State Superintendent Jill Underly won a second term in office Tuesday evening. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Incumbent Jill Underly, who had the backing of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, won a second term as state superintendent on Tuesday, defeating education consultant and Republican-backed candidate Brittany Kinser. 

“I’m just deeply honored and humbled for the trust you have placed in me to continue as state superintendent for public instruction,” Underly told supporters at her Election Night party. “This victory belongs to all of us who believe in the power of public education, but for every educator, family, and most importantly, kids across our state.”

The Associated Press called the race at 10:05 p.m. with Underly leading by more than 5 points and with more than 80% of the votes counted.

Kinser’s campaign released a statement shortly before 10:30 p.m. in which she acknowledged the result was “not the outcome I had hoped for.”

“Our kids’ future shouldn’t rest on the politicization of our education system, but on the belief that our kids deserve so much better than they currently receive,” she said.

The state superintendent, a technically nonpartisan position, is responsible for providing guidance for the state’s 421 public school districts, leading the Department of Public Instruction (DPI)  — an agency responsible for administering state and federal funds, licensing teachers and developing educational curriculum and state assessments — and also holds a position on the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents. 

Underly received the endorsement from Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), the state’s largest teachers’ union, and AFT-Wisconsin. The Democratic Party of Wisconsin contributed over $850,000 to her campaign. While Underly had the backing of the state Democratic party, Democrat Gov. Tony Evers refused to endorse in the race. 

WEAC said in a statement that the “victory inspires the public school educators who work with students every day to be even more visible and more involved in education policy deliberations to solve staffing shortages and the state funding crisis that forces communities to referendum every year to keep the schoolhouse doors open” and that the result is a rejection of “the school voucher lobby in favor of educators, so all students – no exceptions – have the opportunity to learn without limits and unlock their dreams.”

Kinser had never worked in a traditional Wisconsin public school and received criticism during the campaign for never holding a Wisconsin teachers’ license and allowing her administrator’s license to lapse, though she eventually updated it. She had also worked mostly in charter school circles in recent years, including as principal and executive director of Rocketship schools in Milwaukee and as a leader of the City Forward Collective, a Milwaukee-based advocacy group that has lobbied in favor of increasing funding for the state’s voucher program.

With her background, Kinser, who describes herself as a moderate, found support from Republicans and school choice advocates, receiving over $1.6 million in contributions from the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

While decisive, Underly’s victory was by a narrower margin than her first election in 2021, while Kinser did better than past DPI candidates who have run with the backing of the state’s powerful school choice lobby.

Underly said her takeaway from the closeness of the race is that “we need to just communicate better.” 

Throughout the campaign, Underly faced criticism from her opponent, Republicans and others for her recent approval of changes to state testing standards and poor communication with school districts. 

“There’s a lot that goes on at the agency that I think in years past, maybe state superintendents took for granted, but I think it’s important that we are communicating more,” Underly told the Wisconsin Examiner.

Underly said that the agency is working on rebuilding its relationship with legislators. 

“The Legislature and the relationship with the state superintendent hasn’t always been that great…,” Underly said. “We meet with them frequently. We meet with the governor’s office quite frequently also. I’m just going to go back to the fact that I hope that we all want the same things, regardless of where we are on the political spectrum.” 

Underly said that she also respected Evers’ decision not to endorse in the race and that her working relationship with his office is “fine.”

Throughout her campaign, Underly defended her decisions during her first term and said that she has served as “the No. 1 advocate for public education” and will continue to do so. Prior to being elected to the top DPI position, Underly worked as assistant director in DPI. She also previously served as a principal and superintendent of the Pecatonica Area School District and taught in public schools in Indiana.

Underly leaned on her advocacy for public schools while making the argument for her reelection. She introduced a budget request for the state that would have invested over $4 billion in public education, saying that it’s what schools deserved. Republicans and Evers both said it was too large. 

Democratic lawmakers said Underly’s victory is a sign of Wisconsinites’ support of public schools and will hopefully bode well for the future of securing improved funding for public education. 

Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) told the Wisconsin Examiner that Underly’s victory was a vindication of her first term in office.

“She’s had to make do with some really tough choices, and she’s done a great job for kids and for teachers,” Hesselbein said.

“We know public schools unite communities, and when we have strong public schools, we have strong communities,” Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) said. “We’ve got a state superintendent who’s going to be looking out for every learner in our state, and so I’m also looking forward to the transparency and accountability that will come with ensuring that public dollars are for public schools.” 

Hong said that the lack of communication between Republican lawmakers and Underly is the fault of  lawmakers who are not interested in meeting the needs of students. She said that Underly’s win and “Republicans needing to answer to their communities who care about their public schools again” could encourage them to work across the aisle. She noted that Wisconsinites have repeatedly raised their property taxes to ensure schools have funding in lieu of reliable state investments. 

Hong also said that she thought Underly’s victory showcased that “public dollars going to private schools was a deep concern for a lot of Wisconsinites.” During her campaign, Underly criticized  her opponent for her lobbying for and support for Wisconsin’s school choice programs. She also expressed her opposition to the growth of those programs, saying it is not sustainable for the state to fund two school systems and that she would oppose dedicating more money to private school vouchers.

Underly said it’s clear that her opponent “cares about kids and she cares about kids learning.” and that something she would take away from the race is that “we all want the same things. Ultimately, we want kids to be successful.”

(Photo by Drew Angerer | Getty Images)

Wisconsin voters on Tuesday approved a constitutional amendment to enshrine the state’s already existing voter ID law into the state Constitution. 

The amendment was approved by 25 points. The Associated Press called the election less than 40 minutes after the polls closed. 

The Republican-authored referendum does not change the law that was already on the books in the state which requires that voters show an approved ID to register to vote and receive a ballot. Republican legislators said the amendment was necessary to protect the statute from being overturned by the state Supreme Court. In recent years, Republicans in the Legislature have increasingly turned to the constitutional amendment process to shape state law without needing the signature of Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. 

Democrats had accused Republicans of including the referendum on the ballot in this election as an effort to boost conservative turnout in the state Supreme Court election. 

Wisconsin’s voter ID law has been on the books for more than a decade. During debate over the law, Republican lawmakers discussed its potential to help the party win elections by suppressing the vote of minority and college-aged people who tend to vote for Democrats. 

Democrats and voting rights groups said the law amounted to a “poll tax.” A 2017 study found that the law kept 17,000 people from the polls in the 2016 election. 

Since its passage, a number of court decisions have adjusted the law, leading the state to ease restrictions and costs for obtaining a photo ID — particularly for people who can’t afford a high cost or don’t have proper documents such as a birth certificate. 

Republicans in Wisconsin and across the country have increasingly focused on photo ID requirements for voting since conspiracy theories about election administration emerged following President Donald Trump’s false claims that he was robbed of victory because of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential campaign.

While the law doesn’t change, the approved language of the amendment gives the Legislature the authority to determine what types of ID qualify as valid for voting purposes. Currently, approved IDs include Wisconsin driver’s licenses and state IDs, U.S. passports, military IDs and certain student IDs.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Dane County Judge Susan Crawford thanks supporters after winning the race Tuesday for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Dane County Judge Susan Crawford was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court Tuesday, solidifying liberal control of the body until 2028 and marking a sharp rebuke by the state’s voters of the policies of President Donald Trump and the financial might of his most prominent adviser, Elon Musk. 

Crawford rode massive turnout in Dane and Milwaukee counties and outperformed Kamala Harris’ effort last year in a number of other parts of the state to defeat her opponent, Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel by about 11 points.

The former chief legal counsel for Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle who represented liberal groups such as Planned Parenthood and the Madison teacher’s union as a private practice attorney said during the campaign that she would look out for the rights of all Wisconsinites on the Supreme Court while repeatedly criticizing Schimel for his eagerness to show his support for Trump, his record as attorney general and the outside assistance his campaign got from Musk. 

Crawford’s victory marks the third straight Supreme Court election for Wisconsin’s liberals and maintains the 4-3 liberal majority that has been in place since Justice Janet Protasiewicz was elected in 2023. Crawford will replace retiring Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. 

Since gaining control of the Court, the new liberal majority has ruled that the state’s previous legislative maps were unconstitutional, ending the partisan gerrymander that had locked in Republican control of the Legislature for more than a decade, and accepted cases that will decide the rights of Wisconsinites to have an abortion. The Court is also likely to consider a challenge to Wisconsin’s 2011 law stripping most union rights from public employees within the next year or two. 

“I’m here tonight because I’ve spent my life fighting to do what’s right,” Crawford said after the race was called for her. “That’s why I got into this race, to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all.”

Schimel said he got into the race because he was opposed to the “partisanship” of the liberal controlled Court but his effort to nationalize the race and show his support for Trump proved unsuccessful against a backlash to the second Trump term and voters’ distrust of Musk, who offered cash incentives for people who got out the vote for Schimel. 

Tuesday’s election was the first statewide race in the country since Trump won the presidency last fall. Trump narrowly won Wisconsin and in counties across the state, Schimel failed to match the president’s vote total. In La Crosse County, Crawford performed 11 points better than Harris did last year and Schimel didn’t even match Trump’s vote share in his home of Waukesha County. 

Schimel ran nearly even with former Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly, who lost to Protasiewicz in the 2023 race. Wisconsin’s conservatives have now lost the past three Supreme Court elections by double digits.

The 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court race set the record for the most expensive judicial campaign in U.S. history, topping the $100 million mark. While Crawford received support from liberal billionaires including George Soros and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Musk dwarfed all other contributors, dumping more than $20 million into the race.

Musk’s money helped blanket the state’s airwaves with attack ads against Crawford’s record as a judge, often criticizing sentences she gave to people convicted of sexual violence. A Musk-associated PAC also hired people to knock on thousands of doors in an effort to turn out Trump’s base of Wisconsin voters, who have often sat out non-presidential elections. America PAC, a political action committee associated with Musk, paid door knockers $25 an hour, offered voters cash if they filled out a petition against “activist judges” and gave two people $1 million checks at a rally on Sunday. 

“But I’ve got to tell you, as a little girl growing up in Chippewa Falls, I never could have imagined that I’d be taking on the richest man in the world  for justice in Wisconsin,” Crawford said. “And we won.”

In a concession speech delivered shortly before 9:30 p.m., Schimel told supporters they “didn’t leave anything on the field,” and when a few began to complain said “no, we’ve gotta accept this.”

“The numbers aren’t going to turn around. Too bad. We’re not going to pull this off,” he said. “So thank you guys. From the bottom of my heart. God bless you. God bless the state of Wisconsin. God bless America. You will rise again. We’ll get up to fight another day, it just wasn’t our day.”

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin, harnessing voters’ alarm at the actions Musk has been leading from his federal DOGE office to cut government programs and fire thousands of public employees, held People v. Musk town halls across the state where residents said they were worried about the effect those cuts would have on services they rely on like Medicaid, Social Security, veteran’s benefits and education funding. 

Gov. Tony Evers said that Wisconsin “felt the weight of America” in this election, which proved Wisconsinites “will not be bought.”

“This election was about the resilience of the Wisconsin and American values that define and unite us,” Evers said. “This election was about doing what’s best for our kids, protecting constitutional checks and balances, reaffirming our faith in the courts and the judiciary, and defending against attacks on the basic rights, freedoms, and institutions we hold dear. But above all, this election was as much about who Wisconsinites believe we can be as it was about the country we believe we must be.”

Democrats and Crawford accused Musk of trying to buy a seat on the state Supreme Court, partially to influence a lawsuit his company, Tesla, has filed challenging a Wisconsin law that prohibits car manufacturers from selling directly to consumers. Musk said he was focused on the race because the Court could decide the constitutionality of the state’s congressional maps, which currently favor Republicans and help the party hold a narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. 

At the victory party, Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chair Ben Wikler compared the effort against Musk and Trump to Gov. Robert “Fighting Bob” La Follette’s fight against the oligarchs of the early 20th century, adding that Republicans’ association with Musk will be an “anchor.”

“I think what Susan Crawford did by making clear that Elon Musk was the real opponent in this race, what voters did by responding to Elon Musk, it made clear that Elon Musk is politically toxic, and he is a massive anchor that will drag Republicans from the bottom of the ocean,” he said. “And that’s a message that I hope Republicans in Washington hear as fast as possible. Not only will they lose, but they will deserve to lose resoundingly and they will be swept out of power in a wave of outrage across the nation.”

On the campaign trail, Crawford sought to tie Schimel to Musk — she called her opponent “Elon Schimel” at the only debate between the two candidates — while portraying herself as the less partisan candidate. Throughout the nominally non-partisan race, both candidates lobbed accusations of extreme political views at the other. 

With Crawford’s victory and the retention of the Court’s liberal majority, the body is expected to rule on cases that ask if Wisconsin’s Constitution grants women the right to access an abortion, the legality of the Republican-authored law that restricts the collective bargaining rights of most public employees, how Wisconsin’s industries should be regulated for pollution and the legality of the state’s congressional maps. 

Heather Williams, a spokesperson for the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, said in a statement that Democrats were offering a better vision for the country than the one promised by Schimel, Trump and Musk. 

“Despite Republicans’ best efforts to buy this seat, Wisconsin voters showed up for their values and future,” Williams said. “While Trump dismantles programs that taxpayers have earned, support, and are counting on, voters across the country are turning to state Democrats who are delivering on promises to lower costs and expand opportunities.”

Children at The Playing Field, a Madison child care center that participates in the federal Head Start program. (Courtesy of The Playing Field)

Head Start child care providers in Wisconsin and five other Midwestern states were stunned Tuesday to learn that the federal agency’s Chicago regional office was closed and their administrators were placed on leave — throwing new uncertainty into the operation of the 60-year-old child care and early education program.

“The Regional Office is a critical link to maintaining program services and safety for children and families,” said Jenny Mauer, executive director of the Wisconsin Head Start Association, in a statement distributed to news organizations Tuesday afternoon.

The surprise shutdown of the federal agency’s Chicago office — and four others across the country — left Head Start program directors uncertain about where to turn, Mauer said.

“We have received calls throughout the day from panicked Head Start programs worried about impacts to approving their current grants, fiscal issues, and applications to make their programs more responsive to their local communities,” Mauer said.

The regional offices are part of the Office of Head Start in the Administration for Children and Families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

In an interview, Mauer said there had been no official word to Head Start providers about the Chicago office closing. Some program leaders learned of the closing from private contacts with people in the office. 

“We have not seen official information come out” to local Head Start directors, who operate on the federal grants that fund the program, Mayer said. “It’s just really alarming. For an agency that is about serving families, I don’t understand how this can be.”

The National Head Start Association issued a press release Tuesday expressing “deep concern” about the regional office closings. 

“In order to avoid disrupting services for children and families, we urge the administration to reconsider these actions until a plan has been created and shared widely,” the association stated.

Katie Hamm, the deputy assistant secretary for early childhood development at HHS during the Biden administration, posted on LinkedIn shortly before 12 noon Tuesday that she had learned of reduction-in-force (RIF) notices to employees in the Administration for Children and Families earlier in the day. 

RIF notices appear to have gone to all employees of the Office of Head Start and the Office of Child Care in five regional offices, Hamm wrote, in Boston, New York, San Francisco and Seattle in addition to Chicago. 

“Staff are on paid leave effective immediately and no longer have access to their files,” Hamm wrote. “There does not appear to be a transition plan so that Head Start grantees, States, and Tribes are assigned to a new office. For Head Start, it is unclear who will administer grants going forward.”

Hamm left HHS at the end of the Biden administration in January, according to her LinkedIn profile. 

Mauer said regional office employees “are our key partners and colleagues,” and their departure has left Head Start operators “incredibly saddened and deeply concerned.” 

Regional employees work with providers “to ensure the safety and quality of services and to meet the mission of providing care for the most vulnerable families in the country,” Mauer said. 

The regional offices provide grant oversight, distribute funds, monitor Head Start programs and advise centers on complying with regulations, including for child safety, she said. They also provide training and technical assistance for local Head Start programs.

“The Regional Office is a critical link to maintaining program services and safety for children and families,” Mauer said. “These cuts will have a direct impact on programs, children, and families.”

In addition to Wisconsin, the Chicago regional office oversees programs in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota. 

Head Start supervises about 284 grants across the six states in programs that  enroll about 115,000 children, according to Mauer. There are 39 Head Start providers in Wisconsin enrolling about 16,000 children and employing about 4,000 staff.

The federal government created Head Start in the mid-1960s to provide early education for children living in low-income households. Head Start operators report that the vast majority of the families they serve rely on the program to provide child care so they can hold jobs.

The regional office closings came two months after a sudden halt in Head Start funding. Head Start operators get a federal reimbursement after they incur expenses, and program directors have been accustomed to being able to submit their expenses and receive reimbursement payments through an online portal.

Over about two weeks in late January and early February, program leaders in Wisconsin and across the country reported that they were unable to log into the system or post their payment requests. The glitches persisted for some programs for several days, but were ultimately resolved by Feb. 10.

Mauer told the Wisconsin Examiner on Tuesday that so far, there have not been new payment delays. But there has also been no communication with Head Start operators about what happens now with the unexpected regional office closings, she said.

“No plan for who will provide support has been shared, and the still-existing regional offices are already understaffed,” Mauer said. “I’m very nervous to see what happens. With no transition plan this will be a disaster.”

In her statement, Mauer said the regional office closing was “another example of the Federal Administration’s continuing assault on Head Start” following the earlier funding freeze and stalled reimbursements.

She said closing regional offices was undermining the program’s ability to function.

“We call on Congress to immediately investigate this blatant effort to hamper Head Start’s ability to provide services,” Mauer stated, “and to hold the Administration accountable for their actions.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Members of SEIU and Voces de la Frontera arrive at the Capitol Tuesday | Wisconsin Examiner photo

Online rumors warning of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) patrols around polling places in Milwaukee and Madison appear to be unfounded. The reports circulated on social media claiming that there would be “more than 5,000 ICE agents patrolling the areas” in the two cities, as voters went to the polls to cast ballots in the April 1 election for candidates running for  Wisconsin Supreme Court, state superintendent, and referendum questions focusing on voter ID. 

Anxieties about ICE activities have been heightened under the Trump Administration. Recent weeks have seen videos showing plain-clothes, masked ICE agents detaining people on the street. Some of the detainees had been arrested after participating in activist activities, such as protests calling for an end to the war in Gaza. Fears of ICE raids have increased  in Milwaukee and Madison, as in other cities. 

Spokespersons for Milwaukee and Madison city government told Wisconsin Examiner that they have not heard any reports, complaints, or notifications about ICE agents at polling places. A spokesperson for the ICE office in Milwaukee said, “due to our operational tempo and the increased interest in our agency, we are not able to research and respond to rumors or specifics of routine daily operations for ICE.”

Meanwhile, turnout in Milwaukee has been so high that local news outlets are reporting that polling sites across the city have run out of ballots. The city’s Election’s Commission is arranging for fresh ballots to be sent to polling stations. In Tuesday’s election Republican-backed Supreme Court candidate and former Wisconsin attorney general Brad Schimel is facing off  against Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, who has the backing of state Democrats. In the  state superintendent’s race, incumbent Jill Underly is facing challenger Brittany y Kinser. Wisconsinites will also get to decide whether the state’s constitution should be amended to codify a voter ID requirement.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

People demonstrate outside the main campus of the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention on April 1, 2025 in Atlanta, Georgia. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. laid off thousands of employees across multiple agencies on April 1, as part of an overhaul announced in March. (Photo by Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)

A coalition of Democratic state officials sued the Trump administration Tuesday over plans to cut more than $11 billion in grants by the Department of Health and Human Services, on the same day thousands of HHS workers reportedly found they’d been swept up in a mass layoff.

In Washington, the Republican chairman and top Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee wrote HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asking him to appear before the panel and discuss his plans for the massive agency.

The federal suit, signed by 22 attorneys general and two Democratic governors, alleges Kennedy revoked, without warning, billions in grant funding appropriated by Congress during the COVID-19 pandemic, starting last week. That led to states scrambling to adjust plans for vaccination efforts, infectious disease prevention, mental health programs and more.

The sudden and chaotic rollout of the grant cuts foreshadowed a scene at HHS offices, including at big campuses in Maryland, on Tuesday morning. Termination notices to laid-off workers were reportedly emailed early Tuesday, but many workers did not see them before arriving at the office and finding out they’d lost their jobs when their key cards did not work.

Few specifics

Both the mass layoffs and the grant funding cuts challenged in the lawsuit stem from Kennedy’s March 27 announcement that the department would be “realigning,” by shuttering several offices and cutting 10,000 workers.

It was unclear Tuesday exactly what offices or employees were affected.

An HHS spokesperson responded to a request for comment by referring States Newsroom to Kennedy’s announcement, a press release and an accompanying fact sheet from March 27.

None provided a detailed breakdown but laid out plans to eliminate 3,500 full-time positions at the Food and Drug Administration, 2,400 employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1,200 staff at the National Institutes of Health and 300 workers at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The spokesperson did not respond to a follow-up inquiry requesting more details of the positions eliminated and other clarifications.

Efficiency doubted

In a written statement, Andrés Arguello, a policy fellow at Groundwork Collective, a think tank focused on economic equity, said the cuts would have “the exact opposite” effect of the administration’s stated goal of government efficiency.

“Gutting 10,000 public servants means higher costs, longer wait times, and fewer services for families already struggling with the rising cost of living,” Arguello, an HHS deputy secretary under former President Joe Biden, wrote. “Entire offices that support child care, energy assistance, and mental health treatment are being dismantled, leaving working families with fewer options and bigger bills. This isn’t streamlining—it’s abandonment, and the price will be paid by the sick, the vulnerable, and the poor.”

The lack of communication led to confusion among advocates and state and local health workers about the impacts of the staff cuts and cast doubt about the administration’s goals, speakers on a Tuesday press call said.

“There are so many more questions than answers right now,” Sharon Gilmartin, the executive director of Safe States Alliance, an anti-violence advocacy group, said. “They clearly are eliminating whole divisions and branches, which doesn’t speak to bureaucratic streamlining. It speaks to moving forward an agenda, which has not been elucidated for the public health community, it’s not been elucidated for the public.”

While specific consequences of the cuts were not yet known, Gilmartin and others said they would be felt at the state and local level.

“I think what we do know is that … when we’re cutting these positions at the federal level, we are cutting work in states and communities,” Gilmartin said.

Pain in the states

The lawsuit from Democratic officials is full of details about the impacts of the loss of federal funding on state programs.

The suit was brought in Rhode Island federal court by the attorneys general of Colorado, Rhode Island, California, Minnesota, Washington, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Wisconsin and Govs. Andy Beshear of Kentucky and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania.

HHS revoked “more than half a billion dollars” of grants from Pennsylvania, the Democratic officials said, affecting more than 150 state employees and contracted staff. The grants funded work “to respond to and mitigate the spread of infectious disease across the Commonwealth” and mental health and substance abuse programs.

In Nevada, “HHS abruptly terminated at least six grants” that had funded epidemiology and lab capacity, immunization access and mental health services, according to the suit.

“These terminations led Nevada to immediately terminate 48 state employees and to order contractors working under these awards to immediately cease all activity,” the complaint reads. “The loss of funding will have substantial impacts on public health in Nevada.”

The cutoff of $13 million in unobligated grants for local communities in Minnesota will mean the shuttering of clinics to provide vaccines for COVID-19, measles, mumps, rubella, influenza and other diseases, the suit said.

“One local public health agency reported that it held 21 childhood vaccination clinics and provided approximately 1,400 vaccinations to children in 2024,” a paragraph in the complaint about Minnesota local vaccine clinics said. “It also held 87 general vaccination clinics in 2024. As a result of the termination of the … funds, it has immediately ceased all vaccination clinics for 2025.”

The grant terminations also affected state plans already in the works.

Rhode Island had received an extension from HHS for a grant with $13 million unspent, but that money was revoked last week.

“Accordingly, the state public health department developed a workplan for its immunization program that included an April 2025 vaccination clinic for seniors, provided salaries for highly trained technicians to ensure that vaccine doses are stored and refrigerated correctly to prevent waste of vaccines purchased with other tax-payer dollars, planned computer system upgrades, and covered printing costs for communications about vaccine campaigns,” the suit said.

Senators want RFK Jr. on the Hill

Democrats on Capitol Hill issued a slew of statements opposing the cuts and warning of their effects.

Republicans were more deferential to the administration, asking for patience as details of the cuts are revealed.

But the letter from the top members of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee also brought both sides together to write Kennedy asking him to testify before the committee to make those explanations plain.

“The hearing will discuss your proposed reorganization of the Department of Health and Human Services,” the letter from Louisiana Republican Bill Cassidy and Vermont independent Bernie Sanders said.

In a written statement, Cassidy said the hearing would be an opportunity for Kennedy to inform the public about the reorganization.

“The news coverage on the HHS reorg is being set by anonymous sources and opponents are setting the perceptions,” Cassidy said in a written statement. “In the confirmation process, RFK committed to coming before the committee on a quarterly basis. This will be a good opportunity for him to set the record straight and speak to the goals, structure and benefits of the proposed reorganization.”

Federal health officials temporarily froze Title X family-planning funds for some Planned Parenthood clinics, which provide reproductive health services ranging from birth control to STI testing, across the nation this week. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) 

More than 1 million people seeking care such as contraception or testing for sexually transmitted diseases and cancer could be affected by the Trump administration withholding more than $27 million in Title X funding to Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide, according to estimates from the Guttmacher Institute.

Planned Parenthood state affiliates said they were notified that the funding they receive under the Title X family-planning program would be temporarily frozen, Politico first reported Monday night.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is responsible for managing and distributing Title X funds, told States Newsroom via email that it is reviewing all Title X grant recipients to make sure they comply with federal law and President Donald Trump’s executive orders. The department is concerned about “the compliance of several awardees” that together receive $27.5 million, according to an HHS spokesperson, who added, “HHS expects all recipients of federal funding to comply with federal law.”

Letters received by some affiliates detailed possible violations of federal civil rights laws and executive orders recently issued by Trump, including the administration’s efforts to prohibit diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and provide care regardless of a person’s immigration status.

“It is difficult to overstate how ridiculous it is that the administration is premising this funding freeze on a ‘DEI review,’” said Amy Friedrich-Karnik, Guttmacher’s director of federal policy, in a statement. “The entire point of the Title X program is to address disparities in access to contraception and other sexual and reproductive health care, including serving people with low incomes and those from other historically underserved communities. We need to see this for what it is — a direct attack on health equity.”

The Title X program was established in 1970 to provide reproductive health care for anyone who needs it. Federal law prohibits use of federal funds for abortion. Planned Parenthood clinics offer a broad range of non-abortion services.

No final decisions have been made regarding Title X funding for Planned Parenthood.

Affiliates in Alaska, California, Idaho, Hawaii, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah and others reported receiving the notification, representing thousands of people served at each clinic every year and millions in funds. Guttmacher’s data shows that 83% of people who visited Title X-funded clinics in 2023 had family incomes at or below 250% of the federal poverty level.

In Missouri and Oklahoma alone, Title X funding totals nearly $8.5 million, according to a news release from Missouri Family Health Council.

“Withholding these critical funds, even temporarily, threatens the essential sexual and reproductive health care communities depend on,” said Michelle Trupiano, executive director of the council.

Kat Mavengere, spokesperson for Maine Family Planning, said the agency also received notice of a freeze affecting $1.92 million in funds. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England is a sub-grantee of Maine Family Planning. Mavengere told States Newsroom the notice from HHS identified two items on their website “related to documents that detail our commitment to health equity” as reasons for the funding review.

Nicole Clegg, CEO of the Northern New England Planned Parenthood affiliate, said it receives about $900,000 in funds between Maine and New Hampshire from the family-planning organization.

If people can’t seek basic reproductive health services at no cost, including wellness exams, Clegg said they go without.

“We’ve seen that. When Planned Parenthoods leave communities, the data just speaks to increases in STI transmission, increases in unintended pregnancy … there are very real consequences to a community when we’re no longer there,” Clegg said. 

A recent poll conducted by Perry Undem showed 77% of respondents were opposed to the idea of the Trump administration cutting funding for services like birth control for people with low incomes.

During his first term, Trump also cut Title X funds to clinics that provided abortions or referred people for abortions in 2019, causing one-third of participating providers to leave the program, according to KFF. The Biden administration reversed the policy two years later.

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Wednesday in a case that will determine whether South Carolina government officials can remove Planned Parenthood clinics from the state’s Medicaid program because the organization provides abortions. If the court rules in South Carolina’s favor, other states that have tried to drain the organization’s funding for decades may follow suit.

Anti-abortion organizations celebrated the news of the Title X freeze for some Planned Parenthood clinics on Tuesday, including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which has been pushing efforts to “defund” Planned Parenthood in recent weeks in its fundraising emails. SBA was also involved in the drafting of the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for the next conservative presidency, Project 2025, and identified this action as a priority.

“This is a big step in the right direction,” President Marjorie Dannenfelser told States Newsroom in a statement. “We thank President Trump for this bold action and urge further steps to eliminate all taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune speaks to reporters following a weekly Republican policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 19, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans hope to approve a budget resolution this week that would clear the way for Congress to enact an extension of expiring tax law as well as sweeping cuts to federal spending later this year.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Tuesday the chamber will likely vote on the House-passed budget resolution later this week, after completing the vote-a-rama, where lawmakers vote on dozens of amendments, typically into the early morning hours.

“Republicans continue to have very productive conversations on how to achieve our agenda and working with President Trump on making sure that we are rebuilding our military, unleashing American energy dominance, making sure there isn’t a four-and-a-half trillion tax increase on the American people at the end of this year and obviously securing our border,” Thune said.

The House and Senate must vote to adopt the same budget resolution with matching instructions before they can use the complicated reconciliation process to move legislation through Congress on their own. The process allows the majority party to avoid the Senate filibuster that requires 60 votes for most legislation.

One ‘big, beautiful bill’

GOP lawmakers in the two chambers have been at odds for months over whether to move their core legislative goals in two bills or one package.

The Senate approved a budget resolution in mid-February that would have addressed the issue in two bills, before the House voted later that month to move forward with a different budget resolution.

The final, adopted budget resolution would set up Republicans to hold floor votes on one “big, beautiful bill,” as President Donald Trump has described it, later this year, if GOP leaders can keep nearly all of their members on board with the final product.

Republicans hold unified control of Congress and the White House, but voters didn’t give the party especially wide margins.

The GOP holds 218 seats in the 435-member House amid absences, though it could pick up two more members following special elections in Florida on Tuesday. Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate.

Any changes to tax law, energy policy or spending cuts will need support from nearly every GOP lawmaker in Congress, including centrists, who barely won election in swing districts, and far-right members, who are more likely to lose to a primary challenger claiming they’re not conservative enough.

The House-passed resolution includes reconciliation instructions that would allow Congress later this year to extend the 2017 tax cuts and a range of other GOP policy priorities that could not survive the 60-vote threshold.

Democratic amendments

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Tuesday that Democrats plan to put up amendments during budget debate that will showcase how the eventual bill could impact Americans.

“We have had many good discussions, including today. And you are going to find us focused relentlessly on what … Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the Republican Senate and House are doing to the American people,” Schumer said. “They’re taking away benefits that they desperately need.”

The Senate adopted just two amendments during its last vote-a-rama in February, one from Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan and one from Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee.

Democrats put forward numerous amendments but were unable to get any adopted. 

Melissa Beson photo courtesy LDF Police Department

On Tuesday, April 1, the Lac du Flambeau (LDF) Tribal Police Department said in a press release that it is continuing a search for Melissa Beson, 37, who has been missing since March 17 from the Lac du Flambeau Reservation in Vilas County.

Chief of Police T.J. Bill said there had been ground, air and water searches using drones and dogs, and images from over 300 reservation surveillance cameras have been reviewed for clues.

Beson, a member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, was last seen in the vicinity of Indian Village Road and Chequamegon Forest Trail in Lac du Flambeau.

She was last seen wearing red sweatpants, a black sleeveless shirt, and a gray sweatshirt.

Beson is a Native American female, 5’7”, with a medium build, brown hair and brown eyes. She has numerous tattoos, including on her neck, arms and leg.

Beson’s family reported her missing on March 23, six days after she was last seen.

“Finding her has been the number one priority of the LDF Police Department,” Bill in a statement. “We have conducted extensive ground searches on foot, even in severe weather conditions. Our officers have even come in on their days off to search for her. The dedicated members of Newbold Search and Rescue have once again come to our aid and have assisted us by searching with their specially trained canines.The dogs have shown interest and appeared to pick up Melissa’s scent in the area of her last known sighting.”

The LDF Police Department has used two high-quality drones to search a portion of the Bear River’s open water and plans to use an underwater drone to dive under ice.

“Although we are expending monumental efforts in searching the area in which Mellisa was last seen, we are in no way ignoring the possibility that she may be elsewhere,” said Bill. “Our officers are working non-stop, during every shift, to follow up on every lead and tip that we receive. We have combed through countless hours of surveillance footage, have interviewed dozens of people, and have reached out to law enforcement agencies in various areas of the State of Wisconsin, who have assisted us by contacting persons with possible information and even conducting searches of residences in their jurisdictions.”

Bill told the Examiner that the LDF Police Department has reviewed surveillance footage from over 300 cameras monitored around the reservation.

“So nothing’s been revealed on them, on the surveillance of the cameras, where she was last seen,” he said. Where Beson was last seen is “in more of a desolate area,” he added, “so we don’t have cameras that go out that far.”

He also noted that the ground searches using dogs had been hampered by recent weather, including snow.

“We would like to extend our sincere appreciation to LDF Emergency Management, LDF Tribal Roads Department, LDF Economic Support Department, Newbold Search and Rescue, the Vilas County Sheriff’s Department, and Vilas County Dispatch for their vital assistance to our investigative and search efforts,” he said.

He added, “We would also like to thank everyone in the community who has provided assistance to our Department and been supportive to Melisa’s family during this difficult time.”

Anyone with information is encouraged to call the Lac du Flambeau Tribal Police Department. at (715) 588-7717 or the Vilas County Sheriff’s Office at (715) 479-4441.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. Cory Booker started his speech on Monday at 7 p.m. and said he would continue as long as he is "physically able." (Photo by John Partipilo)

This story was updated at 7:16 CST

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker broke the record for longest floor speech in the history of the Senate on Tuesday, surpassing the 24-hour and 18-minute record set in 1957 when South Carolina’s Strom Thurmond attempted to prevent passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Booker, a Democrat who began his remarks Monday at 7 p.m. saying he wanted to highlight President Donald Trump’s “complete disregard for the rule of law,” by Tuesday at 7:20 p.m. was raspy-voiced, occasionally teary-eyed, and wearing what he called a “ripe” shirt.

It was New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, who interrupted Booker to say he had broken Thurmond’s record.

“Do you know how proud this caucus is of you? Do you know how proud America is of you?” Schumer said to applause and a standing ovation from his fellow Democrats and visitors.

Booker noted that Thurmond with his 1957 filibuster “tried to stop the rights upon which I stand.”

“I’m not here, though, because of his speech. I’m here despite his speech. I’m here because, as powerful as he was, the people were more powerful,” Booker said.

Wyoming Sen. Cynthia Lummis was one of just two Republican lawmakers in the chamber at the time. Lummis joined Democrats in celebrating Booker’s accomplishment by standing and clapping.

Guests and staff are normally barred from any displays of support or disapproval while sitting in the gallery, but Utah Sen. John Curtis, a Republican who was presiding over the chamber, allowed it.

Booker finally yielded the floor a few minutes after 8 p.m. Tuesday.

Booker’s record-breaking speech comes as the Democratic Party faces criticism from voters who say the party’s leaders are not doing enough to stand up to Trump’s actions, especially those that experts say fly in the face of legal precedent.

“These are not normal times in our nation, and they should not be treated as such in the United States Senate,” said Booker, 55. “The threats to the American people and American democracy are grave and urgent, and we all must do more to stand against them.”

Booker, a Democrat first elected to the Senate in 2013, on Monday said he’d continue speaking as long as he is “physically able.” After his speech surpassed 20 hours, he looked exhausted, joked about his shirt being “ripe,” and took occasional breaks by yielding the floor for questions from his Democratic colleagues, who praised the former college football player for his endurance.

His speech comes as the Democratic Party faces criticism from voters who say the party’s leaders are not doing enough to stand up to Trump’s actions, especially those that experts say fly in the face of legal precedent.

“This is not right or left. It is right or wrong. This is not a partisan moment. It is a moral moment,” Booker said early Tuesday afternoon. “Where do you stand?”

Booker’s speech is one of the longest ever given on the Senate floor. The record was previously held by Strom Thurmond, a South Carolina Republican who held the floor for 24 hours and 18 minutes in 1957 in protest of the Civil Rights Act.

The senator covered a breadth of topics: health care, Social Security, Medicaid, grocery prices, free speech, veterans, public education, world leaders, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, and national security concerns. He read letters and comments from constituents and he quoted speeches from the late Rep. John Lewis — invoking Lewis’ famous call to action to “get in good trouble” — and the late Sen. John McCain.

Booker, a former mayor of Newark, also assailed Trump’s policies on immigration. He said the Trump administration is doing “outrageous things like disappearing people off of American streets, violating fundamental principles of this document” — here he held up a copy of the U.S. Constitution — “invoking the Alien Enemies Act from the 1700s that was last used to put Japanese Americans into internment camps.”

“Do we see what’s happening?” Booker asked.

He spent about a half-hour reading the account of Jasmine Mooney, a Canadian citizen who was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for 12 days in March. He also noted that the Trump administration conceded Monday that it deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a 29-year-old Maryland man with protected legal status, to an El Salvador prison because of an “administrative error.”

“The government can’t walk up to a human being and grab them off the street and put them on a plane and send them to one of the most notorious prisons in the world, and just say, as one of our authorities did, ‘Oopsie,’” Booker said.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who asked about the impact of potential Medicaid cuts and tariffs about 15 hours into Booker’s speech, told Booker he has the support of the entire party.

“Your strength, your fortitude, your clarity has just been nothing short of amazing. All of America is paying attention to what you’re saying. All of America needs to know there’s so many problems — the disastrous actions of this administration in terms of how they’re helping only the billionaires and hurting average families — you have brought this forth with such clarity,” he said.

New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence T. McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

French wine on display in a District of Columbia shop on March 13, 2025, the day President Donald Trump threatened tariffs on European wine and French Champagne. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — American business owners and consumers are bracing as President Donald Trump teases, with few details, the announcement of sweeping tariffs expected Wednesday afternoon.

Trump has dubbed April 2 “Liberation Day,” his self-imposed deadline to fulfill his campaign promise of taxing imported products from around the globe.

The White House confirmed Tuesday that Trump had made a decision on tariff levels but would not provide further details.

“He’s with his trade and tariff team right now perfecting it to make sure this is a perfect deal for the American people and the American worker, and you will all find out in about 24 hours from now,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Tuesday afternoon at the daily briefing.

The new tariffs come as Trump already imposed 25% duties on imported steel and aluminum, as well as 25% levies on foreign cars and vehicle parts set to begin Thursday.

But the anticipation of more tariffs on numerous imported goods has stopped business owners in their tracks as uncertainty about costs and consumer reaction clouds day-to-day decisions.

Stockpiling coffee cups

Gabe Hagen, owner of Brick Road Coffee in Tempe, Arizona, said small business owners are feeling “whiplash.”

“Are we going to have a tariff? Are we not? It’s not easy for me to change my prices overnight. But at the same time, if all of the sudden I have my cost of goods going up, it’ll put me into a loss territory.”

Most disposable beverage cups are produced in China, so Hagen made the decision last year to purchase and store $26,000 worth of coffee cups in anticipation of tariffs.

He also had to pull back $50,000 in capital for development on a second shop location, he said.

“The main thing we’re asking for is stability,” said Hagen, who also sits on the Small Business for America’s Future advisory council.

Walt Rowen, owner and president of Susquehanna Glass Company in Columbia, Pennsylvania, said “there’s no clarity at this point at all.”

“Everybody is in a holding pattern. We’re stuck wondering what is going to happen,” Rowen said. “We can sort of know that we’re gonna have to increase prices if the tariffs come into effect. But what we don’t know is if we increase prices, how much does that affect demand?”

Rowen’s historic 1925 three-story production facility right in the middle of the southeastern Pennsylvania town employs anywhere from 35 to 65 workers, depending on the season.

Through a variety of decorating techniques, his employees engrave or imprint screened paint logos, names and other messages on wine glasses he sources from a manufacturer in Italy and mugs made in Vietnam.

Rowen’s production rooms buzz, especially in the months leading up to the holidays, when his employees laser engrave and hand paint personalized ornaments sourced from China for the Lenox Corporation.

“My Christmas ornament business is huge for us in the fourth quarter, and I would normally be planning to bring in 20 to 30 people to work in that category of business. But if those prices increase by 30, 40, 50%, I don’t know how many we’re going to sell this year. So I can’t even plan production. It’s frightening,” he said.

States to feel economic pain

Economists are warning the rollercoaster tariff policy coming from the Oval Office is undermining economic growth and trust in the U.S. as a stable trading partner.

Trump told reporters as recently as Sunday that he was planning to slap tariffs on “all countries.”

His administration’s mid-March levies on aluminum and steel imports sparked retaliation from the European Union and Canada, which beginning in mid-April will enforce taxes on hundreds of American products crossing their borders, including iconic Kentucky bourbon, Tennessee whiskey and Harley-Davidson motorcycles.

Unless Trump carves out exceptions on certain products, more states can expect to feel economic pain, said Mary Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

“For example, a state like Washington state is very export dependent, not just obviously aircraft, but also apples and a wide variety of other manufacturing and agricultural (products). That state will be really hard hit if there are retaliatory tariffs, both from Canada, which is a market, but also from Asia,” Lovely said.

Trump’s tariffs on products from Canada, China and Mexico could cost the typical American family at least an extra $1,200 annually in price increases, according to a report Lovely co-authored. The dollar amount increases when calculating for universal tariffs on all imported goods, and when accounting for retaliation from other countries.

European Union President Ursula von der Leyen already made clear in a speech Monday that the bloc wants to negotiate with Trump but will apply more levies on American products given no other choice.

“Europe has not started this confrontation. We do not necessarily want to retaliate, but we have a strong plan to retaliate if necessary,” she said.

Tariffs on Canada

On Capitol Hill, Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner of Virginia and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota introduced a resolution to block the president’s tariffs on Canada, which he triggered under his emergency powers.

Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Power Act to slap 25% tariffs on products out of Canada and Mexico marked the first time a president had ever done so.  

“We think that the economic chaos that’s being caused and markets being roiled and consumer confidence dropping, and some predicting recession, together with a bipartisan vote might convince the White House — ‘Hey, look, there’s a better way to treat American citizens and customers,’” Kaine told reporters outside the U.S. Capitol Tuesday.

Kaine said his message to Republicans is “stand up for your constituents and say no tax increase on them.”

The Senate is expected to vote on the legislation late Tuesday or Wednesday.

Bill Butcher, founder of Port City Brewing in Alexandria, Virginia, spoke alongside the senators Tuesday, expressing concern about the price of Canadian Pilsner malt that he’s used for 14 years.

“It’s a very specific strain of high quality barley that grows in the cold climate of Canada, and there’s not a suitable U.S. substitute that we can get at the same quality to make our beer,” he said. “If there’s a 25% tariff on this basic ingredient, it’s going to slow our business down.

“By the time it goes from us to our distributor to the retailer to the consumer, this $12.99 six-pack of beer is going to end up at $18.99. How many people are still going to want to buy a six-pack of great-tasting beer but at $18.99? People are going to start looking for a different substitute,” Butcher said.

White House defends tariffs

In an emailed statement Tuesday to States Newsroom, White House spokesperson Kush Desai said Trump used tariffs “to deliver historic job, wage, and economic growth with no inflation in his first term, and he’s set to restore American Greatness in his second term.”

“Fearmongering by the media and Democrats about President Trump’s America First economic agenda isn’t going to change the fact that industry leaders have already made trillions in investment commitments to make in America, and that countries ranging from Vietnam to India to the UK have already begun to offer up trade concessions that would help level the playing field for American industries and workers,” Desai said.

Peter Navarro, Trump’s senior counselor on trade, told “Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream” Trump’s new tariffs will raise $600 billion a year for the U.S., plus another $100 billion from the 25% duty on foreign cars that will launch this week.

The government would gain that revenue from U.S. businesses who will need to pay the duty rates to get their purchased goods through the U.S. border.

Erica York with the Tax Foundation, a center-right think tank that advocates for lower taxes, said Tuesday that number is “very, very wrong” because Navarro is basing the math on the current level of imports.

“If we put a 20% tax on imports, people are not going to buy as many imports, so that reduces how much revenue you get,” York said. “Also, mechanically, if firms are making all of these tariff payments, that reduces their revenue. They don’t have as much to pay workers (and) to return to shareholders.”

U.S. stocks showed their biggest losses since 2022, according to Monday’s report on the first quarter of 2025.

Both Moody’s Analytics and Goldman Sachs warned on Monday that they’ve raised their forecasts for an economic recession to 35%.

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center  or CECOT, on March 26, 2025, in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The White House Tuesday defended the deportation of a national from El Salvador to a notorious mega-prison in that country, despite Trump administration officials admitting in court filings that the removal was a mistake.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia of Beltsville, Maryland, was ordered in 2019 to be removed from the United States by an immigration judge, but was granted protection from removal because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he were returned, according to court documents.

Yet on March 15 he was placed on one of three deportation flights to El Salvador. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Justice admitted in separate court filings that his deportation to the brutal prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, was an “administrative error.”

“This was an oversight, and the removal was carried out in good faith based on the existence of a final order of removal and Abrego-Garcia’s purported membership in MS-13,” ICE Acting Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations Robert L. Cerna wrote in a Monday court filing.

Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg, the attorney for Abrego Garcia, is requesting a preliminary injunction from the U.S. District Court of Maryland, which would require the Trump administration to make a request to the government of El Salvador for Abrego Garcia to be returned to U.S. custody.

The lawyer also wants a halt to U.S. payments to the government of El Salvador for detaining his client at the “notorious CECOT torture prison.”

A hearing is set for 1 p.m. Eastern Friday before U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. She was appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2016.

Press secretary defends decision

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt Tuesday said that Abrego Garcia was a leader of the MS-13 gang, despite his deportation being “a clerical error.”

“The administration maintains the position that this individual who was deported to El Salvador and will not be returning to our country was a member of the brutal and vicious MS-13 gang,” she said.

She said the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has evidence of his gang activity that she has seen and she also alleged that Abrego Garcia was involved in human trafficking.

Sandoval-Moshenberg, the attorney for Abrego Garcia, has denied his involvement in any gangs, noting he has no criminal charges or convictions in the United States, El Salvador or any other country.

“Abrego Garcia is not a member of or has no affiliation with Tren de Aragua, MS-13, or any other criminal or street gang. Although he has been accused of general ‘gang affiliation,’ the U.S. government has never produced an iota of evidence to support this unfounded accusation,” according to court filings.

Leavitt also dismissed the 2019 order from an immigration judge granting Abrego Garcia protections from removal.

Federal law bars the removal of an individual if they will face persecution, known as a “withholding of removal.” Because of this condition, Abrego Garcia was required to check in with ICE each year, which he has complied with since 2019, according to court filings.

“Who does that judge work for? It was an immigration judge who works for the Department of Justice at the direction of the attorney general of the United States, whose name is Pam Bondi, who has committed to eradicating MS-13 from our nation’s interior,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt said that 17 more men were deported to CECOT Monday. The U.S. is paying El Salvador’s government $6 million to detain all those deported there.

Identified from news story

Abrego Garcia, who is married to a U.S. citizen with whom he has a child, was detained by ICE on March 12 while driving with his 5-year-old son near Baltimore, Maryland. He was informed by ICE officials that his “status had changed,” according to court filings.

Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, “was called and instructed to appear at their location within ten minutes to get her five-year old son, A.A.V.; otherwise, the ICE officers threatened that the child would be handed over to Child Protective Services.”

Vasquez Sura tried to call the ICE facility that her husband was transferred to and inform officials that he could not be sent back to El Salvador.

“Her attempts to protest by saying that he had won protection from being removed to El Salvador fell on deaf ears,” according to court filings.

Within three days, he would become one of the 261 men on one of three deportation flights to CECOT in El Salvador, despite a temporary restraining order in place from a district court judge from the District of Columbia that applied generally to all the deportations.

Vasquez Sura was able to identify him from a news article when a photo showed men sent to the prison with their heads shaved and arms over their necks. She recognized her husband’s scar on his head and his tattoo.

DOJ arguments

Department of Justice attorneys, on behalf of the Trump administration, argued that the district court in Maryland lacks jurisdiction because Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody and his lawyers have not shown it is likely he could be returned.

“There is no showing that any payment made to El Salvador is yet to occur; no showing that El Salvador is likely to release CECOT detainees but for any such payment; no showing that El Salvador is even inclined to consider a request to release a detainee at the United States’ request,” according to the DOJ filing.

The Department of Justice also argues that his attorney has “not clearly shown a likelihood that Abrego Garcia will be tortured or killed in CECOT.”

“While there may be allegations of abuses in other Salvadoran prisons—very few in relation to the large number of detainees—there is no clear showing that Abrego Garcia himself is likely to be tortured or killed in CECOT,” according to DOJ.

The Department of Justice said the district court should defer to the Trump administration’s determination “that Abrego Garcia will not likely be tortured or killed in El Salvador.”

“Although the government erred in removing Abrego Garcia specifically to El Salvador, the government would not have removed any alien to El Salvador for detention in CECOT if it believed that doing so would violate the United States’ obligations under the Convention (Against Torture),” according to DOJ.

Colorado Democratic Rep. Brittany Pettersen speaks on the U.S. House floor on Tuesday, April 1, 2025, while holding her newborn. (Screenshot from U.S. House Clerk livestream.)

This story was updated at 3:02 p.m. EDT.

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republican leaders on Tuesday were unable to use a procedural maneuver to block a Florida Republican and a Colorado Democrat from bringing a resolution to the floor that would allow expecting mothers and new parents to vote by proxy.

GOP leaders tried to block their discharge petition from moving forward by putting language in a rule that would have set up House floor debate on separate pieces of legislation.

That provision and the rule were blocked following a 206-222 vote, with nine Republicans voting to buck party leaders. GOP leaders opted to cancel votes for the rest of the week afterward.

“People have emotional reasons for doing what they’re doing,” Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters after the failed vote. “But we’re going to keep governing. This is a small, razor-thin majority and we have to build consensus on everything. I wish they had not taken this course, but we’re not shaken by this.”

The discharge petition from Florida GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and Colorado Democratic Rep. Brittany Pettersen received signatures from 218 lawmakers, indicating it has the support needed to change the House’s rules when a vote is held.

Florida Rep. Byron Donalds, Georgia Rep. Richard McCormick, New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew, New York Rep. Michael Lawler, Ohio Reps. Michael Rulli and David Joyce, Pennsylvania Rep. Daniel Meuser, Tennessee Reps. Tim Burchett and Andy Ogles and Texas Reps. Dan Crenshaw and Wesley Hunt were the Republicans who signed the discharge petition.

A newborn on the House floor

Pettersen, holding her newborn in her arms, urged House lawmakers to ensure that women who cannot travel to the Capitol due to their pregnancies and new parents can still represent their constituents.

“When I was pregnant, I couldn’t fly towards the end of my due date because it was unsafe for Sam, and you’re unable to board a plane,” Pettersen said during floor debate. “I was unable to actually have my vote represented here and my constituents represented.”

“After giving birth I was faced with an impossible decision: Sam was four weeks old and for all of the parents here we know that when we have newborns it’s when they’re the most vulnerable in their life, it’s when they need 24-7 care, when taking them even to a grocery store is scary because you’re worried about exposure to germs and them getting sick — let alone taking them to an airport, on a plane and coming across the country to make sure you’re able to vote and represent your constituents.”

Pettersen said she was “terrified that no matter what choice” she made about whether to vote in-person, she would have “deep regrets.”

“So Sam and I made the trip out and this is our third time coming to the floor for a vote,” she said. 

Pettersen said it was “unfathomable that in 2025” Congress had not modernized to have basic parental leave and said the institution has “a long ways to go to make this place accessible for young families like mine.”

Luna said she had spent years trying to convince Republican leaders to allow new parents to vote by proxy. But after exhausting all of her options, worked with her colleagues to gather signatures for a discharge petition.

“Now, leadership, because of the fact they don’t like that I was successful at this, is trying to change the rules,” Luna said, calling GOP leaders’ choice “fundamentally dangerous.”

‘A new laptop class in America’

Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern, ranking member on the Rules Committee, said Republican leadership was “trying to overturn the Democratic process of majority rule.”

“When 218 of us sign a petition, the House rules say it can be brought up for a vote,” McGovern said. “But a backdoor provision slipped into this rule is being used to shut down that process — an unprecedented step. Literally, it has never been done before in the history of the House.”

House Rules Chairwoman Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., opposed moving forward with the discharge petition and a floor vote on proxy voting.

“I know there’s a new laptop class in America that seems to operate increasingly in a virtual space, but that’s simply not a fact of life for most American workers and I believe Congress should live by that standard,” Foxx said.

Members of Congress, including dozens of Republicans, voted by proxy during the coronavirus pandemic.

Speaker Johnson has also allowed discharge petitions to move forward before. Just last year Congress cleared a bill making changes to Social Security benefits for some Americans after members from both political parties signed a discharge petition.

Tuesday’s measure, titled Proxy Voting for New Parents Resolution, would allow House members who just gave birth, or had a spouse give birth, to designate another lawmaker to vote on their behalf for 12 weeks.

The resolution would also allow House lawmakers to vote by proxy before giving birth if their health care providers advised the “pregnancy presents a serious medical condition or that she is unable to travel safely.” 

The legislation would not affect the Senate. Generally, each chamber of Congress sets its own rules and does not try to tell the other chamber how to operate.

Luna quits Freedom Caucus

Luna left the far-right Freedom Caucus on Monday over the group’s efforts to block her discharge petition from moving forward, writing in a two-page letter that “the mutual respect that has guided our caucus” for years was “shattered last week.”

“This was a modest, family-centered proposal,” Luna wrote. “Yet, a small group among us threatened the Speaker, vowing to halt floor proceedings indefinitely — regardless of the legislation at stake, including President Trump’s agenda — unless he altered the rules to block my discharge petition.”

Luna rebuked several of the Freedom Caucus members, without naming names. She said their choice to try to block the discharge petition from moving forward by embedding language in a rule that set up debate on a separate bill was duplicitous.

“This tactic was not just a betrayal of trust; it was a descent into the very behavior we have long condemned — a practice that we, as a group, have repeatedly criticized leadership for allowing,” Luna wrote. “To those involved, I ask: Why? Why abandon the principles we’ve championed and resort to such conduct?

“The irony in all of this is that I have never voted by proxy, yet one of our own on the Rules Committee that is so adamantly opposed has done so over 30 times.”

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem delivers remarks to staff at DHS headquarters in Washington on Jan. 28, 2025.  (Photo by Manuel Balce Ceneta-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in California on Monday blocked the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from terminating the temporary protected status of more than 350,000 Venezuelans next week.

The group was set to lose deportation protections by April 7 after DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, in her first week in office, vacated an extension of  protections put in place by the Biden administration.

The order does not apply to a separate group of 250,000 Venezuelans who are set to lose their status in September.

U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California said the groups that brought the suit against the Trump administration are likely to succeed in their claims. He noted that Noem’s decision to vacate the temporary protected status for Venezuelans was not only arbitrary and capricious, but would harm the TPS holders, cost the U.S. billions in economic loss and harm public health and safety in U.S. communities.

DHS did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

Program for immigrants in danger

TPS allows nationals from countries deemed too dangerous to return to remain in the U.S. Those with the status have deportation protections and are allowed to work and live in the U.S. for 18 months, unless extended by the DHS secretary.

Under Biden administration orders, protections were extended until October 2026 for two groups of Venezuelans, one initially assigned temporary protected status in 2021 and another in 2023.

Chen’s order applies only to the group who first gained status in 2023. The 2021 group is also challenging the Trump administration’s revocation of their status, but that group’s status is in place until September.

Chen noted that the Trump administration “failed to identify any real countervailing harm in continuing TPS for Venezuelan beneficiaries.”

Chen was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2011.

Gang activity cited

The groups who brought the suit against Noem represent TPS holders from Venezuela.

The groups argued that Noem’s decisions to vacate the 2023 protections and end TPS for Venezuelans were arbitrary and capricious.

They also argued that the Trump administration violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause, arguing that the decisions to vacate the extension and terminate protections “were motivated, at least in part, by intentional discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or national origin.”

Noem cited gang activity as her reason for not extending TPS for the 2023 group of Venezuelans.

The Trump administration has invoked the Alien Enemies Act to quickly deport any Venezuelan national 14 years or older who is suspected of having ties to the Tren de Aragua gang. A federal judge has placed a temporary restraining order on use of the wartime law.

‘Classic example of racism’

In his order, Chen said that while attorneys on behalf of the Trump administration argued that there is the threat of the Tren de Aragua gang, “it has made no showing that any Venezuelans TPS holders are members of the gang or otherwise have ties to the gang.”

Chen also rejected the Trump administration’s argument that Noem had the legal authority to vacate the extension of protections.

“The unprecedented action of vacating existing TPS (a step never taken by any previous administration in the 35 years of the TPS program), initiated just three days after Secretary Noem took office, reverses actions taken by the Biden administration to extend temporary protection of Venezuelan nationals that have been in place since 2021,” he wrote.

In granting the nationwide pause, Chen noted the groups had a strong claim under the equal protection clause because Noem has “made sweeping negative generalizations about Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries.”

“This is evident not only in what she said, but also in the fact that she decided to take en masse actions against all Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries, who number in the hundreds of thousands,” he said. “Acting on the basis of a negative group stereotype and generalizing such stereotype to the entire group is the classic example of racism.”

This is not the first time the Trump administration has tried to end TPS designation for certain nationals. During Trump’s first term, DHS tried to end TPS for Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Sudan, but the courts blocked those attempts in 2018.

Noem has also moved to end TPS for nationals from Haiti. There are also legal challenges to that decision. 

Voters at the Wilmar Neighborhood Center on Madison's East side cast their ballots. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin’s spring election takes place Tuesday, with voters across the state weighing in on the races for state Supreme Court and superintendent of schools, a constitutional amendment and local offices.

Polls open at 7 a.m. and close at 8 p.m. Voters who are already in line to vote when polls close should remain in line and will still be able to cast their ballots. Absentee ballots must be returned by the time polls close and can be returned to a voter’s polling place or municipal clerk’s office. Information on polling places can be found at MyVote.WI.gov. 

Hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites have already cast their ballots, surpassing the early vote turnout of the 2023 Supreme Court race when 1.8 million people voted. On the Monday before the election that year, more than 409,000 ballots had already been cast. This year, more than 644,000 votes have already been cast, with Dane and Milwaukee counties each seeing the most turnout. More than 100,000 votes have already been cast in both counties. 

While the lower turnout of spring elections means results usually come faster than in presidential elections, state law still doesn’t allow election officials to begin processing absentee ballots until polls open on Election Day. Last year, Republicans in the state Senate killed a bill that would have allowed absentee ballots to start being processed on the Monday before the election. This means that especially in Milwaukee, where all absentee ballots are processed and counted at one central count location, results may take longer to come in. 

Supreme Court race

The race for Wisconsin Supreme Court is the most consequential on the ballot on Tuesday, with the ideological balance of the body up for grabs. Liberal-backed Dane County Judge Susan Crawford is taking on conservative-backed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel. The winner will replace retiring Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. 

Wisconsin is holding the first statewide election in the country since President Donald Trump was elected last November. That opportunity to test the voting public’s mood, and the $20 million that Trump adviser Elon Musk has pumped into the race to support Schimel, has turned the race into a referendum on the first months of the second Trump administration. 

Musk appeared at a rally in Green Bay on Sunday night to advocate for Schimel, give $1 million to two attendees and hype up his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been making drastic cuts to federal agencies and programs. 

Schimel has said he is running to remove partisanship from the Court and that if elected he would  treat Trump like any other litigant in a case. But he also told a group of canvassers associated with Trump-aligned Turning Point USA that he’d be a “support network” for Trump on the Court and, the Washington Post reported, told a group of Republicans in Jefferson County that Trump was “screwed over” by the Court when it ruled against Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of  the 2020 election. 

Democrats and Crawford’s campaign have accused Musk of attempting to buy a seat on the state Supreme Court. They point to Musk’s current litigation in Wisconsin challenging a state law that prevents Tesla from selling cars directly to consumers. Democrats have held People v. Musk town halls across the state where attendees said they were worried about DOGE’s cuts to Social Security, Medicaid and education. 

At the only debate between the two candidates in March, Crawford called her opponent “Elon Schimel.” Crawford has said if elected she’ll be a justice who seeks to protect the rights of all Wisconsinites while Schimel has said he’s running to counter the alleged partisanship of the Court since liberals won a majority in 2023. 

The race for Supreme Court has set the record for most expensive judicial campaign in U.S. history. The race recently surpassed the $100 million mark, nearly doubling the record set by Wisconsin’s 2023 Supreme Court election when more than $50 million was spent in the race between Justice Janet Protasiewicz and former Justice Dan Kelly. 

While the race has been nationalized, the winner will hold a deciding vote in cases that could decide how Wisconsin’s congressional maps are drawn, how pollution is regulated, the collective bargaining rights of the state’s workers and if Wisconsin women have the right to access an abortion.

Superintendent of Schools

Also on the ballot on Tuesday is the race for superintendent of schools. The race is between incumbent Jill Underly, supported by the state Democratic party, and Brittany Kinser, an education consultant who’s been backed by the state Republican Party. 

The two candidates appeared together at just one virtual forum, with Underly declining to attend a number of proposed events. Kinser has criticized Underly’s effort to change the standards used to assess student progress and advocated for more support for the state’s “school choice” programs including taxpayer-funded private school vouchers. 

Underly is endorsed by the state’s teachers union and says she will defend  public schools against privatization efforts by school choice advocates such as Kinser. 

Voter ID amendment

Voters will also weigh in on a proposed constitutional amendment to codify the state’s voter ID law. The Republican-authored proposal would require that voters provide a photo ID to register to vote, which is already the law. Republicans say the amendment is necessary to prevent the state  Supreme Court from striking down the voter ID requirement. Republicans have increasingly used the constitutional amendment process in recent years as a way to shape state law, avoiding Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ veto.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Tennesseans and Wisconsinites involved with the Builders' project. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

Madison School Board member Ali Muldrow said people who work in education know that the “worst day” is when children get hurt in school. 

“When the Abundant Life shooting happened, which was at a private Christian School very close to my home, it was just a really horrible day, and I think I realized it’s too late to talk about this,” Muldrow said. “It’s been too late and we can’t keep letting it be too late.”

A teacher and student were killed and six others were injured by a 15-year-old who brought a gun to Abundant Life Christian School, a private school in Madison, in December 2024. It is the deadliest school shooting on record in Wisconsin.

The shooting made national headlines, but it is just one example of children harmed by gun violence. According to the K-12 School Shooting Database, there were 332 school shootings in 2024. A 2024 report by Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions found firearms continue to be a leading cause of death for children and teens, and those who are Black are disproportionately the victims

Muldrow, who is running unopposed for another term on the Board this spring, said measures taken to try to prevent shooting deaths at school have not been enough. 

“All of the things that we’ve done to our students haven’t resolved this issue — whether it’s practicing and having drills or whether it’s making our schools harder places to get into,” Muldrow said. “None of that changes the reality that a 15-year-old went into their school, two guns, and killed multiple people, including themselves.”

Students from Madison Metropolitan School District walked out of class in December and marched to the state Capitol to demand something be done about gun violence. 

“They asked for two things,” Muldrow said. “They asked for laws related to gun storage and gun safety, and they asked for more mental health support within their education.”  

Muldrow said that adults should “honor” the demands of the students and build bridges across political divides to get the work done. She said having conversations is an important starting point. 

In the aftermath of the Madison school shooting, Muldrow said she wanted to organize an event to inspire people in the community to feel capable of making change. She turned to a group that tried to find solutions after a school shooting took place about two years ago and more than 620 miles away.

Tennesseans were left reeling in 2023 after a shooter killed three 9-year-olds and three adults at the private Christian Covenant elementary school. A nonprofit organization called Builders (formerly known as Starts With Us) that seeks to ease political polarization brought together a group of 11 Tennessee residents with a range of opinions on the issue of guns to discuss and come up with some solutions. 

Muldrow was part of a similar group in Wisconsin in 2024 that explored the debate on abortion. She saw a documentary about the Tennessee group and thought its approach could be a way for the community affected by the Abundant Life shooting to come together and find a way forward. 

Muldrow said that the point of the event she helped organize Sunday was not necessarily to “mirror or mimic what happened in Tennessee, but to learn from that collaborative attitude towards solutions.” 

More than 100 people attended the event at the Overture Center for the Arts in Madison, which included a screening of the documentary about the Tennesseeans’ journey and a panel discussion with two of the participants and a handful of Wisconsinites.

Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette Law School Poll noted during the panel that potential solutions to gun violence would look different for Wisconsin, given the difference in state laws and the general beliefs of residents in each state. A key point of disagreement among participants in the documentary centered on concealed carry permits and whether they should be mandated. Tennessee has allowed for permitless carry of handguns since 2021.

Wisconsin already requires a permit for concealed carry, however, and it’s mostly not a partisan debate, Franklin said. According to the most recent polling, about 65% of Wisconsinites support concealed carry, but only under certain circumstances. 

“We do have a concealed carry law that requires a permit. When the Legislature has considered concealed carry without a permit, we found only about 20% support for that, about 80% opposition,” Franklin said. “There is a distinction that the public makes… public opinion is quite opposed to that form of concealed carry, but solidly in favor of [concealed carry] with a permit.”

Franklin said he thought proposals that originate from and garner support among Second Amendment supporters should be celebrated. He noted that there is a Republican bill that’s been introduced in Wisconsin that would create a tax exemption for gun safes. 

“That’s a small, incremental matter of, what, 5 ½% on the cost of the safe, but on the other hand, when you think of children’s access to guns in the home, access to those guns by burglars or other circumstances,” it could be a significant step, Franklin said. 

Franklin said the idea that “if you don’t get everything you’ve got nothing” is a huge barrier to progress. 

“I would just stress that incremental improvements are still improvements,” Franklin said.

Steve D’Orazio, founder and president of the Oregon, Wis., gun shop and range Max Creek Outdoors said during the panel that his business works hard to educate people who acquire guns. He said he has been working with a doctor at the UW Health System to educate doctors on guns and have them talk with their patients about gun safety and awareness, including keeping guns locked away. 

“My goal is the safety of our children,” D’Orazio said. 

The solution to school shootings he emphasized the most was implementing metal detectors in all schools. 

“Every one of us here today walked through the front door of this building and we walked through a metal detector, but our schools don’t have metal detectors,” D’Orazio said. “I sell guns. That’s our business. There’s so much education that we do at our shop to make sure that the gun owner doesn’t get hurt and that they use it correctly…, but every school district should have a metal detector. That’s how you’re going to stop this stuff.” 

The documentary shows the Tennessee group taking and presenting their recommendations at the Tennessee State Capitol. Those recommendations included temporary removal of firearms based on risk of violence, developing tools to support responsible gun ownership, expanding the role of school resource officers, investing in community to reduce trauma and developing gun literacy resources for schools, communities and media. 

Tennessee leaders did pass a bill in 2024 requiring education in schools about guns, a policy similar to the recommendation of the group. Though the end result was not exactly as participants imagined it. 

Adam Luke, a Tennessee marriage and family counselor and conservative, spoke to how the “rush to be right” by lawmakers on the issue may diminish the effectiveness of the legislation.  

“People will not be able to opt out [of the curriculum]. Now, I would like to turn to conservative America and say, ‘If you did not have the ability to opt your child out of sex education would that bother you?’” Luke asked. “This is what happens when you have super majorities.” 

Luke said that the Tennessee Department of Education also doesn’t have the curriculum for teachers and just recently closed the public response period. He said lawmakers were so quick to want to get something done that they’ve created a policy that may not be effective.

“Let’s say that we did something, but guess what? We forgot to actually give you the resources to be successful with it,” Luke said. 

Political polarization was on display following the Madison school shooting. Muldrow said she has been “saddened” by the divide.

“It’s really hard to see our Legislature be so divided and in such a contentious relationship with our governor, and it’s a shame because all of these people represent us and there is an expectation that they work together,” Muldrow said. 

Since the shooting, Gov. Tony Evers has launched the Office of Violence Prevention and has proposed adopting further gun safety policies including stricter background checks and red flag laws. Republican lawmakers were quick to criticize Evers’ proposals and have been developing their own proposals for addressing school shootings, including financial support for the Office of School Safety and allowing teachers to be armed. 

The Madison Common Council and the Dane County Board of Supervisors both passed resolutions urging the Legislature to take action and implement common-sense gun measures. 

Steven Olikara, a former candidate for Wisconsin Senate and founder of the nonpartisan organization the Future Caucus, said the actions of local leaders and Evers are a step forward, but the state needs to take bigger steps. 

“Those bigger steps will come from bringing Democrats and Republicans together in a real way and building trust,” Olikara said. “And I think conversations like this can help create that kind of momentum. [When people are at] each other’s throats, the kind of progress you make is very small and very incremental. When you have conversations like the one today, you can reach transformative change, and that’s really what we need.”

Tennessee educator Alyssa Pearman, who lost one of her students to gun violence, said the key is to keep showing up to have the conversations.

“You are going to be told no, and you are going to have people who have no interest in making a change and being a builder, but you keep showing up,” Pearman said. “You find people who want to do something, who want a better tomorrow, and you have conversations like these… This is the type of conversation that needs to be had, whether it’s in Wisconsin, whether it’s in Tennessee and whatever state where we have this crisis.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Multiple Republican-led states have sued to rescind a federal rule keeping the records of those who sought legal reproductive care private, while a federal judge in Texas is questioning the constitutionality of the federal HIPAA law in its entirety. (Photo by Wichayada Suwanachun/Getty Images)

The decades-old federal law protecting the privacy of individual health information is threatened by multiple lawsuits that seek to throw out a rule restricting disclosure of information in criminal investigations, including for those seeking legal abortion and other reproductive health care.

In one of the cases, the Texas federal judge who has been at the center of several anti-abortion court battles appears to question the constitutionality and legality of the health privacy act in its entirety.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act — or HIPAA — established in 1996 to protect the privacy and security of patient health information, includes some exceptions under limited conditions, such as law enforcement investigations. But after the U.S. Supreme Court ended federal abortion rights in 2022 and more than a dozen states passed abortion bans, advocates worried that such records could be used by state officials and law enforcement to investigate and prosecute patients seeking an abortion and those who help them.

Health officials under former President Joe Biden’s administration enacted a HIPAA rule to keep health information private when the patient was in a state with legal access and the care was obtained legally. In order to release information related to this type of care, the entity subject to HIPAA rules must sign a document stating it is not released for one of the prohibited purposes.

“These cases may have been prompted by this newer rule, but they threaten more broadly the entire HIPAA system on which we all rely when accessing medical care,” said Carrie Flaxman, senior legal adviser for Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal organization.

Two lawsuits seek to rescind that most recent rule, while another brought by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton goes a step further, asking the court to remove the general rules established in 2000 about how much health information can be disclosed to law enforcement.

“The threats to the 2000 privacy rule would be a seismic shift that could erode patients’ trust entirely in their providers and dissuade them from wanting to seek out health care and be transparent about their symptoms,” said Ashley Emery, a senior policy analyst for the nonprofit Partnership for Women and Families. “A law enforcement officer could pressure a psychiatrist to share patient notes from therapy sessions without a subpoena, without a warrant, if the 2000 privacy rule is invalidated.”

The state of Missouri sued to rescind the Biden rule in January, and the state of Tennessee filed a similar action the same day that 14 other Republican attorneys general joined as plaintiffs: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. All but three of those states either heavily restrict or outright ban abortion, and if the lawsuits are successful, records kept by doctors and pharmacists in other states could be subpoenaed.

All of the lawsuits are filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is now under Republican President Donald Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The Trump administration has so far followed the direction of the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which calls for the most recent HIPAA rule to be rescinded.

Amarillo judge ordered briefing on HIPAA’s constitutionality and legality

Three cases are still in motion, including one with a physician as the plaintiff. Dr. Carmen Purl, the sole owner of Dr. Purl’s Fast Care Walk In Clinic in Dumas, Texas, sued HHS because she said the rule creates a conflict with the laws requiring her to report child abuse.

“I consider both a pregnant woman and her unborn child to be human persons, and both are entitled to medical care and deserve the protection of the law,” Purl said in court documents. “I believe … that elective abortions harm patients’ health and public health.”

The location of Purl’s clinic puts her in the judicial district that has only one federal judge — U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee. Most federal cases are assigned randomly to a group of judges in a district, but since Kacsmaryk is the only one, many advocates and attorneys have accused law firms like Alliance Defending Freedom, who is representing Purl in the case, of “judge shopping,” or finding a plaintiff in a certain area for the purpose of putting it in front of an ideologically friendly judge.

On Dec. 22, Kacsmaryk granted an injunction blocking enforcement of the rule against Purl while the case proceeds, and he is still considering whether to permanently block the law.

As part of the decision, Kacsmaryk also ordered the parties to submit briefs explaining how recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that delegate more authority to Congress over administrative agencies “affect the constitutionality or legality of HIPAA and HHS’s authority to issue the 2024 rule.”

Kacsmaryk presided over a lawsuit in 2023 brought by a group of anti-abortion doctors seeking to revoke the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, one of two drugs commonly used to terminate pregnancies in the first trimester and to treat miscarriages. Kacsmaryk ruled in favor of removing its approval, but the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overruled him in 2024.

Purl added that she thinks gender-affirming care is harmful to children, never medically necessary and a matter of concern for public health, though she has never treated a child with gender dysphoria. In the process of providing routine medical care, she said she could learn that a child was being subjected to gender-affirming treatments or procedures that could constitute child abuse, and she would be obligated to report it.

Purl’s clinic has fewer than 20 employees, and she has been licensed to practice family medicine in Texas since 1986. In that time, she said she has treated many patients who have been victims of abuse and neglect, and estimates she has personally treated more than 100 pediatric patients who were victims of sexual abuse.

“I have treated hundreds of girls under the age of consent who were either pregnant or reported sexual activity. During my career, I have delivered babies from mothers as young as 12 years old,” Purl wrote.

Purl said she has responded to Child Protective Services investigations between 10 and 12 times, and she fears that providing full, unredacted patient records in response to an entity such as CPS would violate the 2024 rule and subject her and the clinic to civil and criminal penalties, which often means hefty fines.

In a response filed by HHS in December, before Trump’s second term began, the department said the rule does nothing to prevent Purl from reporting suspected child abuse, and denied the other harms Purl said she would incur.

“Given the nature of her medical practice, Dr. Purl is highly unlikely to ever encounter a conflict between her obligations under state law and under the Rule,” the department said in court documents.

AGs from ban states are testing newly enacted shield laws

The Texas case led by Paxton has been on hold since February, after the U.S. Department of Justice asked the court to delay scheduling until the new administration could determine how to proceed. U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, a Trump appointee, ordered the parties to file a status report by May 1.

Attorneys general in states with abortions bans have already attempted to prosecute providers in other states for prescribing abortion pills via telehealth and prosecute women who obtained an abortion in another state without the consent of a male partner. Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry signed an extradition warrant for a doctor in New York for prescribing and mailing abortion pills to residents of the state.

New York is one of 17 Democratic-led states that has a shield law to protect providers and patients from out-of-state legal actions for reproductive care and gender-affirming care, and the state government has so far refused to comply with Louisiana’s law enforcement efforts.

The coalition of states that joined Tennessee’s lawsuit claim the privacy rule harms their ability to investigate cases of waste, fraud and abuse, and “sharply limits state investigative authority.”

Chad Kubis, spokesperson for Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, told States Newsroom via email that the office could not comment for this story because of the ongoing litigation.

“The final rule will hamper states’ ability to gather information critical to policing serious misconduct like Medicaid billing fraud, child and elder abuse, and insurance-related malfeasance,” the complaint says.

Attorneys at Democracy Forward have asked the courts to allow the clients they are representing to intervene as defendants in all four cases, arguing that the new administration is likely to either not defend the cases at all or defend them inadequately. They are representing the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Madison, Wisconsin, as well as Doctors for America, an activist organization of physicians and medical students. None of the judges have ruled on their motions yet.

Partnership for Women and Families filed an amicus brief with 23 other advocacy organizations to support upholding the rule.

“We can’t count on the Trump administration to defend this regulation, given its longstanding record of hostility toward reproductive health and rights,” Emery said.

It’s possible the new leadership at HHS will rescind the 2024 rule, Emery said, but the lawsuits alone are concerning enough because of the threat posed to privacy protections. That’s part of the goal, said Emery and Flaxman — to present the threat and sow fear and intimidation in patients and providers. And the method of launching multiple lawsuits in various jurisdictions fits a pattern that has been observed in the fight for abortion rights, Emery said.

“Anti-abortion extremists’ legal campaign against HIPAA’s reproductive health privacy protections is designed to test out different legal venues and arguments to obtain the most favorable outcome possible,” she said.

Doctor who has been investigated before says intimidation tactics have an effect

Indiana OB-GYN Dr. Caitlin Bernard knows what it’s like to be the target of an investigation, and said she’s still in court fighting new attempts to instill fear in doctors and patients.

Bernard was an abortion provider in Indiana before the state enacted its ban in August 2023. She reported in 2022 that she had provided a medication abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim who traveled to Indiana from Ohio when the state briefly had a ban in place. She was accused of violating patient privacy laws and investigated by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, and the state licensing board fined her $3,000 and reprimanded her for the incident after Rokita asked the board to revoke her license to practice medicine. She was not found to have violated patient privacy and kept her license.

“Now my case is held up as an example of what can happen to you if you speak out about abortion bans,” Bernard said. “I’ve spoken to many physicians across the country who are intimidated by that. They say, ‘Look at Dr. Bernard and what happened to her.’”

Now, Bernard is part of a lawsuit against the state to categorize terminated pregnancy records as medical records in state law that cannot be released to the public. Indiana has historically treated abortion reports as public record with certain details redacted, but Bernard said with the ban in place and so few people qualifying for its limited exceptions, that policy should change. The records include demographic information like age, ethnicity and education level, as well as information such as diagnoses and the date, location and physician who provided care.

“It also includes the county, so you could imagine in these very small counties, somebody could absolutely figure out who that person is,” Bernard said.

Ashley Emery, senior policy analyst at Partnership for Women and Families, said the lawsuits take aim at a deeply needed line of defense against abortion criminalization, and said it will disproportionately affect immigrants, people of color and low-income populations. Trust is already low between marginalized people and health care providers, Emery said, and this would further erode that trust.

“These challenges to HIPAA are designed to take protections away from patients and try to allow anti-abortion politicians to have more control, and I think that power deficit is really important to note, and it should be very chilling,” she said.

Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway alongside other Wisconsinites at a city celebration for Transgender Day of Visibility. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

Wisconsin Democrats and city of Madison leaders recognized transgender visibility day in Wisconsin Monday, introducing legislation that would provide protections for people and raising the transgender pride flag. 

This year’s International Transgender Day of Visibility comes amid a political environment in which trans people have been targeted by new proposed federal and state restrictions. Wisconsin Republican lawmakers spent significant time in March on a slate of bills focused on transgender kids and would have limited their ability to play sports, access gender affirming medical care and change their names and pronouns in school. The bills are among more than 800 anti-trans bills that have been introduced nationwide this year.

Participants in the Madison celebrations said the point of the day was not to focus on the negative and harmful actions being taken, however, but to focus instead on the positive experiences of being transgender. 

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove), co-chair of the Transgender Parent and Nonbinary Advocacy Caucus, said during a press conference that the purpose of the day is to “elevate the voices of our trans and non-binary communities, emphasize the joy of living life as your authentic self and to visualize the world in which all our trans and non-binary children, co-workers, neighbors, parents and elected officials throughout Wisconsin and the world are loved, accepted and safe.”

Democrats holding the press conference proposed a handful of bills. One would extend Wisconsin’s nondiscrimination laws to include transgender and nonbinary people by prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity or gender expression.

Another bill would create an exception to current law for those seeking a name change for gender identity reasons. Under the current state statute people seeking a name change petition must publish notice of their petition in a local newspaper, including in the area where the petition will be heard, once per week for three consecutive weeks before they may petition the court.

A third bill would declare March 31, 2025 as Transgender Day of Visibility in Wisconsin and recognizes the achievements of several transgender people and organizations who have made contributions to Wisconsin.

In addition to the bills, Gov. Tony Evers, who has committed to vetoing any anti-trans legislation that makes it to his desk, signed a proclamation declaring Monday Transgender Day of Visibility.

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) said the bills are important because lawmakers need to send a positive message to young Wisconsinites who may be paying attention. He said that when he was young he remembers feeling discouraged as a gay teen when the state passed a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. 

“Thirteen-year-olds across Wisconsin are listening to political actions and messages that are being sent out of the Capitol,” Phelps said, adding that children should know there are elected officials and allies and leaders who are fighting for transgender, non-binary and gender-expansive people of all ages across Wisconsin.

“That’s the message that we want people to take out of the Capitol and into their communities and to see [protections] passed in the state law as well,” Phelps said. 

When asked about plans to discuss the legislation with Republicans and the potential for garnering support across the aisle to pass any of the bills, the lawmakers sounded doubtful. Republicans hold majorities in the Assembly and Senate and support from them would be necessary for any of the Democratic legislation to be taken up.

“I don’t think they will sign on to this legislation. I certainly wish that they would take a look at it and hear our voices here today and see the love and support of so many community members,” Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) said. 

Clancy called it a “valid question” that Democrats get every time they hold a press conference. 

“Will Republicans sign on to this? And every time the answer is somewhat the same…,” Clancy said. “Republicans, two weeks ago, sat on the floor of the Assembly just feet from here for hours. They said that trans people should not exist, should not have basic rights. They have had the opportunity to weigh in on this, and I would welcome any of them moving across the aisle, breaking ranks from their, frankly, hateful leadership and joining in on these things.” 

The city of Madison also recognized Transgender Visibility Day by raising the transgender pride flag outside of the city municipal building.

Mayor Satya Rhodes Conway said the city was raising the flag to celebrate trans people, because the city respects individual rights and “rejects hate.” 

“The safety and the livelihoods of trans people are being threatened, and the issue of the fact of trans people is being used to divide our country in a hateful and really disappointing way, but here in Madison, we refuse to go backwards, and we refuse to let hate divide.” 

Asked about communicating the message of acceptance to those who disagree, Rhodes-Conway said that she thinks it’s important people recognize that diversity makes the Madison community stronger and invited people to “learn about the things that maybe make them nervous or scared and to be a part of the incredible diversity.” 

Rhodes-Conway also urged people to educate themselves.

“Folks can educate themselves and each other and a lot of the fear and resistance comes from lack of knowing, and so I just encourage people — there’s a lot of resources,” Rhodes-Conway said. “Please don’t ask the trans people in your lives to educate you. There’s a lot of resources out there and our libraries, our fantastic resources, and people can educate themselves about the history.”

Dina Nina Martinez-Rutherford, the first out transgender member of the Madison Common Council, said that transgender people are all “part of an unbroken legacy of resilience” and “authenticity.” 

Martinez-Rutherford said that she never expected to feel “so much love and community” when first elected in 2023 and never expected when she first started transitioning in 2007 to be in a position to advocate for people. 

“We raise the transgender flag today for it to be a symbol that Madison is welcoming and that you belong here,” Martinez-Rutherford said. “Let it be a beacon of hope, a reminder that we will not be erased.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Democratic members of Congress on Monday gathered on the National Mall in honor of Transgender Day of Visibility. (Stock photo by Vladimir Vladimirov/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Nearly two dozen Democratic lawmakers Monday gathered on the National Mall in honor of Transgender Day of Visibility, pushing back against the Trump administration’s policies that harm the trans community.

It came as the Trump administration has moved to block gender-affirming health care for transgender children, bar transgender members from serving in the U.S. military, deny gender markers for passports and ban transgender athletes from women’s sports.

Transgender Day of Visibility is dedicated to recognizing the transgender community for their accomplishments and raising awareness of the discrimination that trans people face. 

Lawmakers like Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost of Florida slammed President Donald Trump and his administration. He said that Trump is using transgender people as scapegoats.

“In (an) even more despicable move, he’s chosen to scapegoat kids, trans kids,” he said. “The reason you can’t pay your rent, you can’t afford health care, the reason that you have to fear gun violence, the reason that you can’t afford your grocery has nothing to do with trans people and everything to do with the billionaires and corrupt corporations that have been giving us crumbs for generations.”

Interfaith groups, trans advocacy groups

Interfaith groups and transgender advocacy groups also joined lawmakers for the event organized by the Christopher Street Project, a nonprofit that aims to elect pro-trans Democratic members of Congress.

“My religion has taught me that every human being is the divine image,” Rabbi Abby Stein said. “When the people in (Congress) or the White House try to take away our rights, try to legislate us out of existence, what you are doing… is an affront not just to humanity but to divinity and to any version of spirituality or creed.”

Democratic members in attendance included Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts and Reps. Jerry Nadler of New York, Robin Kelly of Illinois, Paul Tonko of New York, Pramila Jayapal of Washington state, Sara Jacobs of California, Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, Frost of Florida, Val Hoyle of Oregon, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Jill Tokuda of Hawaii, Julie Johnson of Texas, Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, Judy Chu of California and Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia.

Democratic Sens. Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Ed Markey of Massachusetts also attended.

Trans family members

A handful of lawmakers with transgender family members spoke at Monday’s rally.

Lee said that she is the proud aunt of a transgender nibbling, a gender-neutral term for a child of a sibling, instead of niece or nephew.

“What’s happening right now, especially to our trans siblings, is cruel,” she said of the Trump administration’s policies. “They are purposely targeting some of the most marginalized people in our society.”

Chu said that she fears for her nephew, who is transgender.

“I fear for what the future will hold for him as this punitive administration takes it out on trans people, but I tell you, we will fight back,” she said. 

Legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate would order the U.S. Department of Agriculture to resume frozen payments to farmers on contracts that have already been signed. (Photo by Gregory Conniff for the Wisconsin Examiner)

A group of U.S. Senate Democrats introduced legislation Monday that would order the agriculture department to resume paying farmers on contracts already signed.

“Donald Trump and Elon Musk are stiffing our farmers and processors — taking away resources these folks were guaranteed, threatening small businesses’ ability to stay open and people’s livelihoods,” said Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin), one of 17 cosponsors.

In addition to 15 Democrats, two independent senators who caucus with them, Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine, signed on to the bill.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has stopped reimbursing farmers and farm organizations for money they’ve spent, despite contracts they have already signed with the agency. The contracts call for farmers to be reimbursed for expenses they incur under the contracts.

Honor Farmer Contracts Act, introduced by Sen. Cory Booker (D-New Jersey), would require USDA “to release illegally withheld funding for all contracts and agreements previously entered into by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,” Baldwin’s office said in a statement announcing the legislation.

Under President Donald Trump, “USDA has refused to make reimbursement payments to fulfill signed contracts, without any indication of when or whether farmers will be paid the money they paid out and are owed,” Baldwin’s office said.

Farmers and organizations serving them contract with the USDA for various programs to connect with local markets and improve their productivity. The department then pays farmers back for the expenses they incur under those contracts. The department’s failure to pay strains finances both for the individual farmers and for the organizations that work with them under the programs, Baldwin’s office said.

The legislation would require USDA to unfreeze all signed agreements and make all past due payments as quickly as possible. It would also bar the department from canceling agreements or contracts unless there has been a failure to comply with their terms and conditions.

The bill would prohibit the department from closing county offices, field offices or centers of the Farm Service Agency, the Natural Resources Conservation Service or the Rural Development Service without notification at least 60 days in advance and justifying the closing to Congress.

On March 7, Baldwin said the USDA had resumed another previously stalled stream of funding, $6.5 million in grants for dairy businesses to diversify and market their products.

Baldwin has also demanded the Trump administration to reverse its cancellation in March of a program connecting farmers to local food banks.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE