear. It comes immediately before another provision that allows individuals without proof-of-citizenship documentation to register if they sign an attestation that they are a citizen and an election official signs an affidavit saying the person has sufficiently established citizenship. The Election Assistance Commission would create a uniform affidavit for use in that situation.

“Who knows what sort of process they’ll say,” said Alison Gill, director of nominations and democracy at the National Women’s Law Center, a progressive legal advocacy group. “So there is language there, but it’s still very vague and conflictual.”

Because states would be responsible for setting procedures to vet those with different names on their documents, Gill said some states would probably try to make the process easier than others. But election officials would likely err on the side of strict enforcement because they could be prosecuted for registering individuals who don’t provide citizenship documents.

“Ultimately, this puts the burden on election officials, who face criminal and civil liability under the bill, potentially to decide whether to risk registering a person with mismatching documents,” Gill said.

‘Frankly insulting’

White House officials and some congressional Republicans have denied that individuals who change their name would face greater difficulty registering to vote. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in March that there was “zero validity” to claims that the legislation would stop women from voting or make it harder for them to vote.

Married women who have changed their name and are already registered to vote would be unaffected by the legislation, Leavitt said. She added that for the “small fraction” of individuals who go on to change their name or their address, they would have to go through their state’s process to update their documentation.

“I think it’s frankly insulting that the Democrats are saying that there are certain groups of people in this country who aren’t smart enough to update their documentation to allow them to vote,” Leavitt said.

But Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski has raised concerns about how the SAVE America Act would affect married women. Murkowski, who opposes the bill, said in a floor speech that an estimated 155,000 female citizens in Alaska age 15 and older have names that don’t match their birth certificates.

“Again, is it impossible? No,” Murkowski said. “Is it going to be really challenging? Absolutely, yes.”

Lawsuits ensured

The SAVE America Act would almost certainly face legal challenges if it became law and the Supreme Court would come under immense pressure to weigh in because of the sweeping, nationwide changes in the legislation.

Some federal courts have ruled against proof-of-citizenship voter registration requirements. In 2020, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Kansas’ law, finding that it violated federal voting laws as well as the Constitution’s equal protection clause. The Supreme Court at the time declined to take the Kansas case.

The provisions on name changes alone could face their own legal challenges. 

Tracy Thomas, a constitutional law professor at the University of Akron School of Law in Ohio, said opponents could argue the bill’s impact on people who change their name amounts to voting discrimination in violation of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law.

Courts have affirmed some election restrictions, like requirements to show a photo ID at the polls, as acceptable rules that don’t overly burden voters. However, Thomas suggested the SAVE America Act may go too far if it delays people from registering, requires multiple steps and forces them to pay for needed documents.

“That starts to sound like more than minimal inconvenience,” Thomas said.