Thousands of low-income people living with HIV could be losing drug coverage as states impose limitations on HIV assistance programs amid constrained budgets — raising alarms over consistent access to lifesaving medications.

Many factors are putting budget constraints on state programs, including federal funding — which has remained flat for years and hasn’t been adjusted for inflation — increased drug costs and rising insurance premiums.

The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program is the national safety-net program supporting more than 600,000 low-income people living with HIV across the nation. States receive federal grants and drug rebate money — the latter making up the bulk of state program budgets — to, among other things, help pay for medications and support community groups and specific populations, such as women and children.

Congress has kept key drug assistance funding at $900.3 million annually since 2014. New enrollments for state programs jumped 30% from 2022 to 2024, in part because states cut off pandemic-era Medicaid assistance.

As of January, at least 18 states have pulled back their Ryan White AIDS Drug Assistance Programs, known as ADAPs, in some way, according to a March 2 analysis by health research group KFF and a report by the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors, which offers consultation for states.

There are roughly 1.2 million people in the United States living with HIV, and about 1 in 4 people get support from a state drug assistance program.

A disproportionate number of HIV/AIDS patients are gay, bisexual and other men who have male-to-male sexual contact, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. LGBTQ+ communities have been targeted in recent years by some federal and state policies, including the rollback of civil rights, shutting down a youth mental health hotline, restricting health care access, and imposing discussion and book bans in public schools.

Florida has introduced the most dramatic restrictions on income eligibility for its HIV drug program — cutting individual eligibility for the program from 400% of the federal poverty level to 130%. That means uninsured and underinsured people up to that 400% poverty line no longer have coverage under the program.

That’s roughly slashing maximum annual income of $63,840 for an individual down to $20,748. The state says the change will prevent a $120 million shortfall.

“(That) creates an immense coverage cliff,” for example, for childless adults not eligible for Medicaid, said Amber Tynan, CEO of Big Bend Cares, a North Florida Ryan White provider. Florida is among the 10 states that haven’t expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act.

Florida’s department of health didn’t respond to Stateline’s request for comment.

Delaware, Kansas, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island have also reduced income eligibility for their programs, but to a lesser extent, according to KFF. For example, Kansans with HIV/AIDS whose incomes are above 250% of the federal poverty level won’t be eligible for help with Obamacare insurance premiums. That change will affect about 230 people, the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors estimates.

In Pennsylvania, about 1,600 people will lose HIV drug assistance coverage as the state imposes income eligibility caps at 350% of the federal poverty level.

“We cannot continue to provide services at a certain level when the funding to do so does not exist,” Neil Ruhland, Pennsylvania Department of Health press secretary, told Stateline in a statement. He pointed to drug costs and enrollment numbers that are “steadily rising while funding remains stagnant.”

Florida also is removing the brand-name drug Biktarvy, which is the only single-tablet HIV medication regimen recommended by national guidelines for those starting treatment and is the most widely prescribed antiretroviral medication nationally. There is no generic form.

The medication is highly effective at reducing a person’s viral load, meaning the virus is undetectable in blood tests and untransmittable to others.

Eighty percent of Floridians with HIV who are in the state’s program use Biktarvy, Tynan said.

“Not having the opportunity to stay on lifesaving treatment is creating quite the panic and crisis for our population,” Tynan said. “For decades we’ve worked to turn HIV from a fatal diagnosis into a manageable chronic condition, and that progress depends on one thing: consistent access to treatment. When that stability is disrupted like it has (been) in Florida, it creates real risk for patients and for public health.”

Other states (Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Washington, plus the District of Columbia) also are considering limiting which drugs they cover, according to the alliance’s report.

And several other states may impose other limits to their drug assistance program. Health agencies in Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, Virginia and Washington are considering cutting funding for core medication and support services. Others are considering implementing a six-month recertification period, restricting eligibility, putting caps on expenditures, changing covered medications and lowering assistance for insurance premiums.

While no state has implemented a waiting list for drug assistance, three states — Arkansas, Louisiana and New Jersey — are considering one as a future cost-containment measure, according to the national alliance’s report.

Dr. Sabrina Assoumou, an infectious disease physician at Boston Medical Center, said many of her HIV patients are under-resourced and rely on her state’s Ryan White program. She added that she’s relieved Massachusetts’ program hasn’t announced any changes as of February, when the alliance’s report was released, but that she’s worried for patients in the other states.

“We’ve taken HIV from a very serious virus, a deadly virus when it was first discovered in the ’80s, to a very manageable chronic condition because of the medicines,” she said. “It is concerning to see … that we’re sort of moving backwards by not providing that kind of care that’s so much needed, and that’s lifesaving.”

Florida bypassed a rulemaking process when it announced its changes days before open enrollment ended. In late January, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a global nonprofit agency, sued the state department of health over the changes. The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services opened a new enrollment period for Floridians losing coverage to enroll in a different marketplace plan.

In late February, Florida issued an emergency rule putting the new eligibility requirements into effect. About 32,000 Floridians get help from the state program in some way — whether it’s through local health departments or the state helping to pay for insurance premiums.

Half of those, around 16,000, will lose coverage entirely — but many others will be affected in other ways, such as losing access to Biktarvy.

“So if you remain in the program, there’s a very high likelihood that you’re still going to be impacted by some of the other changes, like the dropping of the premium assistance, the elimination of Biktarvy from the formulary,” said Tim Horn, director of medication access for the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors. “When you take a look at all of these changes in the net, the vast majority of Florida ADAP clients are going to be impacted by this, one way or another.”

Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org.

U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin is calling for a nominating commission to try again to agree on a nominee to be the U.S. attorney for Wisconsin’s Eastern District after interim appointee Brad Schimel’s term in the position expires March 17. 

The judges in the district declined to retain Schimel for the job. Schimel previously served as the Republican attorney general under Gov. Scott Walker and in 2024 he ran unsuccessfully as a conservative for the state Supreme Court. 

Schimel was appointed U.S. attorney by Attorney General Pam Bondi in November after the nominating commission failed to reach consensus on who should fill the job in both the Madison and Milwaukee district offices. 

Last week, Baldwin said Schimel was a “clearly partisan actor” in the federal prosecutor role. 

Historically, Wisconsin’s two senators — including Baldwin and Sen. Ron Johnson — have worked together to name members of the nominating commission which agrees on candidates who are then recommended to the president and attorney general. Restarting the commission would require Baldwin and Johnson to agree on a charter. 

Across the country, the president has generally deferred to the home state senators when choosing U.S. attorneys. 

“I’m glad that the judges of the Eastern District of Wisconsin are respecting the process that Senator Johnson and I have to get high-quality, impartial prosecutors to serve Wisconsin,” Baldwin said in a statement. “It has not always been easy, but the hard work is worthwhile for the people we serve.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — The Democratic National Committee Tuesday filed a lawsuit in federal court aiming to force the Trump administration to admit if it plans to send armed federal law enforcement or U.S. troops to polling locations in the upcoming midterm elections. 

The suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia charges that 11 Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, requests submitted to the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense by the DNC in October have gone unanswered, a violation of public records law. 

“To ensure that the American people obtain timely knowledge of potential threats to free and fair elections and to enable the DNC to take appropriate action to ensure voting rights are protected, the DNC now seeks this Court’s aid to enforce FOIA requirements,” according to the suit. 

The suit was assigned to federal Judge Beryl A. Howell, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama.

Voting machines

The suit details how the FOIA requests were filed after comments from President Donald Trump to the New York Times that he regretted not using the U.S. military to seize voting machines after he lost the 2020 presidential election. 

“These and many other actions have raised serious concerns among voters across the country that the President will order armed federal agents or troops to polling places, drop boxes, and election offices, … and will send FBI agents or Justice Department officials to interfere with the orderly administration and certification of elections,” according to the complaint.

The suit also cites comments from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt that she “couldn’t guarantee” that federal law enforcement officers would not be at polling locations this November. 

“Donald Trump wants to bully and cheat his way through a midterm election that he knows Republicans will lose, but we won’t let him,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement. “The DNC will stand on the side of voters and use every tool in our arsenal to stop voter suppression and intimidation before it can even begin.”

Are there records?

It’s also possible that no records exist.

Congressional Democrats have pressed Trump officials during hearings on plans to send agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection to polling locations. 

Both heads of those agencies, ICE acting director Todd Lyons and CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott, said there were no plans to send any of their agents or officers to polling locations. 

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who is leaving her post at the end of month and being replaced by Oklahoma GOP Sen. Markwayne Mullin, was also pressed by Democrats. 

She said there were no plans for ICE agents, but also asked Democrats if they plan for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, something that is already illegal and rarely occurs. 

But during the hearing, Noem would not commit to issuing a directive barring immigration agents from polling locations. 

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Senate panel on Tuesday added to the fierce debate over compensation for student-athletes, with senators and experts agreeing the current system wasn’t working but with different ideas for a path forward.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican and chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, hosted a roundtable of experts, leaders and former college and professional athletes to discuss “fixing college sports.”

Cassidy said the “current system is actually hurting the student-athlete.”

“Our effort will be, what do we do to protect the student-athlete?” he continued, adding that approach would also protect universities.

Two of the five panelists Cassidy brought in hailed from Louisiana State University, including Collis Temple Jr., a member of the LSU Board of Supervisors and former basketball star at the university, along with Julie Cromer, executive deputy athletic director and chief operating officer for LSU Athletics. 

The event came on the heels of a White House roundtable last week, where President Donald Trump pledged to imminently deliver an executive order aimed at reshaping college sports. 

Debate over athletes as employees

The college sports world continues to grapple with the fallout from the NCAA’s 2021 guidelines, which allowed student-athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness. 

A federal judge in June 2025 approved the terms of a nearly $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that paved the way for schools to directly pay athletes.

The rules for name, image and likeness deals vary from state to state.

The college sports landscape is also wrestling with gender inequity in NIL deals and the NCAA’s controversial transfer portal, among other issues.

A bipartisan bill on pause in the U.S. House aims to create a national framework for college athletes’ compensation. It would also prohibit college athletes from being classified as employees while providing broad antitrust immunity to the NCAA and college sports conferences.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, expressed optimism over the bill’s fate during the White House roundtable, saying “we’re right on the verge of passage in the House and we now think we have the votes to do that.” 

But the bill would face a dismal path in the Senate, where Senate Democrats have pushed back against it.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan proposal from GOP Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state would provide “a new antitrust exemption allowing college football institutions to jointly sell media rights” and make it “optional for conferences and schools to pool their media rights together.”

Conversation between schools and athletes needed

Jim Carr, president and CEO of the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, said “the implications of student-athletes becoming employees, or a lot of these court decisions that are making it difficult to enforce our rules around what we call education-based athletics, is really — I don’t think it’s an overstatement or being too dramatic to say — critical to not only the NAIA but each of our institutions being able to stay in business on a long-term basis.” 

Carr, whose association includes roughly 250 institutions, said at an average NAIA school, 36% of the students are also athletes.

Sen. Chris Murphy called for collective bargaining, where athletes can “speak for themselves,” noting that Congress should not “micromanage” the relationship between colleges and college athletes. 

“We should just empower the colleges or the conferences and the athletes to have a conversation between themselves,” the Connecticut Democrat said. 

Bernard Dennis III, principal at Jackson Lewis P.C. and an employment and sports law expert, said that if students are classified as employees, “they then become subject to several statutory schemes, not the least of which would be the (Fair Labor Standards Act), which would allow them to be compensated for their work time, for overtime and then it becomes a challenge in what constitutes that.”

He added that “under the law, it would be anything that is required for their work, and so when you have eligibility rules about maintaining a certain GPA, things like that, it becomes not only your time on the field, but does going to class become compensable work time? How do you track that?”

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats tasked with overseeing defense left a classified briefing Tuesday incensed about President Donald Trump’s war with Iran, as the United States and Israel continue their joint bombardment and families prepare to bury seven American service members killed in the conflict.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he left the briefing “more doubtful than ever that there is clarity on objectives or exit strategy.”

“I emerged from this briefing as dissatisfied and angry, frankly, as I have from any past briefing in my 15 years in the Senate. I am left with more questions than answers, especially about the cost of the war,” Blumenthal said.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement that since the beginning of the war in Iran, “approximately 140 U.S. service members have been wounded over 10 days of sustained attacks.” 

“The vast majority of these injuries have been minor, and 108 service members have already returned to duty,” he said. “Eight service members remain listed as severely injured and are receiving the highest level of medical care.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, asked at a press briefing about a Reuters news report that as many as 150 U.S. troops have been injured in the war, replied, “I know it’s within that ballpark,” but deferred to the Pentagon for the exact numbers.

Seven U.S. troops have died, the Pentagon has said.

‘The most fighters, the most bombers’

Military and defense intelligence officials conducted the closed-door update for senators shortly after Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, alongside Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caine, said from the Pentagon that Iran should expect “yet again the most intense day of strikes” Tuesday.

“The most fighters, the most bombers, the most strikes — intelligence more refined and better than ever,” Hegseth said.

The secret briefing occurred a day after oil prices took a rollercoaster ride, peaking at $119 a barrel before falling below $90, due to Iranian officials’ effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s petroleum passes.

Giving mixed signals Monday night, Trump said the war in Iran is “going to be a short-term excursion,” but added later the U.S. military “will not relent until the enemy is totally and decisively defeated.” 

Dems unsure of end game

Many Senate Democrats have criticized the administration for not coming before Congress to debate the war publicly.

“We’ve been calling over and over again for them to come out of the classified rooms to allow us to have these conversations as much as we can in an open setting,” Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., said after leaving the briefing, held in a secured compartmented information facility, or SCIF, underneath the U.S. Capitol.

“I have to think about what I can and can’t say — it is concerning, it is disturbing, and I’m not sure what the end game is or what their plans are. They certainly have not made their case,” Rosen said.

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., said “a range of four individuals” briefed lawmakers, including a major general and personnel from the Joint Staff Intelligence and Defense Intelligence Agency, two organizations.

Telling reporters that “wild horses” could not get him to discuss the classified briefing, Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said he hasn’t received a request from Democrats, including ranking member Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., for an open hearing.

Schumer demands hearings 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., issued a joint press release with Reed and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., just after the classified briefing demanding public hearings “on Trump’s war of choice.”

“Public hearings featuring cabinet-level witnesses have been a standard part of congressional oversight throughout our history, including recent military conflicts, as well as during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. After all, our founders were clear about the role of Congress in matters of war as the representatives of the American people,” the senators wrote.

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds said he feels lawmakers are getting enough information from the administration, but he indicated that what happens after the bombing stops will largely be left up to civilians in Iran.

“That’s not our focus,” he said. “Our focus was on eliminating the threat to our people in the Middle East, to our allies, and to be able to address the threats before they became a lot worse in a very short period of time.”

Rounds said he believes that once the war ends, it will “be up to the Iranian people to determine whether they want to join the free world.”

“The Iranians are very smart people. They’re well educated. They can run their country if given the opportunity,” he said. “But if they just come to bring in another group of religious zealots, then they’re going to continue to have problems. And I think they realize that.”

Progress seen by Montana’s Sheehy

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren criticized the administration for not having clearer goals or an exit strategy. 

“Here we are, well into the second week of attacks, and there are still contradictory descriptions of the goals and contradictory descriptions of how we intend to accomplish this work.” she said. 

Montana Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy said he believes the U.S. military has “made great progress” during the first week-and-a-half of bombing. 

He said he expects the war will end once the United States and Israel have eliminated “the regime’s ability to continue to spread terror around the world and continue to control regional waterways and continue to try to kill Americans and our allies, not just in the region, but around the world.”

Shaheen, ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, said she hopes the administration will publicly release its investigation into whether a U.S. missile struck near a girls school in Iran. 

“Hopefully they will release the investigation,” she said. “Certainly I don’t believe there is any deliberate intent to target civilians in Iran in that way, but the fact that there are so many different explanations for what’s happening raises concerns.”

Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans during a Tuesday hearing laid the groundwork for legislation that would prevent state and local governments from making decisions on whether to limit cooperation with the federal government on immigration enforcement. 

Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham of South Carolina argued that sanctuary cities — a term used by critics — undercut federal law, and local policies shielding immigrants without legal status should be banned. President Donald Trump has called on Republicans who control Congress to act.

“What’s the upside of ignoring federal law and keeping people like this out of federal custody?” Graham said. “It’s a political choice.”

As the Trump administration aims to carry out mass deportations, federal immigration officials have increased enforcement in the interior of the country, targeting cities with high immigrant populations that are led by Democrats such as Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis and the District of Columbia. 

All those cities have policies that bar assistance to the federal government in immigration enforcement. 

“Our Democratic friends are accepting of a sanctuary policy. They don’t think it’s a problem. I do,” Graham said. “Let’s have a debate. Let’s have a vote. This will be good for the country going into 2026 as to who should be in charge of controlling our borders and enforcing law.” 

He did not cite specific legislation he favors, but last month he introduced a bill, S.3805, that would make it unlawful for states and local governments to pass laws that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. 

One of the witnesses tapped by Republicans, former DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, who served in the first Trump administration, agreed.

“To restore the rule of law, the era of sanctuary cities needs to come to an end,” Wolf said. 

Immigration enforcement funds

The top Democrat on the committee, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, said the committee should instead be conducting oversight of the $170 billion Congress provided to the Department of Homeland Security through the 2025 tax cuts and spending package known as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.”

He argued that under that funding, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has conducted aggressive immigration enforcement, wearing masks and conducting warrantless arrests. 

“We now have a secret police called ICE,” Merkley said.

He noted that three U.S. citizens have been killed by federal immigration agents: Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota, and Ruben Martinez in Texas. 

Merkley also pushed back on the assumption that immigration enforcement does not occur in states and cities that are referred to by Republicans as sanctuary cities. 

“Sanctuary is a bit of a misnomer,” Merkley said. “It refers to the decision that local police will serve as local police and not be commandeered to be assisting ICE agents.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said in his state, there is a legal precedent to not hold an immigrant for ICE to pick up because it would be regarded as an unlawful detainment.

“It is binding law that state and local officials who hold somebody under an ICE detainer, where ICE hasn’t bothered to get a warrant, can be held civilly liable,” Whitehouse said.

Graham took issue with the requirement for a judicial warrant and said the need for it to deport someone is “stupid.” 

“All of a sudden we’re Nazis,” Graham said.

Democrats are calling for ICE to use judicial warrants when making an arrest of a person in the country without legal authority, not for deportations. 

Budget Committee role

Democrats argued that the Budget Committee instead of immigration policy should be addressing fiscal issues, such as the spike in oil prices due to President Donald Trump’s decision to join Israel in its war with Iran. 

California Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla said Tuesday’s hearing was “off-base.”

“Gas prices are spiking because of an unauthorized war with Iran,” he said. 

Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico agreed, and said the hearing should focus on affordability and the rising cost of living. 

Graham said he would hold a future hearing on affordability. 

Fewer Wisconsin children and adolescents got vaccinated last year for many childhood illnesses, raising the risk of outbreaks and clusters that could lead to more widespread illness, the state health department reported Monday.

Vaccination rates for a group of seven childhood diseases that public health experts recommend in the first two years after birth fell to 66.9% in 2025. In 2024, the rate was 68.8%, according to the Department of Health Services.

“While nearly seven out of every 10 children had the recommended vaccines in this series by 24 months of age, we know that three out of 10 kids did not,” said Stephanie Schauer, who manages the Wisconsin immunization program for DHS. That’s a decline of almost 2 percentage points — about 1,200 children, she said at an online press briefing Monday.

“We use data like this as an alert system,” said Paula Tran, state health officer and administrator at the DHS Division of Public Health, said in a DHS statement. “Today that alert system is sending a clear signal that the health and well-being of Wisconsin kids and communities are at risk.”

Details of vaccination rates for children and adolescents are published on the Department of Health Services website. 

In 2025, 79.8% of children 2 or younger were fully vaccinated against measles — dropping below 80% for the first time. In 2013, 88.2% of Wisconsin 2-year-olds were fully vaccinated with the MMR vaccine, which protects against mumps and rubella as well as measles.

“Measles is a very infectious disease and really requires a very high level of immunity in a community such that it won’t spread,” Schauer. “So it is something that we are concerned with as we continue to see that drop.”

Measles outbreaks have been popping up across the country in the last year especially. The MMR vaccination rate in Wisconsin has been slowly but steadily declining over the last dozen years, and last year it fell by 1.6 percentage points from 2024.

“That’s headed in the wrong direction. We need more children protected, not fewer,” Schauer said. “We really need to be closer up around 95% of a community protected so that we don’t have an outbreak if measles is introduced into a community.”

With spring break coming soon and with it travel plans, the health department is also encouraging families to review their children’s measles immunization records, Schauer said, because most recent measles outbreaks and clusters across the country “are due to individuals who have been traveling where measles is occurring and then bringing them back.”

There have been some positive trends, Schauer said. In contrast to most other vaccine types, the rates of vaccine against meningitis — which is given in adolescence — have been increasing over the last decade and the last couple of years in particular.

She attributed the increase both to increased awareness and to the health department’s addition of the vaccine in 2024 to the list of required shots for students going into grades 7 and 12. Previous attempts to add the meningitis vaccine to the required list were blocked by the Republican majority on the state Legislature’s Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules.

With more families asking about the meningitis vaccine and more doctors talking about it with their patients, “that shows that school immunization requirements can and do help ensure that our kids are protected,” Schauer said

Schauer said there are two broad reasons for the decrease in vaccinations: public mistrust and lack of access.

“We understand that there’s a lot of misinformation and disinformation out there, that maybe people are questioning vaccines, or they may be delaying or spreading vaccines out,” she said.

To overcome mistrust, the state health department looks to health care providers to serve as the best messengers to the families in their care. Research has shown that 86% of the public “had a fair degree of confidence in their primary health care providers to provide them information on public health matters, and that would include vaccines,” Schauer said.

“We continue to recognize that parents have questions, and that’s appropriate and OK, but we want to make sure that they’re getting those questions answered,” Schauer said.

The message to families is to encourage them to turn to their health providers with questions, she added, “so that they can feel reassured that providing vaccines is really the most safe and effective way of preventing some of these really nasty diseases.”

Others, however, may lack any information at all about vaccines, have difficulty getting access to them because they lack regular access to health care.

Vaccines for Children, a program in place for more than 30 years, is intended to make it possible for families whose health care is covered by Medicaid or who have no insurance or inadequate insurance to get the vaccines they need, Schauer said. The program is also available to Alaska Native and American Indian children.

DHS lists providers across the state who participate in the Vaccines for Children program. More than 720 pharmacies and other providers take part, and the department continues to recruit more.

“We don’t want any children to go without vaccines because they weren’t aware of this program,” Schauer said.

DHS also funds 25 community organizations and tribal health departments in a program to make connections in their communities. Those agencies are “the trusted messenger and talking about vaccines and vaccine safety and why they are important in their communities,” she said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Over the past year, GOP leaders and the Trump administration have used a law known as the Congressional Review Act to push for coal mining in Montana, oil drilling in Alaska and copper mining in Minnesota, while also attempting to reverse protections for a national monument in Utah.

The rarely used act gives Congress a few months to revoke new federal regulations. Only in the past year has it ever been used to overrule land management plans.

Conservation advocates say Congress is recklessly throwing out detailed plans, which are created after years of research, public meetings and local collaboration. They fear lawmakers’ intervention could upend the long-standing management system that governs hundreds of millions of acres of public lands — with consequences that could threaten endangered species and coal miners alike.

But the fallout could be much more far-reaching than the rollback of protections for specific areas, some legal experts say. By using their review authority in a way that was never thought to apply to land management plans, lawmakers are calling into question the validity of well over 100 other such plans that were never submitted to Congress for review.

If those plans are challenged, it could create legal uncertainty for tens of thousands of leases and permits for oil and gas, mining, cattle grazing, logging, wind and solar farms and outdoor recreation.

“Using the Congressional Review Act (to revoke management plans) is really unprecedented and will have unforeseen consequences,” said Robert Anderson, who served as solicitor for the Department of the Interior during the Biden administration. “There’s a huge playing field of actions that would be forbidden if none of these management plans are lawfully in place. This could bring things to a screeching halt.”

Republicans have argued that congressional action is necessary to unleash President Donald Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum frequently refers to public lands as “America’s balance sheet,” and has pledged to increase returns by extracting more resources like oil, minerals and timber.

Montana U.S. Rep. Troy Downing, a Republican who sponsored a resolution to revoke a management plan in his home state, argued during debate on the measure that Montana’s economy and energy demands rely on coal production.

“When the federal government acts recklessly, it is the responsibility of Congress to step in and course correct. … The war on coal must end,” he said.

What’s the Congressional Review Act?

The Congressional Review Act, which was signed into law in 1996, requires federal agencies to submit new regulations to Congress before they can take effect. Congress then has 60 working days to review those regulations, and may vote to revoke them.

If lawmakers reject a rule, federal agencies are barred from crafting a new one in “substantially the same form,” unless Congress passes a new law.

For 20 years, the Congressional Review Act was rarely invoked. But during Trump’s first term, Republicans used it to overturn 16 regulations, such as a rule to protect streams from coal mining pollution. Democrats used the act to revoke three rules from Trump’s first presidency.

But in 2025, Congress and Trump revoked 22 Biden-era rules.

“It seems increasingly popular from Congress as a way to get a quick win to reverse something that happened under the previous administration,” said Devin O’Dea, Western policy and conservation manager with Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, which has opposed efforts to open public lands for resource extraction. “The long-term implications are what we’re concerned about.”

Until recently, management plans for public lands were not considered subject to congressional review. Federal agencies have issued well over 100 such plans without ever submitting one to Congress. Those documents guide the work of agency officials who oversee specific areas of land, often covering millions of acres.

Created after years of public meetings and local feedback, they determine which landscapes will be leased for oil and gas drilling, protected for endangered species or open for off-road vehicles, along with a multitude of other uses.

But last year, Republicans asked the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan advisory agency for Congress, to affirm a sweeping new view of the Congressional Review Act. The office found that certain management plans were subject to review because their land-use decisions “prescribed policy,” and determined that lawmakers’ queries had opened the 60-day review “clock” for the plans in question.

“A very long deliberative process goes into these plans,” said Justin Meuse, government relations director for climate and energy with The Wilderness Society, a conservation nonprofit. “These plans are so broad and multifaceted and deal with so many different things. This is taking a hatchet to something that should be done with a scalpel.”

Using this new tool, Republicans have revoked plans that restricted mining and oil production on federal lands in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming. Meanwhile, House Republicans voted in January to overturn a regulation that blocked development of a mine near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in Minnesota, a move that now awaits a vote in the Senate.

And GOP lawmakers from Utah are seeking to overturn the management plan for Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in that state.

Conservation leaders say the rollbacks are unprecedented.

“It’s very surprising,” said Autumn Gillard, coordinator with the Grand Staircase-Escalante Inter-Tribal Coalition, a group of tribal nations working to protect the monument. “The (resource management plan) is created as a set of advisement points to land managers to reflect on when making decisions. It’s not a direct set of rules.”

In Minnesota, advocates for the Boundary Waters wilderness area say it is treasured for its pristine lakes, where paddlers can fill their water bottles straight from the surface. They fear efforts to allow a copper mine near the headwaters of the area will irreversibly pollute the most popular wilderness in the country.

“We weren’t expecting the Congressional Review Act to be on the table in this way,” said Libby London, communications director with Save the Boundary Waters, a coalition seeking to protect the wilderness area. “It sets a really scary precedent that undermines decades of land management decisions.”

Officials at the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management did not grant interview requests. Staff at the House Committee on Natural Resources did not grant an interview with U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman, an Arkansas Republican who chairs the committee and who has championed using the Congressional Review Act to allow more mining and drilling.

Legal questions

Environmental groups have condemned Republicans’ use of the act to push for more resource extraction. If Trump wants more mining and drilling, they say, then federal agencies should take the time to draft new management plans using the same rigorous process.

But perhaps more concerning to some public land stakeholders are the potential implications for a whole host of other lands. None of the plans issued by federal land managers over the past 30 years were ever submitted for review, because no one at the time considered them to be rules.

In other words, hundreds of plans covering millions of acres of land could be deemed invalid under the new congressional interpretation that they qualify as rules.

“That right there is chaos,” said Peter Van Tuyn, a longtime environmental lawyer and managing partner at Bessenyey & Van Tuyn LLC. “Those (plans) go across the full spectrum of what land managers do: conservation and preservation, mining approvals, oil and gas drilling, resource exploitation, public access and recreation. There’s a very real chance that a court could say that a resource management plan was never in effect and all the implementation actions under the umbrella of that plan are invalid.”

In a letter to the Bureau of Land Management late last year, The Wilderness Society and other organizations identified more than 5,000 oil and gas leases that could be legally invalid, as they were issued under management plans that were never reviewed by Congress.

Public lands advocates say the same logic could be applied to mining leases, grazing permits, logging, outdoor recreation and many other activities covered by agency planning documents. Many industries that rely on public lands, such as hunting and fishing guides, could be thrown into chaos.

“Let’s say you’re operating as an outfitter,” said Ryan Callaghan, president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. “Having something like an entire resource management plan rolled back would be a huge curveball, and something you’d have an absolute inability to plan for as a business owner. It’s very reasonable to have a lot of questions as to what the ramifications are.”

Industry concerns

Some industry leaders are also worried about the precedent Congress is setting by wiping out plans that were created after years of local input and consultation.

“I’m fairly concerned about that,” said Kathleen Sgamma, a longtime oil and gas advocate who now serves as principal for Multiple-Use Advocacy, a consulting group focused on federal land policy. “It’s not unreasonable to think about a future day where there is a Democratic trifecta and they would be able to (revoke) old plans likewise.”

Sgamma was nominated by Trump to lead the Bureau of Land Management, but withdrew her nomination last spring amid fierce opposition from conservation groups, and following the publication of a memo in which she had criticized Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

She said she was less concerned with the idea that previous plans could be declared invalid. She argued that, if challenged, agency officials could submit those old plans to Congress and start the 60-day review “clock” before litigation advanced.

The greater uncertainty, Sgamma said, is the provision that agencies cannot adopt rules in “substantially the same form” as those that have been revoked by Congress. While Republicans intend to target restrictions on drilling and mining, they are using the Congressional Review Act to revoke entire plans. That could prevent agencies from issuing new plans covering less controversial topics, such as campgrounds and trails.

Van Tuyn, the environmental lawyer, shared that concern.

“If they have a plan that looks 80% like the previous plan, and a court says 80% is ‘substantially similar,’ what does the agency do? Go back to the drawing board and say 50%? You used to have all this public access and now you can’t?” he said.

The Public Lands Council, which advocates for ranchers who operate on public lands, did not respond to an interview request. Western Energy Alliance, which advocates for oil and natural gas production, did not grant an interview request. The American Petroleum Institute did not respond to an interview request. Public Lands For The People, which advocates for mining on public lands, did not respond to an interview request.

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

The Dodge County Sheriff’s Office is denying reports that a U.S. citizen from Illinois was transferred to its jail and then released over the weekend, after being detained by immigration authorities. Multiple local media outlets reported that Sundas “Sunny” Naqvi, 28, was detained upon returning to the U.S. after traveling abroad. 

Naqvi’s family, protesters and local county officials gathered outside the Broadview detention facility in Illinois on Sunday saying that Naqvi had been detained alongside her coworkers. Her family tracked Naqvi’s phone to the Broadview facility and then later to Dodge County Wisconsin, where the jail has long doubled as an immigration detention facility.

During a press conference, CBS News reported, Cook County Commissioner Kevin Morrison — who’s also a family friend of Naqvi — said that “it is our belief” that six people were transported from Broadview to Wisconsin. Naqvi was reportedly released on Saturday along with her coworkers in Dodge County. Naqvi and her coworkers are all of Pakistani descent and headed to India for a work trip with a layover in Turkey, WGN9 reported. Naqvi’s sister, Sara Afzal, said that the group’s flight was canceled due to visa issues. This caused the group to separate and travel to different countries, with Naqvi going to Bulgaria and Austria. They reunited in Turkey and flew back to O’Hare International Airport in Chicago. 

Describing what happened to Naqvi, Morrison said in his speech at Broadview, “All she was told was there was curious travel history, but they had no cause to detain her for those 30 hours.” During the press conference Morrison said of Naqvi that “her first shower was actually today, and she was able to eat some food.” Naqvi’s family members say that she has still not received her passport back. “The fact that this could happen to any U.S. citizen should terrify us all,” said Morrison. 

Naqvi’s family said that federal authorities denied that she was at Broadview. Family members were able to track her cellphone, which was turned off and back on again and showed a location in Dodge County. Federal authorities, however, denied that Naqvi was being detained there.

In a press release issued Monday, Dodge County Sheriff Dale Schmidt refuted the reports. Schmidt’s office “has no record of the individual referenced ever being booked, detained, or released from the Dodge County Jail,” the sheriff said in the statement. “Jail logs confirm that no female inmates or detainees from the federal government were admitted or released during the timeframe in which these events were alleged to have occurred.”

Schmidt said that he takes all allegations about the jail seriously, and that a review and investigation is underway. “We encourage anyone who believes they have evidence related to this matter to provide that information — along with any available electronic metadata — to the Dodge County Sheriff’s Office so it can be properly evaluated,” said Schmidt, who also encouraged Naqvi herself to contact the office. “We are also asking that the unknown individual who reportedly picked her up in the Juneau area and drove her to the Holiday Inn contact the Sheriff’s Office to provide a statement.”

The sheriff said he will not comment further pending investigation into the matter, and that he does not speak on behalf of federal authorities. Late last year, Dodge County sheriff’s deputies were spotted transporting immigration detainees to and from the Broadview facility. 

Wisconsin officials expressed outrage over initial reports of the detention.  Sen. Chris Larson posted on BlueSky  that federal agents “repeatedly lied, saying she was not in custody. After nearly two full days she was released, needing to hitchhike to a nearby hotel to call for a ride home. This should not happen in any nation that purports to call itself the ‘Land of the Free.’”

Naqvi’s family said that she is still recovering from her detention. On Tuesday morning a spokesperson from Customs and Border Protection, a component of the Department of Homeland Security, also refuted Naqvi’s allegations. “The passenger’s claims are blatantly false,” the spokesperson said, adding that Naqvi arrived at O’Hare the morning of March 5. “CBPD officers referred her to Secondary, for additional inspection based on law enforcement checks and conducted a baggage exam. Ms. Naqvi departed CBP within 90 minutes of her arrival to the United States. Ms. Naqvi was not taken into custody or transferred to ICE for detention.”

This article has been updated with comment from the Department of Homeland Security.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Donald Trump on Monday told House Republicans, who were gathered in Florida for a policy retreat, that he expects the war in Iran will wrap up “quickly,” though he didn’t give a specific date or detail exactly what he wants to do before ending the hostilities. 

“We took a little excursion because we felt we had to do that to get rid of some evil,” he said. “And I think you’ll see it’s going to be a short-term excursion.”

Trump added later in his speech that the U.S. military “will not relent until the enemy is totally and decisively defeated.”

During a press conference afterward, Trump said the U.S. military had struck 5,000 locations inside Iran but that he was holding off on bombing some of the country’s larger targets to see if its leaders would allow ships to safely travel through the Strait of Hormuz.

The danger of navigating the key shipping route during the war has been a factor in rising oil prices and other market volatility globally.

“We’ve left some of the most important targets for later in case we need to do it,” he said. “If we hit them, it’s going to take many years for them to be rebuilt, having to do with electricity production and many other things. So, we’re not looking to do that if we don’t have to.”

Trump said “when the time comes,” the U.S. Navy and undisclosed partners will escort ships through that narrow channel.

“I hope it’s not going to be needed,” he said. “But if it’s needed, we’ll escort them right through.”

Trump said he was “disappointed” that Iranian leaders over the weekend selected Mojtaba Khamenei as the country’s new supreme leader. He is the son of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed by military strikes shortly after the war began. 

Trump declined to answer if the country’s new leader could soon become the target of similar military action, saying that would be “inappropriate.”

No new laws without elections bill

Trump also focused on legislative requests for Congress during his speech and at the press conference, calling on House Republicans to restructure a bill they already passed that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote and identification to cast a ballot, among other changes. 

Trump said he wants three additional elements written into a new bill. 

The first would be nationwide restrictions on mail-in ballots unless the person is a member of the military based overseas, someone with a disability, someone who is ill or someone who is traveling. 

Trump told GOP lawmakers to add in a provision that would lead to “no men in women’s sports” and language blocking transgender youth from surgery. 

“Now, that should be the easiest thing to get passed that you’ve ever had,” he said.

Trump said if the House GOP passed the reworked bill that Republicans would “win the midterms at levels that you can’t even believe.”

He expressed confidence that Senate Republicans would be able to move such a bill through that chamber, but didn’t detail how that would happen with the 60-vote legislative filibuster still in place. 

“We’re not going to sign a watered-down version like has been sent up there. Let’s go for the gold, and let’s just not accept anything else,” Trump said. “I’ll tell you what, I’m willing to just sort of say, I’m not going to sign anything until this is approved. I really am.”

Democrats unmoved

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said during a floor speech earlier in the day that Trump’s position would not change Democrats’ minds that the legislation is “Jim Crow 2.0.”

“Donald Trump is saying, in effect, unless Congress helps him undermine democracy, he’s prepared to hold the rest of the country hostage,” Schumer said. “This is what he does. He’s a thug, He’s a bully. He can’t ever argue on the merits, so he threatens.”

Schumer said that would mean any bills Congress approves to try to lower the cost of living wouldn’t take effect. 

“No bill to bring down gas prices. No bills to make groceries more affordable. No bills to increase housing. Not until the Save Act passes. That’s what Donald Trump is saying,” Schumer said. “Democrats will make sure that never happens.”

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Annette Ziegler announced Monday that she will not run for a third term in 2027, setting up another open race for the seat. 

Ziegler, 62, plans to serve out the rest of her term but won’t run in the April 2027 race.

“After three decades on the bench, now is the right time for me to step away to spend more time with my husband, kids and grandkids,” Ziegler said in a statement. “I will, therefore, not be seeking reelection to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2027.” 

Ziegler was first elected to the Court in 2007. Ziegler won a second term in 2017 in an unusual race where there was no opposition, becoming the only justice to not draw an opponent over the past two decades.

“It has been the honor of my lifetime to serve as judge and justice for the past 30 years,” Ziegler said. “I will be forever grateful to the voters who elected me twice in Washington County and then twice to serve on our state’s highest court.”

Ziegler’s announcement comes about a month ahead of this year’s state Supreme Court race, which is open following the decision of her fellow conservative colleague, Justice Rebecca Bradley, to not seek reelection this year. 

Appeals court judge and former Democratic state Assembly member Chris Taylor and Appeals Court Judge Maria Lazar, a conservative, will face each other next month for that seat. 

The retirements of the two conservative justices comes after liberals won the majority on the Court in 2023 and held it in last year’s race.

Recent Supreme Court elections in Wisconsin have brought national attention and record spending for the nominally nonpartisan seats with the ideological balance of the Court at stake. The 2026  Supreme Court race has not received as much attention or spending with the liberal majority assured regardless of the outcome.  A victory for Taylor next month would increase the number of liberal justices on the Court, locking in a  5-2 liberal majority until 2030.

When Ziegler’s seat is up in 2027, liberals will likely look to extend their majority while conservatives will be looking to claw back some ground. 

“While I will not be a candidate next year, my appreciation for the people of Wisconsin and the judicial system I have been privileged to serve in remains as strong as ever,” Ziegler said. “I look forward to finishing out the rest of my term on the Court and handing the baton to a new justice in 2027.”

Ziegler served as the chief justice from 2021 to 2025. She was the second justice to be elected to the position after a 2015 constitutional amendment made it an elected position rather than one selected based on seniority. 

When the Court flipped to a liberal majority in 2023 for the first time in 15 years, the liberal members voted to weaken the powers of the chief justice, putting some of the powers under the control of a three-member administrative committee and making a series of changes to the Court’s internal operating procedures. Ziegler at the time called the move an overreach by “rogue justices.”

Ziegler worked as a private lawyer, an assistant U.S attorney and as Washington County Circuit Court judge, a position to which she was appointed by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson, before she was elected to the Supreme Court. Ziegler earned her law degree from Marquette University. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — Americans are paying more for gas Monday as the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran chokes off a significant route for roughly one-fifth of the world’s petroleum products.

Global prices for Brent crude oil, the international standard, climbed over $100 a barrel. Prices were just above $70 a barrel in the days before the U.S. and Israel launched a surprise Feb. 28 attack on Iran, killing the regime’s top leader and other powerful government figures.

The spike, which peaked at $119.50 per barrel early Monday, caused ricochets throughout markets, with major stock indexes falling worldwide. Oil prices have not reached costs above $100 per barrel since mid-2022 after Russia launched its full-scale invasion in Ukraine.

Following the Feb. 28 strikes, Iranian officials effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, threatening and reportedly attacking vessels attempting to cross the narrow passage.

Iran’s top security official, Ali Larijani, reinforced on the social media platform X Monday that vessels trying to cross the Strait of Hormuz are not guaranteed safety as the conflict continues.

“It is unlikely that any security will be achieved in the Strait of Hormuz amid the fires of the war ignited by the United States and Israel in the region,” Larijani wrote.  

President Donald Trump defended the price spike late Sunday in a post on his online platform, Truth Social. 

“Short term oil prices, which will drop rapidly when the destruction of the Iran nuclear threat is over, is a very small price to pay for U.S.A., and World, Safety and Peace. ONLY FOOLS WOULD THINK DIFFERENTLY! President DJT,” he wrote.

While the price fell to $90 a barrel just before 6 p.m. Eastern, Patrick De Haan of GasBuddy, a platform that helps people find the cheapest gas prices in their region, said without indications on the direction of the conflict, there’s no guarantee the price will continue to drop.

“It’s hard to know what (prices) will look like, and there’s not a whole lot of clarity on whether or not the administration is actively trying to address the problem that has caused oil to spike,” De Haan told States Newsroom. 

The price of oil dropped below $90 just after Trump said Monday afternoon that the war was “very complete” during a phone call with CBS News’s Weijia Jiang. 

But prices bumped back up.

“There’s just a lot of headlines, there’s a lot of interest, and there’s a lot of volatility in the situation,” said De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said.

U.S. gas prices 

The national average for gasoline in the U.S. rose to $3.48 per gallon Monday, according to the AAA gasoline price survey. That’s up from $3.25 per gallon on March 5, according to the survey. 

AAA data shows consumers in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Illinois experienced the highest prices in the Midwest and eastern U.S., with average retail prices ranging from $3.52 to nearly $3.60 for a gallon of regular gas.

Western states, which tend to pay higher gas prices already, saw an average gallon of regular surpass $4. California topped the nation’s list at $5.20 per gallon.

The price to fill up in Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma remained the lowest, hovering between $2.92 to $2.99. That’s up from a week ago when prices averaged $2.47 in Oklahoma, $2.57 in Kansas and $2.61 in Arkansas.

Spike among “fastest rates in years”

GasBuddy put the national average Monday of regular at $3.45, and diesel at just over $4.59.

“In just a week, consumers have seen gasoline prices surge at one of the fastest rates in years after oil prices spiked following U.S. strikes on Iran and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz,” De Haan said.

De Haan added in a blog post Monday that the reason behind oil prices pushing past $100 a barrel for the first time in years is “fuel markets are now rapidly recalibrating to the risk of prolonged disruption to global supply flows.”

“As a result, gasoline prices in many states could climb another 20 to 50 cents per gallon this week, with price-cycling markets potentially seeing increases as early as today,” De Haan said.

Prior to the war, average U.S. gas prices sat just under $3, with expectations for seasonal increases as warmer weather triggers more demand and refineries produce pricier summer blends.

Nearly one-third of the nation’s private sector workers are covered by paid leave programs as more states require employers to provide medical and family leave, according to a new analysis released this week.

Currently, the District of Columbia and 13 states have passed laws requiring paid leave for many workers, according to a report from the National Partnership for Women & Families, a nonprofit that advocates for reproductive rights, health and economic justice, and workplace equality.

“States have shifted the paradigm now that more than 46 million workers across the U.S. are covered by paid family and medical leave programs, pointing the way forward for the rest of the country,” Jessica Mason, senior policy analyst at the organization, said in a news release. 

The programs vary in design, but generally guarantee paychecks while workers take time off for illness or to care for a child or other loved one. They’re funded through employer and employee premiums similar to unemployment insurance or payroll taxes that cover a portion of employee wages when they take leave.

The report cites research showing multistate employers often respond to local paid sick leave laws by providing paid sick leave to their workers even in places without such requirements.

This year, Delaware, Maine and Minnesota began or planned to start offering benefits through new paid leave programs. And the report cites growing momentum in six more states: Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Virginia. If those states were to implement paid leave policies, 44% of workers nationwide would have access to paid family and medical leave, according to the analysis. 

In Virginia, lawmakers in both chambers have approved bills guaranteeing up to 12 weeks of paid family leave. While previous efforts were vetoed by former Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, current Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger is expected to sign a bill once a final version makes it to her desk, the Virginia Mercury reported. 

In a January address to the legislature, Spanberger said that “being pro-business and being pro-worker are not mutually exclusive.”

“We can support business growth and invest in our workforce. We can attract new companies and protect workers. … That is why we will create a statewide paid family and medical leave program.” 

Virginia is projected to spend about $116.51 million in startup costs over the 2027 and 2028 fiscal years. By 2031, the program is expected to spend $2.1 billion per year in benefits — funded by payroll tax collections. 

Opponents frequently cite the costs of paid leave programs and the burdens they place on businesses. Last month, Virginia Republican state Del. Michael Webert said large corporations may be able to afford new costs and administrative burdens, but not smaller employers. 

“The impact will not fall evenly,” he said ahead of the House vote last month.

Across much of the Midwest and South, state laws prohibit local governments from requiring employers to provide paid sick leave. In 18 states, cities are effectively stripped of the power to enact their own labor protections.

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

Several Democratic states are moving to bar federal immigration agents from being near polling places and other election sites, amid persistent worries that President Donald Trump will use federal law enforcement or the military to disrupt the midterm elections.

Measures to restrict federal agents from operating at or near election-related locations have been offered in more than half a dozen states, according to a Stateline count. While the proposals vary, they broadly seek to combat the prospect of chaotic confrontations between federal agents and voters this November.

A federal law dating to the end of the Civil War already bans sending the military or other “armed men” to polling places, except to repel armed enemies of the United States. The U.S. Constitution also gives states — not the president or federal government — the responsibility for running elections.

But Trump’s calls to nationalize elections, his promise to impose voting restrictions with or without Congress, and his history of working to overturn the 2020 presidential election is prompting some Democratic state lawmakers to act. Adding to lawmakers’ fears is the FBI’s January seizure of ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, Georgia, and U.S. Department of Justice lawsuits against dozens of states for copies of their voter rolls that include sensitive personal information.

The president’s party typically loses ground in Congress in midterm elections. Given that, Democrats fear Trump is laying the groundwork to block or cast doubt on a losing outcome.

“When the president says he’s going to break the law, I actually believe him,” said California state Sen. Tom Umberg, a Democrat who has introduced legislation that would prohibit federal immigration enforcement within 200 feet of polling places. He said Trump’s call to “nationalize” elections was the “triggering event” that prompted him to offer the bill.

Legislation to restrict immigration enforcement or the presence of federal forces near polling places and other election sites has been offered or announced in California, Connecticut, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Washington. A bill has also been introduced in Kansas, which has a Democratic governor, but the measure is unlikely to pass in the Republican-controlled legislature.

The bills focus on immigration enforcement, but the New Mexico legislation would go further, prohibiting the military or any armed federal personnel from polling locations.

The Trump administration and its supporters have suggested that the president might order U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to the polls. After former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in early February said ICE will surround polling places, White House press secretary Karolina Leavitt said she couldn’t guarantee an ICE agent wouldn’t be near a polling place

Trump allies have also circulated a draft executive order that Trump could sign declaring a national emergency and attempting to assert broad powers over elections, The Washington Post reported last week. Trump told reporters on Friday that he had never heard of the draft order.

But during a conference call last week for election officials from across the country, the Department of Homeland Security committed to not placing ICE agents at any polling places in 2026, according to both Republican and Democratic secretaries of state who were on the call.

Homeland Security told Stateline in a statement that ICE isn’t planning operations “targeting” polling places, but could arrest individuals if an active public safety threat endangered a polling location.

“There’s no reason for us to deploy to a polling facility,” ICE’s current leader, Todd Lyons, told Congress in February.

Democratic state lawmakers calling for election-related restrictions on ICE in state law say they don’t want to take any chances.

“I think this is just prudent, wise policy to do what we all know is right, which is to protect polling places,” said Virginia Democratic state Del. Katrina Callsen, the chief sponsor of a bill that would prohibit federal civil immigration enforcement within 40 feet of polling places and voting counting sites.

The New Mexico legislature in February passed a measure that largely mirrors restrictions in federal law against armed federal personnel at polling places. The bill is now before Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham.

The bill says officials generally cannot order or bring troops or other armed federal agents to polling places or parking areas for polling places beginning 28 days before Election Day, when early in-person voting begins. It also would prohibit officials from changing who is qualified to vote contrary to New Mexico law or from imposing election rules that conflict with state law. Violators would be guilty of a felony.

New Mexico lawmakers offered the legislation the day after Trump’s initial remarks about wanting to nationalize elections. New Mexico Democratic state Sen. Katy Duhigg, the bill’s lead sponsor, said she wanted a measure that wouldn’t run into issues with the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, which says federal law supersedes state law.

“I think a lot of states, frankly, are trying to figure out what to do right now,” Duhigg said, adding that courts will likely be asked to sort through new state-level limits on federal forces. “This seems like a reasonable approach to try.”

Republican lawmakers opposed

Some Republican state lawmakers are dismissive of the Democratic measures, casting them as unnecessary.

“I just cannot imagine the president, as much as you might dislike him, ordering federal troops to seize New Mexico elections by armed force,” New Mexico Republican state Sen. William Sharer, the minority leader, said during debate. Sharer didn’t respond to an interview request from Stateline.

In Washington state, one bill would require local election officials to block anyone from accessing areas where ballots are processed or counted for the purposes of immigration enforcement. Law enforcement could be allowed access with a judicial warrant or court order, however.

Washington state Rep. Jim Walsh, a Republican who also chairs the state party, characterized the proposal as “fearmongering” and a solution in search of a problem — unless its supporters acknowledge that people in the country illegally are voting. And he claims Washington doesn’t have the authority to legally bar ICE from areas of an election office.

Washington Democratic state Sen. Drew Hansen, the bill’s lead sponsor, said election workers counting ballots deserve to be able to perform their task without interference from federal immigration authorities. Hansen noted that ICE “does not have a perfect track record, to say the least, of only detaining extremely dangerous, violent noncitizens.”

More than 170 U.S. citizens have been held by immigration agents during Trump’s second term, ProPublica reported in October. A December report by Democrats on the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations identified at least seven U.S. citizens who were held for more than 24 hours.

In Arizona, some Republicans want to encourage an ICE presence at the polls. In February, Republican state Sen. Jake Hoffman offered a bill that would require counties to sign an agreement with ICE to provide a federal law enforcement presence at polling places.

Hoffman didn’t respond to an interview request from Stateline. A scheduled committee hearing on the measure was canceled in February, likely killing the bill. Still, the underlying proposal could be resurrected, Arizona Mirror reported.

“Arizonans deserve to know that election laws are not just written in statute but actually enforced in practice,” Hoffman said in a news release.

Existing federal laws against federal election interference are specific and straightforward, said Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights and Elections program at the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. States such as Arizona don’t get a “free pass” to violate federal law, either, he said.

Options exist to hold people accountable under federal law, Morales-Doyle said. If ICE agents deployed to polling places, federal prosecutors would have five years to bring charges against ICE personnel under the statute of limitations. While the Justice Department under the Trump administration would be unlikely to bring charges, he noted, the time limit extends into the next presidential administration.

Still, Morales-Doyle said he understands why people are skeptical, given how ICE and other elements of the Trump administration have behaved.

“So it is, I think, important to think about what state legal mechanisms there are for holding people accountable,” he said.

Local enforcement

Some of the state legislative proposals would place local election workers on the front lines of resisting federal interference.

The Washington state measure would instruct multiple election workers, when possible, to document incidents in which they deny permission to enter areas that are off limits to immigration enforcement. The New Mexico bill would allow county clerks and voters who experienced intimidation to sue over alleged violations, in addition to state officials.

The California legislation goes perhaps the furthest in empowering local election officials. It would allow county election officials to keep polls open if they determine that voting was disrupted because of violations of a ban on federal immigration enforcement nearby.

Some local election officials appear hesitant to discuss the proposals and whether they are preparing for the possibility of federal interference. The president of the California Association of County Clerks and Elected Officials and the clerks chair of New Mexico Counties, a statewide advocacy group for county officials, didn’t respond to requests for interviews. The Washington State Association of County Auditors declined to comment.

More broadly, other election officials have said the possibility of federal interference is informing their preparations for the midterm elections. Scott McDonell, the Democratic clerk of Dane County, Wisconsin, which includes Madison, told Stateline in February that while Trump’s desire to “nationalize” elections isn’t possible under the Constitution, he is paying attention to agencies that answer to Trump.

“What does the president actually control? The FBI, National Guard, ICE, DOJ in general. That’s far more concerning,” McDonell said. (State national guards can be federalized by the president.)

Barbara Richardson Crouch, the Republican registrar of voters in the Town of Sprague, Connecticut, said she prefers no law enforcement at polling places — whether local, state or federal.

In Connecticut, legislators plan to offer a measure to restrict federal immigration enforcement within 250 feet of a polling place or other election site. Crouch, who has been involved in election administration for nearly two decades, said she has long dealt with concerns surrounding law enforcement at voting sites, but that those fears in the past centered on state and local police.

Crouch said a state trooper typically comes through her polling place in the early morning as election workers are setting up, and then again when polls close. Law enforcement is on call, but Crouch said she believes that if someone sees law enforcement, it sends a message that the area isn’t safe.

“I personally have never liked police at election places, even local police,” Crouch said.

Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

Online prediction markets allow users to put money on the outcome of almost anything — this weekend’s NBA game between the Warriors and the Thunder, the next supreme leader of Iran, whether the government will confirm the existence of aliens.

But those markets have no state oversight and operate even in states that ban gambling.

The platforms are raising bipartisan alarms, especially related to sports gambling. As states have legalized sports betting in recent years, they’ve required legal sportsbooks to jump through multiple hoops — from age verification procedures to protections for gambling addiction to tax collections. Online prediction markets circumvent all those rules.

Platforms including Kalshi and Polymarket say they are offering contracts similar to commodity markets that speculate on the future price of corn or oil — not outright gambling. But a growing number of states are rejecting those justifications, arguing the platforms are offering a backdoor to skirt state gambling regulations, particularly on sports.

The issue has sparked action from state regulators, new legislation, and lawsuits from both states and prediction markets. Complicating matters are the federal government’s moves to block state regulation of prediction markets, which see more than $13 billion in transactions each month.

Most activity on those platforms revolves around sports. And in national ads, Kalshi even marketed itself as the first national legal sports betting platform — even though states approve and regulate sports gambling since a 2018 Supreme Court decision. In 11 states, sports gambling remains illegal.

“This is sports wagering. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably sports wagering, in this situation,” said Kentucky state Rep. Michael Meredith, a Republican.

Meredith, who sponsored a 2023 law that legalized sports betting in Kentucky, called for states to regulate prediction markets during a webinar hosted by the National Conference of State Legislatures. That organization, representing state legislators across the country, has urged Congress “to act swiftly to address the rapid growth of unregulated sports‑related event contracts.”

State leaders argue their longstanding authority to oversee gambling should allow states to regulate or ban prediction market platforms. But those companies maintain they are not beholden to state regulations.

“I think it’s very clear that this authority should be vested in our state governments,” Meredith said last month.

In New York, lawmakers are considering legislation that would ban prediction markets from offering contracts on sports events, in addition to natural disasters, acts of terrorism and deaths. In Nevada, where gambling and tourism are top economic drivers, regulators are involved in a protracted legal fight after the state sought to stop prediction market activity on sports.

“To me, this is clearly gambling,” Thomas Reeg, CEO of Caesars Entertainment, which operates casinos and sports betting, said during a company earnings call in January.

But states are also fighting an obscure federal agency seeking to protect the emerging marketplace. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates derivatives such as futures contracts on stocks, has asserted it has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets and promised to fight state regulatory efforts in court.

The CTFC did not respond to Stateline’s request for comment. Neither did Kalshi or Polymarket, two of the leading prediction market companies.

A new wave of betting

Unless Congress passes legislation, experts say the courts will ultimately decide what role states can play in regulating prediction markets.

The standoff has led to litigation between the platforms and states in at least eight states, and officials in 11 states have sent cease and desist orders to prediction market companies, according to the American Gaming Association, an industry group representing casinos and sports books. A bipartisan group of attorneys general from 39 states and the District of Columbia recently urged a federal court to uphold state authority to regulate sports gambling.

The American Gaming Association says prediction markets should either get out of the sports betting business or follow the same regulations and rules that apply to sportsbooks such as DraftKings and FanDuel.

“They don’t want to pay the taxes, they don’t want to undergo the compliance and provide all of the consumer protections that are required by states of operators who operate legal sports betting,” said Tres York, the vice president of government relations for the association.

The organization estimates states have lost out on more than $570 million in sports gambling tax revenues since prediction markets began offering sports events contracts.

Many state leaders and experts are already concerned about the societal effects from the meteoric rise of sports gambling, which has transformed collegiate and professional sports, and the potential for manipulation by players.

“If you already have what I would call an epidemic of sports betting addiction in this country when you have regulated sports betting, imagine what it’s going to be like when you have essentially unregulated sports betting,” said Benjamin Schiffrin, director of securities policy at Better Markets, a nonprofit watchdog group advocating for consumer and investor financial protections.

The wide range of available bets also is raising alarms over election integrity and insider trading. In addition to individual elections, prediction markets have allowed wagers on the ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and the timing of the U.S. strike on Iran. Last week, hundreds of thousands of dollars were bet the day before the Iranian strikes, and more than 100 accounts cashed in $10,000 or more from successful predictions, according to a New York Times analysis.

“It’s a huge change to all of a sudden allow betting on elections, and it really threatens the underpinnings of our democracy,” Schiffrin said. “It just seems like there’s tremendous potential for wrongdoing.”

On its website, Kalshi says it operates under a “strict regulatory framework” with a suite of market integrity, surveillance, financial safeguards, and anti-manipulation protections.

Federal-state conflict 

Citing what it called “an onslaught” of state litigation, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission last month filed a court brief underscoring its authority to regulate prediction markets.

“To those who seek to challenge our authority in this space, let me be clear: We will see you in court,” Commissioner Mike Selig said in a video posted on social media. Selig is the only member of the presidentially appointed commission, which currently has four vacancies.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, immediately vowed to oppose the federal agency and the prediction platforms in court. Gambling has been banned under the Utah Constitution since the state’s founding, and Cox posted on social media that prediction markets are “destroying the lives of families.”

Kalshi swiftly sued the governor and the state in federal court in anticipation of enforcement efforts and pending legislation in Salt Lake City. The company’s lawsuit cited the governor’s post and a column penned by Republican Attorney General Derek Brown explaining why he joined Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a Democrat, “in urging Congress to address offshore gambling operations that disregard state law and target young Americans.”

Prediction market exchange Kalshi sues Utah over proposed prop betting ban

Utah Republican state Rep. Joseph Elison sponsored the legislation cited in Kalshi’s lawsuit. The bill, which has passed both chambers, would expand the state’s definition of gambling to include proposition betting — bets on the performance of an individual player or team that don’t necessarily affect the outcome of a competition. While Elison acknowledged the courts will ultimately determine the issue, he said prediction markets are essentially offering proposition betting without authorization.

”We’re 50 independent sovereigns that gave centralized government to the federal government to do certain things,” he told Stateline. “But the rest, we want those things to be under our purview. And this is one of those.”

The legal landscape 

In early rulings on the matter, courts have issued a mix of opinions: States have found initial success in state courts while results have been more mixed in federal courts, said Daniel Wallach, a gaming and sports gambling attorney tracking the issue.

But federal law has long affirmed state authority to oversee gambling, he said.

Despite attempts to cast transactions as investments, Wallach says courts will look at the substance of bets, which he said are almost indistinguishable from those made in state-regulated betting markets.

“The argument that this is investing rather than gambling is essentially elevating form over substance,” he said. “Plain and simple, this is wagering on the outcome of a sporting event.”

Wallach said state efforts such as cease and desist orders are counterproductive, as they essentially invite federal lawsuits from prediction market firms. He said states are better off pursuing gambling enforcement efforts in state courts, where several have won preliminary injunctions halting operations of the platforms temporarily.

For now, he said the federal agency has applied almost no scrutiny of the platforms, noting that the president’s family has a financial interest in the industry.

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, has a business interest in two of the largest online prediction markets, and the president’s social media platform Truth Social announced it would start its own prediction market, according to The New York Times.

Journalist Dustin Gouker, who authors newsletters on gambling and prediction markets, noted that the CFTC rules that currently regulate prediction markets were built for financial products — not gambling. He said prediction markets have moved into the gaming market because “nobody said no.”

“It’s a bit of a mess,” he said. “If we’re going to have betting in 50 states for everyone 18 and over, shouldn’t we have thought about that a little bit more?”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

Amid a slew of proposed changes scaling the federal government’s role in broadening assistance in federal rental programs, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development plans to rescind a 2024 regulation requiring public housing agencies and certain federally subsidized landlords to give 30 days’ notice before filing for eviction based on unpaid rent. 

Under the proposed HUD changes, those 30 days would give way to older standards, which vary by housing program and state law, and which can be as little as a few days’ notice. 

The proposed HUD rule also would eliminate requirements that landlords include detailed information about rent charges or available assistance in eviction notices.

Many states and localities already require 30-day or longer notices before a landlord can proceed with an eviction for nonpayment of rent, though some are far shorter. California, for example, generally requires at least three–day “pay or quit” notices for nonpayment of rent, meaning tenants have three days to pay the rent or move out. 

The current HUD rule also requires that landlords provide tenants with a ledger showing how their balance was calculated and information about how to obtain a rent decrease if they have lost income. Tenants’ advocates argue the detail allows transparency over how much is owed and when. Without the rule’s protection, advocates say, HUD tenants in some parts of the country could be evicted for being as little as one dollar short or one day late on rent. 

Several tenants’ rights groups have already filed legal challenges, arguing that the rollback was issued without proper public notice and comment. If the rule remains in effect, housing providers and tenant advocates say its impact will depend largely on states’ eviction laws. 

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org.

Gov. Tony Evers signed a pair of bills into law Friday that make grooming a crime and require school districts to adopt policies on appropriate communications. 

“Keeping our kids safe, especially while they’re in our schools, must be a top priority for us, whether it’s addressing grooming, gun violence, bullying or other harmful behavior,” Evers said in a statement.

The bills were introduced last year after a report from the CapTimes that found there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023, though bill authors, including Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie), said they had worked on the legislation for longer.

“After nearly two years of working to strengthen protections for children in Wisconsin, I’m grateful to see these two important bills signed into law,” Nedweski said in a statement. “This is a major step forward in protecting kids, supporting victims and ensuring that those who prey on children are held accountable.”

AB 677, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 88, defines grooming as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of producing, distributing or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.” 

Some of the behaviors that could fall under the law include verbal comments, suggestions or conversations of a sexual nature directed toward a child, inappropriate physical contact or attempts to initiate such contact and communication via texts, emails, social media, or online platforms, meant to seduce, solicit, lure or entice a child.

Under the law, a person convicted of a grooming charge would be guilty of a Class G felony. The charge would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would need to register as a sex offender.

SB 673, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 89, requires public, private and independent charter schools to adopt appropriate communication policies for employees, volunteers and students. Policies will need to be in place by Sept. 1. 

The policy will need to include a range of consequences for policy violations, apply to communications during and outside of school hours, including standards for appropriate content and methods of communication. 

The Department of Public Instruction will need to develop and provide free training on professional boundary violations and identifying, preventing and reporting grooming. School boards will need to provide annual training to employees starting in the 2026-27 school year.

“We have an important obligation to make sure our kids can feel secure, supported, and cared for by educators and staff in our schools — adults they should be able to trust and depend on — while also providing more clarity about what interactions with students are inappropriate and unacceptable and enhancing punishments for adults who violate that sacred trust,” Evers said. 

Evers also signed SB 466, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 93, that expands the Missing Child Alert program to include alerts about 10- and 11-year-olds.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A St Croix County school district that has become the target of right-wing politicians and activists for allowing students to use restrooms corresponding to their gender identity is now being investigated by the Trump administration Department of Education over the practice.

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights announced in a press release Thursday it was investigating the New Richmond School District “based on reports that the District is allowing biological men to use female restrooms.” 

The head of a Wisconsin LGBTQ+ rights group Friday called the administration’s action an attempt to “bully” school children. 

“The law protects trans girls and their ability to use the girls’ bathroom,” said Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin. “A federal department’s press release does not, and cannot, change law. However, a federal administration can bully our kids, and that is exactly what this announcement of an investigation is.”

The New Richmond district superintendent, Troy Miller, was not available for comment early Friday afternoon. 

New Richmond policy attacked, defended

The Trump administration’s action follows its increased targeting of states that allow students to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity, including threatening to withhold federal funding. It also follows increasing attention on the New Richmond district’s policy from right-wing advocacy groups such as Moms for Liberty and Wisconsin Republican political campaigns.

A public discussion of the district’s policy arose at a Jan. 29 meeting of the district’s school board, the Hudson Star Observer reported, with community members speaking for and against allowing students to choose the restroom they use. Opponents of the policy included a school board candidate, the newspaper reported.

Videos posted from a meeting in February to the Facebook page NR Students Against Moms for Liberty show a handful of students speaking in favor of allowing students to use the restrooms they are comfortable with. 

“I’m a woman at New Richmond High School who uses the women’s bathroom, and I ask that you hear my perspective. As a woman, I’m not afraid to use the bathroom with someone who is transgender,” one student said. “While fear around potential violence in bathrooms is totally valid, potential worries about what can happen in the bathroom are misplaced. Trans people are not scary or pedophiles. They are our community members.”

In a presentation prepared for that Feb. 10 meeting, legal counsel for the school board defended the policy respecting gender identity. A 2017 federal appeals court ruling in the case Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified School District No. 1 Board of Education “defined ‘sex’ under Title IX to include gender identity,” according to the presentation slide — meaning that schools must allow students to use bathroom facilities consistent with their gender identity.

At a meeting in late February, Board President Bryan Schafer said district lawyers have told the board that the district is following current law and following case law, the Hudson Star Observer reported. School board members voted at that meeting to look into adding more school restrooms and rejected a call for an internal investigation.  

Republican politicians, candidates weigh in

A week after the issue first arose in January, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany posted on Facebook a demand that the district reverse its policy. Michael Alfonso, who is running in the 7th Congressional District race to succeed Tiffany, has posted on his campaign Facebook page at least five times in the last month about the policy, directing increased national attention to the district. State lawmakers from the area have also weighed in. 

Alfonso is the son-in-law of Transportation Sec. Sean Duffy, who previously represented the 7th District, and recently was endorsed by President Donald Trump. 

“I would expect this from Madison or Milwaukee or some crazy liberal place but not northern Wisconsin,” Alfonso said in a video he filmed with his wife, Evita Duffy-Alfonso, on the way to a school board meeting. “This is why it’s so important for conservatives to remember that elections have consequences. There’s no reason that we should have liberal lunatics on our school boards. We need to make sure we’re getting out to vote in April and August and November because we have a very good chance to take our state back.”

The Department of Education press release Thursday said the agency’s Civil Rights Office “will determine whether the District violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) by allowing students to access intimate facilities based on ‘gender identity,’ not biological sex.” The press release states that an unidentified student in the district has “fear, embarrassment, and anxiety” and no longer uses the restrooms while in school due to the district policy.

Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey said in a statement that the department will investigate the complaint fully and address any violation promptly.

“Young women should never be forced to share intimate spaces with boys and men because school leaders care more about radical gender ideology than protecting girls’ safety, dignity, and privacy,” Richey said. “School board members who ignore these allegations are failing the families they serve.” 

Defending students’ choices, gender identity

Swetz of Fair Wisconsin said in a statement to the Examiner Friday that the Whitaker v. Kenosha decision is “very clear when it comes to accessing bathrooms in schools” in its finding that Title IX protects gender identity. 

“Wisconsinites and Americans are tired of this relentless bullying campaign against kids, families, educators, and schools,” Swetz said. These attacks are not only wrong, but also a significant misdirection of resources and focus.”

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove), who is the mother of a transgender adult child and a co-chair of the state Legislature’s Transgender Parent and Nonbinary Advocacy Caucus, issued a statement Friday defending respect for students’ gender identity.

“Every student deserves to feel safe, respected, and supported at school. Schools have a responsibility to create safe and welcoming environments where all students can learn without fear of discrimination,” Ratcliff said. “Policies that recognize and respect students’ gender identity are consistent with the spirit of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the values of fairness and inclusion we strive to uphold in Wisconsin schools.”

Ratcliff said the local school board’s decision should be respected. 

“Local school boards are best positioned to make such decisions that reflect the needs of their schools while ensuring every child is treated with dignity and respect,” Ratcliff said. 

Nevertheless, there have been ongoing legal challenges over school bathroom policies in Wisconsin, and some school districts in Wisconsin have adopted policies that restrict transgender students. 

Just before Trump took office in January 2025, a federal judge overturned a Biden administration order extending Title IX to include protections for gender identity. On his first day in office, Trump reversed other Biden administration orders protecting gender identity and LGBTQ+ rights. Since then, the Trump administration has systematically erased references on federal websites to gender identity, labeling the concept as “gender ideology” and substituting “sex” in its place. 

In addition to Moms For Liberty, the right-wing Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) has also called attention to the New Richmond district. WILL recently put out model policies that would separate bathrooms based on sex.

“This is a welcome decision by the Trump Administration to enforce Title IX and protect girls’ privacy,” WILL Deputy Counsel Cory Brewer said in a statement. “For too long, school districts in Wisconsin have allowed policies that force young girls to share private spaces with biological males.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — The United States lost 92,000 jobs in February, edging unemployment up slightly according to the latest employment figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The report showed, for the third time in the last five months, losses among nonfarm jobs and highlighted a continued “trend down” in the information sector and federal government employment. The federal workforce is down by 11% from its peak in October 2024, according to the bureau. The report also noted a decrease in health care jobs, “reflecting strike activity.” 

Unemployment ticked up to 4.4% from 4.3% in January, and rates remained higher for women, teenagers and non-white workers.

Administration officials blamed the job losses on winter weather on the East Coast and labor strife among West Coast health care workers.

But Democrats faulted President Donald Trump’s policies, including military action in Iran and reimposing tariffs after the U.S. Supreme Court said many of Trump’s taxes on foreign goods were illegal.

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday’s report is a “blaring alarm that Donald Trump’s economy is deteriorating rapidly,” and speculated the nearly week-old war in Iran will only make things worse.

“Now we’ve seen job losses in two of the last three months and an economy teetering on the edge of recession,” Schumer said in a Friday morning statement. “Tariffs are increasing costs, gas prices are spiking, and jobs are evaporating: The Trump Republican agenda is failing the American people and without immediately changing course the economy may go over the cliff.”

The unexpected report, combined with uncertainty over the war with Iran, rattled U.S. markets Friday morning, sparking a drop across all indexes, according to a daily update from the New York Stock Exchange’s Eric Criscuolo. 

Economists had estimated a February jobs gain for the U.S. to land around 59,000, according to Criscuolo. Additionally, the report is in stark contrast to January’s figures, which showed the economy gained 130,000 jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Trump officials project optimism

But the administration is brushing off negative headlines, and attributing the weak report to ice and snow storms in February and a month-long strike by Kaiser Permanente health care workers. 

“While record-breaking strikes and bad winter weather dragged down February nonfarm employment, the unemployment rate held steady, and there are several positive signs for our economy that continue to show American workers are recovering from the mess left behind by Biden,” Labor Secretary Lorie Chavez DeReemer said in a statement.

She added that the administration’s massive tax and spending cuts law enacted in July is positive for the economy.

Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, told CNBC Friday, “I think what we need to start doing with these jobs numbers, at least on the payroll side, is take the average over a few months.”

“And if you take the average over a few months, we had a surprisingly positive one last month and a surprisingly negative one this one. But on average, it’s about what we expect to be seeing,” he said, adding that the sharp fall in immigration is leading to “break-even employment” in the U.S.

No growth

Economists cautioned the jobs report builds on a negative economic outlook for the country.

“While it’s never sensible to read too much into one month of data, this morning’s report showing a decline in nonfarm payrolls and an increase in the unemployment rate comes at a difficult moment, with inflation still above target and an oil price shock threatening to raise inflation further,” said Daniel Hornung, a fellow at Stanford Institute of Economic Policy Research.

“The report complicates the Fed’s efforts to keep both unemployment and inflation low, and it makes it difficult for the Administration to argue heading into the midterms that their policies are leading to the kind of growth or improvement in living standards that they’ve long promised,” Hornung, the deputy director of the National Economic Council under President Joe Biden, said.

David Kelly, JPMorgan Asset Management’s chief global strategist, described the report as “weak.”

“We’re not seeing any job growth at all, really, in this economy,” Kelly told CNBC Friday morning. “But because immigration has done such a 180 here, and we’ve got a huge drop in the labor force — and that’s keeping the unemployment rate from spiking here — but it’s a very, very slow economy.”

Flocks of poultry in Dane, Jefferson and Walworth counties have been infected with highly pathogenic avian influenza, according to the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. 

The virus has been circulating across North America since 2021, infecting both wild and domesticated birds. The birds on the affected properties will be killed to prevent the further spread of disease, and DATCP has established a 10 kilometer control area around the infected premises in which the movement of poultry is restricted. 

The infected birds in Dane County were in a backyard poultry flock while in Jefferson and Walworth counties the affected birds were in commercial flocks, according to DATCP. 

Officials and farmers in Wisconsin have been managing avian flu infections since spring 2022 when outbreaks across the state shut down poultry shows, exhibits and swap meets. Last year, a dairy herd was quarantined after an infection was discovered. 

DATCP said it is monitoring farm workers at the affected facilities for signs of infection and recommends biosecurity measures to protect flocks and herds near where the current infections were found.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE