With more than 170 acts at nearly three dozen venues, the Homegrown Music Festival is the Twin Ports’ largest music event of the year.

The post A tuba, a harp, a ‘feisty’ Superior night: Homegrown festival connects the Twin Ports with music appeared first on WPR.

A new task force has been created in response to recent flooding that has hit the Milwaukee area.

The post Milwaukee city, county task force created to address recent flooding appeared first on WPR.

Executive Director Sean Wright said the goal is not to remake The Grand into something unrecognizable but to restore and enhance a historic theater that has served north-central Wisconsin for decades.

The post Central Wisconsin’s Grand Theater prepares for its next century with renovation rooted in memory appeared first on WPR.

Wisconsin is seeing an uptick in severe storm activity this month. UW-Madison’s emergency management specialist offers insight into preparing for and recovering from major weather disasters.

The post How to prepare for and respond to severe storms, from a Wisconsin emergency manager appeared first on WPR.

The Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, Wisconsin Corn Growers Association and three other state organizations signed on to a letter urging congressional leaders to pass what policy makers are calling the "Farm Bill 2.0."

The post Wisconsin farmers say new farm bill would bring stability during market uncertainty appeared first on WPR.

The National Weather Service says at least 14 confirmed tornados hit Wisconsin during last week's spate of severe storms that caused widespread flood damage in areas around Milwaukee and Green Bay.

The post Wisconsin cleaning up after week of storms, 14 tornadoes and extensive flooding appeared first on WPR.

Animal welfare activists converged outside of Gov. Tony Evers' Capitol office on Monday, chanting “Free the dogs!” and demanding that the governor and attorney general do what they can to shut down a beagle breeding and research facility where many of the protesters clashed with police two days earlier.

The post Animal welfare protesters converge on Wisconsin governor’s office seeking release of beagles appeared first on WPR.

A University of Wisconsin-Madison employee allegedly attempted to poison a coworker he resented. 

The post UW-Madison employee faces felony charges for allegedly trying to poison coworker appeared first on WPR.

Importers that paid tariffs later struck down by the Supreme Court can now apply for refunds.

The post Wisconsin businesses could recoup millions paid in illegal tariffs  appeared first on WPR.

A new book co-written by James and Susan Patterson draws from Susan’s time as a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the late 1970s and early ‘80s. The pair discuss the book’s Wisconsin inspirations and how they write together.

The post New James and Susan Patterson book rooted in Wisconsin appeared first on WPR.

Advocates and loved ones of Salah Sarsour gathered in Washington D.C. to demand his release from federal immigration detention. Sarsour — a green card holder and lawful permanent resident of Milwaukee and president of the city’s Islamic Society — was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents earlier this month. The federal government accuses Sarsour, who is Palestinian, of lying on his green card application in 1993. 

Sarsour’s son Kareem said that his father is the main caregiver for an elderly member of their family who has dementia. Kareem demanded Sarsour’s release, emphasizing that he is  a father, grandfather and leader in the community. 

Supporters are demanding that Sarsour be released and returned to his family, and that all charges against him be dropped. They also  demanded that the U.S. to stop weaponizing immigration law to target pro-Palestine advocates, and for Congress to investigate the targeting of lawful permanent residents for First Amendment activity. 

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said of Sarsour, “He has spent more than 30 years of his life strengthening those around him. As a Palestinian resident of this country, he has built a huge community. He’s a business owner, a job creator, a leader who is well respected in the inter-faith community, among elected officials, and a diversity of communities fighting in the state of Wisconsin.”

Awad and other supporters of Sarsour say that he’s a political prisoner being persecuted over his opposition of the Israeli government and support for the Palestinian people. “To abduct Salah Sarsour for his politically protected First Amendment activity, upholding justice for the Palestinians and for all people, sends the troubling message that our government is failing to protect basic freedoms that sets America apart from other countries,” said Awad. “We call on this administration to listen to the American people who have been telling them in one form after another to stop the Israelization of U.S. policy, and to serve the American people.” 

Sarsour’s loved ones say that he has long been vocal about Israel and Palestine, having grown up in the West Bank where he was detained for two years by Israeli authorities. Sarsour’s family members say  he was tortured while in custody, a practice which has been documented by humanitarian organizations even in recent years. The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement earlier this month that Sarsour had been accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at Israeli armed forces.

Sarsour is currently being held in an ICE facility in Indiana. Dr. Osama Abu Irshaid also echoed the First Amendment concerns around Sarsour’s arrest. “What does it even mean?” Irshaid asked. “What does it even mean to be a threat to our foreign policy? Someone who stands up and speaks on behalf of the oppressed. On behalf of a people who were the subject and continue to be the subject of a genocide.” 

Naming other Muslim activists who’ve been arrested or detained by ICE for speaking out for Palestine, Irshaid asked, “what does that mean? Does it mean that America stands for genocide?” Irshaid said that the Trump administration  has openly pursued what it views as political opponents, including high profile people such as former FBI director James Comey, and New York Attorney General Latisha James.

“So America has to reckon with this stuff,” said Irshaid. “It’s no longer about minorities. You could be a white American and be shot in broad daylight and get called a domestic terrorist, as what happened to the two American citizens who were shot by a rogue agency called ICE now,” a reference to the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis earlier this year.

“And you could be abducted from the middle of the street just because you dare to say I disagree with this government, and I disagree with our foreign policy,” Irshaid said. “And you could be targeted just because you dared, at one point, to prosecute Donald Trump based on the laws of the land.” 

Irshaid stressed that it is time for people to realize “that the weaponization of our own government against any minority group, against any people means that it could be weaponized against the entire American people.”

Oussama Jammal, secretary general of the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations, also said that he feels Sarsour is being detained for political reasons. “This is a free country, we are allowed to speak our minds,” said Jammal. “Otherwise we could be another rogue country of the ones that we see — what do they call it — banana republics. So we demand the immediate release of Mr. Salah Sarsour, and truly hold the American values ahead of any other agenda other than an American agenda.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum defended the Trump administration’s approach to energy production Monday, as Democrats on a U.S. House Appropriations panel accused the department of kowtowing to oil and gas interests at the expense of renewable energy.

Burgum said President Donald Trump’s administration aimed to ease regulatory burdens on oil and gas producers, and said former President Joe Biden sought to shut out those industries in a misguided attempt to boost renewable energy sources. 

Burgum indicated at several points that what Democrats called a pro-oil-and-gas bias was a correction to Biden’s “over-rotation” toward wind and solar.

“The last administration said ‘all of the above’ and then there were a set of rules that were completely punitive against the stuff that we needed to actually, you know, have baseload power in this country,” he said about Biden’s oil and gas policy. “It was just too early. It was too premature to say we’re going to shut all that down and we’re going to transition.”

But Democrats on the House Appropriations Interior-Environment Subcommittee said the Interior Department under Burgum was doing exactly the opposite: subsidizing fossil fuels while discouraging solar and wind power.

“Shortly after taking office, the White House moved quickly to halt offshore wind development and took steps to rein in solar and wind projects,” Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, said. “Why? Why are we kneecapping industries that create jobs, expand our energy supply and help address the climate crisis? Because this administration’s energy policy is based on political grievance, ideological hostility and, of course, propping up big oil and gas.”

California Democrat Josh Harder called for an overhaul of permitting regulations to enable faster construction of renewable energy infrastructure. Some of that responsibility fell to Congress, he said, but he complained that Trump was making it even harder for wind and solar projects to get off the ground.

“There is, again, one standard for one type of energy and another standard for another type,” he said. “I hear the complaints about previous administrations putting their thumb on the scale. What I see now is secretary-level approval required for one type of project, but not for another. And again, I don’t think that’s sustainable or good policy.”

Burgum responded that the administration was pro-hydro power and pro-nuclear, but was wary of “weather-dependent, intermittent” solar and wind power because those sources can be more expensive for ratepayers.

Cutbacks in parks, Bureau of Indian Education 

The topic of Monday’s hearing was Trump’s $16 billion budget request for the Interior Department for the next fiscal year. The request would keep the department’s funding roughly even with the current fiscal year, which was a nearly 12% cut from fiscal 2025.

Democrats voiced their disapproval of that new baseline, including a $757 million cut to National Park Service operations.

“The department is on a dangerous course,” Pingree said. “This budget would only make the damage worse, and as the ranking member of the subcommittee, I will do everything in my power to oppose these reckless cuts and fight the administration’s destructive policies.”

Members of both parties raised questions about proposed cuts to the Bureau of Indian Education budget after the Department of Education offloaded part of its responsibility in that area to Interior. 

The BIE would receive about $437 million less under the proposed budget, a roughly 32% cut.

“While your agency begins to manage these new programs, I would strongly recommend — I’m sure you will — carrying out thorough tribal consultations to ensure that there are no funding award delays or program disruptions that would potentially harm,” full Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole told Burgum.

Cole, an Oklahoma Republican and enrolled member of the Chickasaw Nation, is the first Native American to lead the Appropriations Committee.

Full committee ranking Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, who is also the top Democrat on the subcommittee that oversees Education Department funding, said she was concerned about the shift.

“I worry about transferring the programs from Education,” she said. “Quite honestly, (BIE) doesn’t have a great track record, and I don’t know whether or not the funding that goes along with those programs is going to come over.”

Burgum said 16 full-time staffers in four Education Department programs would transfer to the BIE, along with all the funding for the programs.

Local issues

Members also raised a host of specific concerns.

Minnesota Democrat Betty McCollum criticized the U.S. Senate vote last week to undo restrictions on mining in the Boundary Waters in northern Minnesota.

Rep. Jake Ellzey, a Texas Republican, focused much of his time on poor conditions at Maryland’s Fort Washington, a unit of the National Park Service a short drive from Washington, D.C.

Ellzey pointed to photos of buildings in need of repair and noted that a longtime park ranger retired last year and her role has not been filled, leaving only two rangers across almost 350 acres.

And subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican, joked that the Bureau of Land Management’s $144 million wild horses and burros program was his top priority.

“If you can solve that problem, I don’t care what happens to the rest of the budget,” Simpson said. “We’ve been trying to deal with that for so long that it’s crazy.”

WASHINGTON — Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer will step down from her post, the Trump administration announced Monday, following multiple reports alleging work misconduct including misuse of funds and more.

Chavez-DeRemer, a Republican from Oregon who lost her U.S. House reelection bid in 2024, will take a role in the private sector, White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung wrote in a social media post. 

“She has done a phenomenal job in her role by protecting American workers, enacting fair labor practices, and helping Americans gain additional skills to improve their lives,” Cheung said. 

Keith Sonderling will lead the agency as acting secretary of Labor, he added. Sonderling also worked at the Department of Labor during the first Trump administration, in the Wage and Hour Division. 

Chavez-DeRemer is the most recent member of the Donald Trump Cabinet to be ousted, following former Attorney General Pam Bondi and former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

The Department of Labor’s independent watchdog started an investigation into Chavez-DeRemer and her top aides over allegations of sending inappropriate messages to young staffers at the department, according to the New York Times. 

The department’s inspector general was also investigating reports of misuse of department funds for personal travel and into allegations Chavez-DeRemer had an extramarital affair with a member of her security detail.

Separately, her husband, Dr. Shawn DeRemer, was barred from entering the Department of Labor after female staffers said he touched them inappropriately, according to the Times. 

Two right-wing organizations are taking aim at the ban on conversion therapy in Wisconsin’s professional code for social workers, citing a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

But the head of a group that fought for the ban says professional standards are the central issue — and aren’t subject to free speech claims. 

In a joint letter Wisconsin Family Action and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty are demanding that Wisconsin repeal the ban. Conversion therapy is a widely discredited practice purporting to change sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Wisconsin Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling, and Social Work Examining Board included the ban in its updated professional code published in April 2024.

The code declares that it is “unprofessional conduct” for practitioners to use or promote “any intervention or method that has the purpose of attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including attempting to change behaviors or expressions of self or to reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same gender.”

WILL has been at the center of many conflicts over trans-inclusive policies and gender identity. Wisconsin Family Action has also lobbied against including gender identity in state civil rights protections.

Their letter seeking the conversion therapy ban’s repeal cites a U.S. Supreme Court ruling March 31 in a lawsuit that challenges Colorado’s law banning conversion therapy on First Amendment grounds.

The high court ruling didn’t throw out the Colorado law directly. Instead, it instructed the federal court hearing the Colorado lawsuit to subject that law to “strict scrutiny” on First Amendment grounds because it seeks to “regulate speech based on viewpoint.”

The WILL-Wisconsin Family Action letter, first reported by Wisconsin Health News, was sent April 14 to Gov. Tony Evers, the Department of Safety and Professional Services and the chair of the social work examining board. 

The letter demands that the board stop enforcing the ban and start the process of repealing it. WILL represents a Christian counselor in a pending federal lawsuit to block a La Crosse city ordinance that bans conversion therapy.

Marc Herstand, executive director for the National Association of Social Workers’ Wisconsin chapter, said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling isn’t relevant to the Wisconsin rule.

“I don’t think it applies because we have a rule, and according to state statute, professional boards can create their own ethical standards,” Herstand told the Wisconsin Examiner. That is supported by both the general law that applies to the state’s licensing boards as well as specific provisions authorizing the social worker board, he said.

Herstand said rules against conversion therapy are to prevent harm. He compared the practice to an electrician’s bad advice that leads to a homeowner’s fatal electric shock or a health provider whose bad advice leads a patient with diabetes to lose a limb to nerve damage or the loss of circulation.

“That’s not free speech — that’s unprofessional conduct,” Herstand said. The electrician or health professional “would be held accountable by the [relevant professional] board. Conversion therapy is exactly the same thing.”

Republican lawmakers repeatedly blocked several previous attempts to update Wisconsin’s social work standards. In April 2024, after the Legislature’s session ended, the social work examining board updated its professional standards to restore the conversion therapy ban.

Then, in a landmark state Supreme Court ruling in July 2025, Chief Justice Jill Karofsky wrote that the statutes that state legislators had used to review and suspend administrative rules violated the Wisconsin Constitution. The examining board “exercised its statutory authority” when it revised its rules to ban conversion therapy, Karofsky wrote in the 4-3 decision.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Customs and Border Protection tariff refund system went live Monday, marking what small business advocates call a “complex” first step for entrepreneurs to recoup $166 billion in import taxes accrued under President Donald Trump’s emergency tariffs, which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down in February. 

Importers and brokers can now upload a detailed list of each tariff paid under Trump’s now illegal order to charge duties under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, or IEEPA. 

Customs officials estimate 330,000 importers paid the duties. Refunds are expected within 60 to 90 days, according to CBP.

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision earlier this year found Trump’s steep global tariffs exceeded his presidential powers.

Following the high court’s decision, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Richard Eaton ordered the government to stop charging the tariffs and establish a refund system.

A handful of small businesses and Democratic state attorneys general led the legal challenge to Trump’s 2025 “Liberation Day” tariffs. 

Small business owners angry, frustrated

States Newsroom documented the experiences of several small businesses across the U.S. who faced increased costs following Trump’s change in international trade policy.

Now many are experiencing a “confusing mix of relief,” Richard Trent, executive director of Main Street Alliance, told States Newsroom in an interview Monday.

Trent, whose organization advocates on behalf of small businesses said “our entrepreneurs, many of whom were angry that they had to pay tariffs in the first place, and were frustrated by the back-and-forth over the last year, opened up the portal this morning only to see that it had crashed. It just feels like the uncertainty just keeps popping up.”

Trent, who spoke to “five or six” businesses Monday morning who experienced technical issues, said the portal was up and running again by afternoon.

Customs and Border Protection did not confirm for States Newsroom whether the system had crashed, but rather provided a written statement.

“U.S. Customs and Border Protection has developed a new tool, the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE), to efficiently process refunds, pursuant to court order, for importers and brokers who paid IEEPA duties,” according to an agency spokesperson. 

“CBP has issued guidance to the trade community to help them prepare to use the new CAPE tool. Importers and brokers can visit CBP’s website for resources and step-by-step guidance,” the statement continued. 

Monday’s launch is the first part of a four-step process in refunding the taxes paid by American businesses of all sizes.

Trent said the “complex” process is yet another hurdle for small operations.

“This is progress, but it’s not yet justice,” Trent said in an earlier statement Monday. “Small business owners should not have to jump through hoops to get back money they never should have had to pay. We need a refund process that is simple, accessible, and fast.”

Guides for refunds

The Liberty Justice Center, the libertarian legal advocacy group that represented small business plaintiffs before the Supreme Court, has established the Tariff Equity Refund Resource for America. The platform offers online guides for how to properly submit documentation for the refunds.

“We took this fight all the way to the Supreme Court on behalf of small businesses, and we’re not stopping now,” Sara Albrecht, chair of the Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement Monday. “We are a nonprofit law firm — our only goal is to help businesses recover every dollar they are owed, not to take a percentage of it. At a time when others are looking to profit off confusion, we are making this process clear, accessible and free.”

Trump declared international trade a national emergency just over a year ago, citing a trade imbalance on imports and exports between the United States and several other countries. The president imposed a 10% blanket tariff on all global imports and steeper double-digit taxes on products from some of the top U.S. trading partners.

The president delayed and changed the rates on numerous occasions. 

Following his Supreme Court loss, Trump imposed a new round of universal, temporary tariffs under a separate statute. The Liberty Justice Center is again representing small businesses in court to fight the new import taxes.

Gov. Tony Evers issued two executive orders this month that make the commutation of prison sentences available again in Wisconsin.

Executive Order 287, creating the Governor’s Commutation Advisory Board and Executive Order 288, creating a Juvenile Life Sentence Process, open up new opportunities for people to get out of prison and reestablish their lives in the community. 

A commutation, like a pardon (a type of civil forgiveness with some rights restored), is authorized in the Wisconsin Constitution under the governor’s executive clemency authority. Commutations can shorten terms of incarceration or place applicants on extended supervision, or they may simply push up the date of a parole board meeting, making an applicant eligible for parole sooner. Unlike a pardon, a commutation doesn’t erase the record of the offense.

Nine-month window of opportunity

With Evers leaving office on Jan. 4, the next governor can continue the commutation process, including maintaining the Commutation Advisory Board that holds hearings on commutation applications and makes recommendations to the governor — or the next governor could amend the process or even decide not to offer commutations at all.

Because of Evers’ imminent departure, there is a sense of urgency among people in prison and their advocates to submit commutation applications as soon as possible, before the first commutation hearings are held in June.

In a Substack post, Eau Claire attorney David Carlson, a formerly incarcerated  advocate for people who are leaving prison, wrote about the significance of the executive orders but also a sense of urgency to take advantage of what might be a unique opportunity.

“There are moments in governance when an action is less about its immediate effect and more about what it makes possible,” he wrote. “Governor Tony Evers’s Executive Orders 287 and 288 fall squarely into that category. They do not resolve the issue of excessive incarceration in Wisconsin, nor do they create a permanent commutation system. What they do is create a window, and that window is narrow.”

He noted the commutation board has a “functional runway of approximately nine months.”

“The question is not whether these executive orders are meaningful – they are – but whether Wisconsin will use this time strategically or allow it to pass as another short-lived initiative that never reaches its full potential.”

Carlson encouraged advocates to engage candidates running for the governor’s seat if they “intend to continue, expand or institutionalize this commutation process,” and he also discouraged applicants from waiting until after the November election to apply.

“These are not applications that can be assembled hastily or corrected later,” Carlson wrote. “They must be done correctly the first time and must be started immediately. Individuals seeking commutation must begin now, and advocates must assist in building strong, complete submissions.”

Carlson also notes that the first cases heard before the commutation board are very important because how “the process is perceived” will impact the future of commutations in Wisconsin.

How to apply

On the governor’s online “Commutation Information” page there are commutation applications available for both standard commutations and juvenile life sentence commutations. 

Juvenile commutation is only available to those who were 19 years of age or younger at the time of their conviction. The age of conviction is critical, not the age of the defendant when the offense was charged.

The juvenile commutation is also restricted to those who were sentenced as adults and received a life sentence or 39 years or more of incarceration.

Since 2022, legislation has been introduced but hasn’t gained traction, which would have offered adjustments of sentences for “an individual who committed the crime for which the individual is being sentenced before he or she turned 18 years old,” but was charged as an adult. That legislation would have allowed those who had not been involved in a death to apply for an adjustment at the 15th year of  incarceration, and for those who had committed a crime involving a death to apply at 20 years.

The proposed legislation and Executive Order 288 both reflect the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Miller vs. Alabama, that a sentence of life without parole for a juvenile is unconstitutional, recognizing mitigating factors for youth due to both intellectual and emotional development.

The eligibility requirements for the two commutation applications share five specific conditions:

1. Applicants must currently  be incarcerated in a correctional institution for a Wisconsin conviction with more than one year of the incarceration term remaining.
2. They must have served at least half of their incarceration term or at least 20 years of a life sentence.
3. They must not have any unresolved criminal charges or outstanding warrants in any jurisdiction.
4. There cannot be any  incidents of violent misconduct within the last five years of current incarceration.
5. The commutation is not for any of the following offenses:

* Sexual assault.

* Physical abuse of a child.

* Trafficking of a child.

* Incest.

* Soliciting a child for prostitution.

An additional condition for the general commutation application requires the applicant not to be serving a sentence for “a sex offense or be required to register as a sex offender (either currently or upon release).”

Commutation applicants are encouraged to obtain assistance, and the application even lists three organizations that provide free or low-cost services: Legal Action of Wisconsin, Milwaukee Justice Center, and Legal Assistance to Incarcerated People Project.

Rachel Fox Armstrong of Legal Action of Wisconsin, said her office has been “inundated by calls for assistance” since the governor issued his orders.

“Unfortunately, our limited resources mean we will only be able to help a very small portion of those who call us for assistance with commutation,” she said. “This process is new and developing. We know that the legal community, advocacy groups, the Department of Corrections, and the Evers administration will need to work together to ensure that the many excellent clemency candidates are able to have their applications submitted and thoughtfully considered.”

Questions about the process

During a Saturday, April 11, webinar conducted by the nonprofit group Forward Justice Wisconsin on commutations, participants expressed concern about how “violent misconduct” or “violent behavior “ should be defined for the purpose of the application. 

Another question addressed the requirement that certified copies of each criminal case, including sentencing transcripts, be obtained and submitted, but people confined to prison in Wisconsin must have their legal mail copied and the original destroyed. That raises the question: If  the original is destroyed, how can the certification be preserved?

Other concerns raised included:

*Older cases where there might not be any certified records available.

* Challenging why a question about  “any other interactions with law enforcement” is relevant, as well as “prior arrest that did not lead to charges, deferred judgments, criminal charges that were later dropped or dismissed, or instances where you have been the subject of criminal investigations.”

*Whether a restraining order that was later dismissed should be required to be disclosed.

Issues raised in the April 11 webinar were forwarded by the Wisconsin Examiner to the Governor’s Commutation Advisory Board for a response, but none were available at the time of publication.

Notifying the courts and victims

Three weeks before a commutation hearing, each applicant must provide a notice to the circuit court and the district attorney’s office of the court where offenses were processed. The chair of the Commutation Board can, at his or her own discretion, forward an application directly to the governor without a “non-binding recommendation and without a hearing or any executive action of the board. 

Applicants are also “strongly encouraged” to provide a copy of the application to the clerk of courts and the DA.

At the April 11 webinar, participants suggested that applicants make four sets of each application: the original for the commutation board, a copy for the applicant, a copy for the circuit court judge who heard their case and another for the DA.

All these copies of the commutation application raise another issue: the cost of just obtaining the original certified documents, supporting documents, the application form and copies. Brittany Lee, one of the webinar presenters, noted that certified court documents alone could cost between $60 and $200.

The executive orders also require victim notification, but that is the responsibility of the governor’s office, at the “discretion and direction” of the commutation board and the Office of Victim Services and Programs. “Reasonable attempts” should be made to publish a notice three weeks before the hearing to be published in newspapers in the county where the offenses were committed.

The staff reviewing the commutation application will also collect additional information, perform a background check, and may seek “additional input from the judge, district attorney, defense attorney, and victims”.

According to the application, the review of each submission may take over a year to complete.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Republican lawmakers want a lawsuit challenging the state’s school funding formula as unconstitutional dismissed, according to court filings. 

The lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s current school funding system was filed in February by Law Forward, a public interest law firm, in Eau Claire Circuit Court. The progressive legal group filed it on behalf of a group of school districts, parents, teachers, students and two advocacy organizations, the Wisconsin PTA and the Wisconsin Public Education Network (WPEN). The suit argues that the state Legislature is not fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide a “sound basic education” under the current school funding formula.

GOP lawmakers, including Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) and members of the Joint Finance Committee, called the lawsuit “meritless” in their filing and said that the majority of questions asked in the lawsuit have been previously answered in previous court cases, including in the state Supreme Court’s Vince v. Voight decision. That 2000 lawsuit found that the state’s school funding formula was constitutional. 

“For all of plaintiffs’ sky-is-falling assertions, the school finance system that plaintiffs challenge here is the same system that the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld against similar (indeed, mostly identical) constitutional claims in Vincent v. Voight,” the filing states. “That system, Vincent explained, complies with the Wisconsin Constitution because it affords every student the opportunity to obtain a constitutionally adequate education. The Supreme Court reached this conclusion notwithstanding various complaints relating to test scores, school facilities, teacher staffing, and the like — complaints that are materially indistinguishable from those that Plaintiffs raise here.”

The lawmakers said the plaintiffs in the suit are asking the judiciary to take over the Legislature’s constitutional role in determining funding for primary and secondary education, even as the Legislature has fulfilled its constitutional responsibilities by enacting a comprehensive school finance system for the state’s public schools. 

The new lawsuit argues that declines in student proficiency for Wisconsin’s reading and math test scores are the result of declining investments in schools. It also argues that the growth of the state’s school voucher programs, which use state money to cover the cost of private school tuition, have contributed to declining funding for Wisconsin public schools.

The lawsuit asks the court for a declaration that the Legislature hasn’t fulfilled and cannot “shirk” its constitutional obligation to fund schools at a sufficiently high level to “ensure that every Wisconsin student has an equal opportunity to obtain a sound basic education that equips them for their roles as citizens and enables them to succeed economically and personally in a tuition free public school where the character of instruction is as uniform as practicable.” It calls for the current funding system to be ruled invalid.

Jeff Mandell, co-founder of Law Forward, called the motion to dismiss a “predictable attempt to avoid accountability” in a statement.

“We filed this lawsuit because families, educators, and communities across Wisconsin are seeing firsthand that the current system is not meeting that promise — forcing schools to rely on referendums, widening inequities, and leaving too many students without the resources they need,” Mandell said. “We maintain that this case deserves to be heard and are confident that the court will agree.”

The lawmakers also argue in the filing that the five school districts named in the suit, including the Adams-Friendship Area School District, the School District of Beloit, the Eau Claire Area School District, the Green Bay Area Public School District and the Necedah Area School District, should be dismissed from the case, arguing that they lack standing to challenge the constitutionality of the school finance system as a political subdivision of the state.

The lawmakers argue that the issues the plaintiffs pointed to in the lawsuit are not sufficient evidence of the state not upholding its constitutional obligation.

The lawsuit specifically points to the increasing reliance of Wisconsin school districts on asking voters to help them keep up with operating costs by increasing local property taxes through ballot measures (with varying results) as well as the decline in the state’s special education reimbursement rate.

The state currently picks up a little more than one-third of special education costs, despite the state budget promising to cover 42% of costs this year. The Necedah Area School District, which recently failed to pass a  referendum in April, has diverted all of its revenue from its previous operational referendum requests, about $6.6 million, to its special education fund. Meanwhile, the special education reimbursement rate for private voucher schools is 90%. 

“The Wisconsin Constitution makes clear that localities are expected to cover a significant portion of the cost of funding public schools,” the Republicans’ filing states. “That some school districts have had to use some of their own general education funds to cover the costs of special education is not constitutionally significant in the absence of any plausible allegations that any student has been deprived of the opportunity to obtain a sound basic education. And as for districts’ need to use referenda to exceed the revenue limits here, this too is constitutionally irrelevant.” 

The Legislature appropriated more than $7 billion in school aid in the 2024–25 fiscal year, the Republican filing noted. 

Democratic lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee submitted their own filing, which was supportive of the lawsuit. 

“A constitutional promise is not optional,” the lawmakers wrote. “Wisconsin children cannot receive one level of educational opportunity in communities that can raise and pass local referenda and another in communities that cannot.”

The lawsuit also lays out how the state’s private-school choice system, which was launched in the 1990s and has grown exponentially over the years, has contributed to the erosion in  funding for public schools. There are four distinct school voucher programs in the state: the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program, the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the Racine Parental Choice Program and the Special Needs Scholarship Program. Wisconsin is paying about $700 million this year for more than 60,000 students to participate in the voucher programs.

Republican lawmakers rejected the assertion that the choice programs are related to the lawsuit’s claims.

“This is a baseless attempt to tar these longstanding, alternative educational offerings that are both highly effective and extremely popular across the State,” the lawmakers stated. 

The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on behalf of parents and School Choice Wisconsin Action are also seeking to intervene in the case as are parents represented by EdChoice Legal Advocates, a school choice litigation firm.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Clouds of tear gas engulfed the Ridglan Farms Biomedical research facility, as police repelled hundreds of animal rights activists attempting to breach the facility to carry away  thousands of beagles bred and housed inside. The activists gathered at Ridglan in the Dane County village of Blue Mounds on Saturday, a day ahead of the date  they’d publicly announced for the planned rescue action. 

Wayne Hsiung, a lawyer and animal rights activist from California who was one of the lead organizers of the action, was reportedly among the first people arrested. The Dane County Sheriff’s Office said on social media that he was arrested “within minutes” for conspiracy to commit burglary. As the activists attempted to enter the Ridglan facility for the second time in a little over a month, they were met with tear gas and rubber bullets. Activists  said some people  were severely beaten by law enforcement. One participant, Nicholas Dickman, lost multiple teeth after officers beat him after Dickman crawled through a hole activists made in the  fence around the facility, according to a press release prepared by the Coalition to Save the Ridglan Dogs. 

The conflict comes after weeks of escalating tensions around the controversial facility. Ridglan keeps thousands of beagle dogs bred specifically to be used in biomedical research. Ridglan maintains its own research wing, but also sells the dogs to other facilities for use in experiments. Critics of Ridglan have long accused the facility of subjecting the dogs to cruel and inhumane conditions. Last year, a special prosecutor appointed by a Dane County judge found that violations of Wisconsin’s animal cruelty laws had occurred at Ridglan. Instead of filing charges, the special prosecutor reached a settlement deal with Ridglan that gave the company until July to shut down its breeding operation. 

Animal rights advocates denounced the decision to let the beagles remain at Ridglan until July. This prompted a first attempted rescue by dozens of activists in March. More than 20 beagles were taken from the facility and  some were adopted. A few of the dogs were intercepted by police and returned to Ridglan. The group forced its way into the buildings housing the dogs, breaching fences and breaking locks. Some of the activists reported that the dogs they pulled from gated enclosures were living in cramped and unsanitary conditions. Although 27 people were arrested, Dane County Sheriff Kalvin Barrett didn’t refer charges to the district attorney’s office until last Thursday, after the activists announced their plans to return to try to get more beagles out. Barrett called the activists “outside groups” who used violence to breach the buildings and “stole dogs from the facility.”

On Saturday, at least 25 people were arrested, a coalition spokesperson said in an email statement to the Wisconsin Examiner. Two people have been charged with tresspassing, one with reckless driving, and four with felony burglary. Hsiung reportedly said in a call from jail that “only a deeply corrupt system will use tear gas and rubber bullets against peaceful activists saving dogs. We are seeing the worst in humanity today. But in the courage of the rescuers, also the best.” The coalition  said in a statement that Hsiung was questioned by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. The FBI refused to comment for this article. 

The Dane County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement on social media that a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) had been used to warn people that they’d be arrested. The statement said  that hundreds of people attempted to breach the gate, while others “blocked roadways to slow the response of law enforcement and other emergency vehicles.” It also said that one of the activists reckless drove a vehicle around the property before “law enforcement stopped it and arrested the driver.” 

The sheriff’s office also said  that some protesters were peaceful while others ignored warnings and attempted to break into the facility, and that 40mm munitions (tear gas) and pepper balls were used. Dane County deputies were assisted by other law enforcement agencies, though the sheriff’s office  did not name them in its statement. 

Sheriff Barrett said that “it was clear from the beginning that this was not going to be a peaceful protest.” Barrett said the use of force was “appropriate and proportionate to the behaviors observed” and that “resorting to crime, chaos, and violence is not the solution.”

The sheriff’s post included pictures of activists dressed in white biohazard suits, carrying equipment like sledgehammers and power saws to breach the facility. 

Lisa Castagnozzi, a resident of Milwaukee County who participated in the action, told the Examiner that she’d been concerned about Ridglan for at least eight years, ever since she read about the facility’s 311 animal cruelty violations cited by the state, “and yet, they just keep reporting these violations and nothing ever happens.” 

“So everyone — myself included — have tried over eight or nine years now, for me eight, all of the legal channels. You know?” Castagnozzi said. “All the advocacy channels. Going to hearings. Signing petitions. Calling our Congress people. Going to Madison to talk to people at [the state Department of Agriculture and Trade], U.S.D.A., meeting with legislators, being part of Dane4Dogs…I mean literally trying to get any of the four major authorities in Wisconsin to take action. Like we know that there’s cruelty there. Why is no one taking action?”

In frustration, Castagnozzi said she and many others decided to go to Ridglan on Saturday. Originally, the second action was announced for Sunday, and Castagnozzi said that she, like many others, was surprised that the action was moved up a day to Saturday. When they arrived at Ridglan, Castagnozzi said she saw what she thought was smoke in the air as the police fired tear gas and people tried  to get through the gates. Castagnozzi’s team decided to keep their distance, and then people started coming down the hill towards them with injuries. 

One man, she said, “had been pepper-sprayed in the eyes, like brutally. And then from that moment on, for the rest of the day, for me…my team was scattered and there’s so many people and chaos. …  people were shot with rubber bullets. People went to the hospital. Knee injuries. A professor from Sheboygan I know, she was shot in the chest and she had to go to the hospital and make sure it wasn’t a broken rib. A lot of injuries, and tons of people with serious chemical, you know, in the eyes, in the face, in the skin, in their lungs, I mean people were just passing out.”

Castagnozzi also said that she saw people who identified themselves as neighbors and supporters of Ridglan blocking roads with their vehicles and not allowing people to pass. 

On Sunday, sheriff’s deputies were still in the area blocking a road to Ridglan and monitoring passing cars. A planned vigil was not held at the farm. Instead, dozens of activists gathered at the Capitol, saying they would not give up on freeing Ridglan’s beagles.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections is making progress on creating a program allowing incarcerated mothers who meet certain requirements to keep physical custody of their babies, the agency argued in court filings in early April. 

Over a year ago, Judge Stephen Ehlke required the Department of Corrections to begin considering women in state prisons for mother-young child programming without delay. 

Lawyers for two formerly incarcerated women argued in February that there had been no meaningful progress in the 11 months since the judge ordered the department to establish the program. They argued that the court should impose sanctions, including a daily fine. 

The department said it wants to have a program that would allow incarcerated women to live with their babies within prison walls, but that it is “currently impossible” to set up such a program in the existing prison system. The DOC cited a lack of sufficient funding from the state Legislature and overcrowding in women’s prisons. 

In its court filings, the agency argued that it has complied with the order by pursuing a program that would involve housing incarcerated women in the community but with some of the same restrictions they would face in prison.

Lawyers for the women from the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and Quarles & Brady LLP haven’t filed a reply to the DOC yet. In an interview with the Examiner on April 10, Wisconsin ACLU Legal Director Ryan Cox said the DOC hasn’t complied with the court order. 

The ACLU’s position is that the department intends to “hide behind the Legislature,” Cox said. 

He said the court can fix the problem by fining the government “until it’s clear to the Legislature that they will be spending more money in sanctions than it would cost to just pass a bill to fix the problem overall.”

Cox said that the agency has said the criteria for its potential program is too restrictive for any person in DOC custody to currently qualify. 

In its filings, DOC said it is aware of one woman who is likely to become eligible in May of this year, and that additional women could become eligible in the future. 

In 2025, 14 mothers gave birth while in the custody of the Wisconsin Women’s Correctional System, DOC communications director Beth Hardtke said in an email to the Examiner. 

The case hinges on a 1991 law that requires the department to create a mother-young child care program that allows women in the correctional system to keep physical custody of their children while they participate. A woman may enter the program if the department approves and she is either pregnant or has a child less than 1 year old. 

Nine states have prison nursery programs, and others are considering or developing a program, Stateline reported in January. 

Last year, Ehlke agreed with the plaintiffs that incarcerated women had to be considered. He rejected the Department of Corrections’ argument that the agency’s existing program for mothers on probation, parole or extended supervision was enough to satisfy the law. 

Plaintiffs Alyssa Puphal and Natasha Curtin-Weber were incarcerated women who wanted to participate, according to the initial complaint filed in June 2024. Both women have since been released from prison. 

DOC pursuing ‘creative solution’

No DOC prisons can support housing infants, and the agency’s budget doesn’t have extra money to build a new facility for the program, the DOC argued. 

The agency said it likely could have created a “more robust” mother-young child program for prisoners if it had the necessary funding, and should not be held in contempt because any shortcoming on its part was not intentional. 

The DOC said it “would have been in no one’s best interest for Corrections to have simply started housing infants in prisons that were not equipped to safely house them.” 

The department said it is actively working with Meta House, a nonprofit that helps women recover from addiction. Meta House is one of the facilities that currently houses the DOC’s mother-young child program for women on correctional supervision in the community, the DOC said, and the department is working with Meta House to enable it to house eligible incarcerated people. 

In April 3 court filings, Daniel Cromwell, an assistant administrator for adult prisons for the DOC, said that a draft policy regarding the program is expected to become final and effective within a few weeks. After the policy is final, the final contract with Meta House will go through a DOC process for approval and signature, according to the department. 

ACLU: Too many women left out  

While Cox thinks women should have to meet some requirements to participate, he thinks the agency’s criteria are too restrictive. 

In its court filings, the department said that its plan with Meta House also relies on another state law: Wisconsin statute 301.046. An incarcerated woman would have to meet the criteria for that law and the mother-child law to participate. 

The law allows prisoners who meet certain requirements to be confined where they live or in other places in the community assigned by the department, the DOC said. 

The law requires the department to keep track of these incarcerated people by electronic monitoring or keeping them in supervised places. Laws that apply to incarcerated people in other correctional institutions still apply to them. The DOC can allow them to leave confinement for activities like employment and education, but it’s unclear whether the agency will permit this.

The DOC said that women placed in the community under this statute are legally considered “prisoners,” and that in this way, the department would meet its responsibility to provide a mother-child program to prisoners. 

Cox said that “we’re still trying to understand” the specifics of the criteria for the community confinement law that the DOC laid out in its court filings, but he contends that it is overly restrictive and doesn’t obey the court order. 

If the program was in one of its women’s prisons or a new facility built for that purpose, the agency might not have included this criteria. However, the department argued that it doesn’t have the resources needed for that. 

Cox also said that the department is trying to confuse the question of who is currently a prisoner, and that the goal of the women’s lawsuit and the court’s order is to provide a program to women who are currently incarcerated.

A drafted DOC policy includes a list of requirements incarcerated women would need to meet. Women convicted of offenses such as homicide or a crime against a child, or who are not classified as minimum custody or minimum community custody, would not qualify. 

Other requirements involve each woman’s behavior while in prison and jail and whether she has actively engaged in parenting classes. Child welfare must have approved or coordinated a safe reunification between the mother and the child, and the woman must have a stable housing and child care plan in place, among other requirements. 

Juli Bliefnick of FREE, an advocacy group focused on the justice system’s impact on women, expressed concern about what criteria the DOC will require women to meet. She said that historically, the department’s discretion limits access to programs, rather than expanding access. 

“And the human cost of excluding mothers and babies from this opportunity to form those critical bonds cannot be understated,” Bliefnick said in a message to the Examiner. 

Request for sanctions

Lawyers for the women requested sanctions, including a daily fine that would accumulate over time. They asked for the money from the fine to be set aside for the mother-child program. 

The DOC argued that it isn’t in contempt of the court order, that Wisconsin law does not allow for money from such a fine to be set aside for that purpose and that the plaintiffs haven’t provided necessary evidence for the court to hold a hearing on contempt. 

DOC’s lack of funding

Wisconsin’s budget includes $198,000 per year for the mother-child program. That’s not enough to construct a new building, and the DOC budget lacks money that could be used to do so, the agency argued. 

According to the DOC, the state Legislature has not provided additional funding despite proposals in the 2025-2027 budget process.

Joint Finance Committee co-chairs Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) and Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green), as well as several of the other Republican members of the committee, did not respond to requests for comment from the Examiner.

The DOC said it’s still seeking legislative support for more money but has no “imminent” way to get the money needed to construct a new building to house a mother-child program. 

According to the department’s filings, the $198,000 per year is used by its Maternal and Infant Program, the department’s program for women on supervision. In addition, the department traditionally spends another $400,000 to $500,000 per year on that program. 

The Maternal and Infant Program reportedly offers ten single-occupancy rooms available for women on supervision to live with their babies. The department said it contracts with ARC Community Services, Inc. to administer the program.

Women take part in the program for approximately six months at a time, the department said. In 2024, about 25 women were referred for the program, with 11 admitted and six successfully completing the program.

‘A critical step’ 

The advocacy group FREE said it is working with partners like the Ostara Initiative to develop community-based alternatives that meet the requirements of statute while advancing their goal of ending the immediate separation of newborns and incarcerated mothers. 

“This is a critical step toward eliminating jail and prison births in our state, and we invite community members to join us in this work,” FREE said. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

(The Center Square) - Wisconsin legislators aren’t giving up on gathering more information on the firing of former Universities of Wisconsin President Jay Rothman.