Gov. Tony Evers said he is focusing on what can be accomplished in the final year of his term rather than what he and his wife may do once he retires from office. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers, who is entering his final year in office, is calling on lawmakers to help him accomplish some of his priorities in 2026 including providing property tax relief and taking action to blunt the effect of cost-shifting from the federal government to states by the Trump administration.

Evers decided to not run for a third term last year, leading to the first open race for governor since 2010. During a press briefing Monday, he told reporters “nope” when asked if he had thoughts on who in the crowded Democratic primary field could best build on his work.

While he wouldn’t comment on the field, Evers said that working on affordability in Wisconsin would be one of his top priorities — and likely one of the top issues in the 2026 campaign cycle. 

Evers said he is focusing on what can be accomplished in the final year of his term rather than what he and his wife may do once he retires from office. 

“We’ve worked hard for seven years and… we have a year left and it’s not all about me. All of the things that need to be addressed, many of them can be. I feel very strongly that legacy is just doing the right thing for the people of Wisconsin,” Evers said, adding he wants to leave Wisconsin in “a better place.” 

The Wisconsin Legislature has work days scheduled through March, though Evers said work may need to go into April to get the state’s business accomplished. He said lawmakers could run for office and work at the same time. 

“I think it will help no matter who is running for reelection, both the Republicans and Democrats, actually spending some time not getting out of town as early as possible and let’s do some things for the people of Wisconsin,” Evers said. “It’s bad politics to say we’re done in February, we’re done in March and we’ll see you at the polls.” 

Evers said 2026 is starting after a year of “historic and bipartisan wins” for Wisconsinites. He highlighted actions taken in the state budget including providing state funding directly to child care centers, increasing school funding and investing in the University of Wisconsin system, and said he wants to build on that work in the rest of his term. “Our budget was a win for Wisconsin kids, families and our state’s future, but there’s no denying the final budget looked different from what I proposed,” he said. 

Evers noted that the state ended the fiscal year with nearly $4 billion in reserves and $2 billion in a rainy day fund. He said projections from the Department of Revenue that will be released soon show that the state could also bring in as much as $1 billion more than this year. 

Tax relief, school funding

Evers said one of his top priorities is taking action to soften the impact of property tax increases. He called on lawmakers, again, to pass a slate of policies he has proposed that could result in $1.3 billion in tax relief. 

Wisconsin taxpayers’ December bills included the highest increase since 2018 — the result, in part, of Evers’ controversial 400-year line-item veto, which extended a two-year increase in the amount of money districts can raise from local property taxpayers for centuries into the future, as well as lawmakers’ decision to not provide additional state aid to schools, pushing many districts to use their additional taxing authority and others to go to referendum, asking local residents to pay more.

“Look, I get it: Republicans love to blame my 400-year veto for property taxes going up,” Evers said. “The problem with that is Wiscosinites were going to referendum before increasing the number of years — long before. The question would be why? Because of a decade of Republicans consistently failing to meaningfully invest in our kids and K-12 schools. That has consequences including forcing Wisconsinites to raise their own property taxes.” 

Evers said that he wasn’t saying relief needs to be accomplished in one particular way, but that the state will be in a “world of hurt” if nothing is done about property taxes.

Proposals on the issue that he has suggested include a state program to encourage local governments to freeze property taxes, increasing state aid to public schools to help reduce tax levies and increasing the school levy tax credit. 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) has also named lowering property taxes as one of his top priorities for the year, though he and other Republicans have focused on the school revenue limit increases that are in place due to the partial veto Evers issued on the 2023 state budget. Evers brushed off the criticism, saying school districts were seeking property tax increases through referendum way before his veto.

“Before that 400-year veto, we were going to referendum all the time, so they can use that as an excuse if they want but let’s just get this done,” Evers said. 

Evers also called on lawmakers to provide additional funding for special education. He and lawmakers put funding in the budget they calculated would bring the state’s share of special ed costs to 42% of districts’ expenses in the first year of the budget and 45% in the second year, but the Department of Public Instruction has issued revised numbers showing that the funding allocated in the budget likely won’t be enough to meet those rates.

“This has to be fixed before the Legislature goes home this year. I’m calling on the Legislature to invest the necessary funding to ensure the agreed upon percentages… are met — or better yet, make the appropriation sum sufficient,” Evers said. Sum-sufficient appropriations are not fixed amounts of money but cover costs for programs even if they fluctuate.

Evers also said lawmakers should take action to exclude certain items including diapers, toothpaste and over-the-counter medications from the state’s sales tax. 

Evers said he is also open to looking at Republican proposals to eliminate taxes on overtime and tips but wants to consider more “universal” forms of tax relief. Republican lawmakers have been working to advance proposals that would align state tax policies with the new federal policies that were adopted last year.

Dealing with the Trump administration  

In his letter to lawmakers, Evers told them they may need to take action to blunt the effects of Trump administration policies. 

“With more chaos being created every day in Washington, new challenges continue to emerge and evolve that deserve our immediate focus and attention,” Evers wrote to lawmakers. “This includes responding to President Donald Trump’s and Republicans in Congress’ ongoing efforts to shift hundreds of millions of dollars in federal program costs to Wisconsin taxpayers and our state’s future budgets.” 

A recent change to federal law means that the state could be at risk of losing more than $200 million annually in federal funds for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program if the benefit payment error rate climbs above a certain level.

Evers told reporters that he is in conversations with lawmakers about a potential investment to ensure that the error rate for the state’s Foodshare program remains low. The state Department of Health Services has said that $69 million would help implement quality-control measures and cover the cuts the federal government has made to administrative costs.

The Trump administration has also recently frozen funds to five Democratic-run states, including Minnesota, due to child care fraud while also increasing reporting requirements for states receiving child care funds to cover services for low-income kids. 

Evers said Wisconsin, not one of the five, is in a good position to ensure accountability in the system as the state already made significant changes after a fraud scandal like Minnesota’s was uncovered in Wisconsin more than 15 years ago.

A 2009 Pulitzer prize-winning investigation by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel uncovered significant fraud within the state’s WisconsinShares program that led to criminal indictments and prompted the state to implement protections. 

“We’re making sure we’re doing everything and we are in a good place,” Evers said. “There’s lots of auditing going on… so I think we’re in a great place.”

ICE shooting in Minneapolis

Evers told reporters that it is a “huge mistake” by President Donald Trump to exclude Minnesota from the investigation into the death of Renee Good at the hands of an ICE agent last week.

“Should the people of Minnesota or Minneapolis be a part of that investigation? Hell yes,” Evers said. “When the federal government comes in and talks about things in terms of you’re going to do this or that… you want to be part of the conversation and there’s none of that going on.” 

Evers said in response to a question about whether ICE was welcome in Wisconsin, “We can handle ourselves, frankly. I don’t see the need for the federal government to be coming into our state and making decisions that we can make at the state level.” 

However, Evers stopped short of endorsing a proposal from Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez that would bar ICE from certain areas.

Rodriguez, who is running in the Democratic primary for governor, proposed on Monday that the state ban ICE from courthouses, hospitals and health clinics, licensed child-care centers and daycares, schools and institutions of higher education, domestic violence shelters and places of worship unless there is a warrant or an imminent threat to public safety.

Evers said when asked about the proposal that he would look at it, but that “banning things will absolutely ramp up the actions of the folks in Washington D.C.”

Evers on what else might get accomplished in 2026

Evers said he is “confident” there will soon be a proposal to release $125 million in state funds to fight PFAS contamination that members from both sides of the aisle can support. He said his administration has spent the last several months in conversation with Republican lawmakers on the issue to try to reach a compromise.

Evers said that he hopes they will be able to do the same for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program, which is set to expire this year. 

Evers said he is open to exploring options for getting WisconsinEye, the nonprofit that provided livestream coverage of state government similar to C-Span until it went dark last month, back online, but said he isn’t supportive of just giving the nonprofit state funds without a match requirement.

WisEye  went offline  Dec. 15 due to financial difficulties. There is $10 million in state funding for the organization that was set aside by lawmakers and Evers for an endowment, but the organization has to raise matching funds to access it.

“I think there has to be some skin in the game,” Evers said of WisEye. 

The organization launched a GoFundMe on Monday to help raise $250,000, which would cover its expenses for three months. By the end of the day, the organization had raised more than  $4,000.

Evers also called on lawmakers to pass legislation that would extend Medicaid coverage for new mothers from 60 days to a year. Vos has opposed the bill and stopped it from receiving a vote in the Assembly, even as it passed the Senate with only one opposing vote and has more than 70 Assembly cosponsors.

“I’m hoping 2026 will be the year that the Speaker finally decides that bill will make it to my desk,” Evers said.

Evers also outlined his hopes that lawmakers will take action to help lower the cost of health care and prescription drug prices including by capping the price of insulin at $35, passing legislation to audit insurance companies when their denial rates are high and creating new standards to increase the number of services health insurance companies must cover. 

Evers also called on lawmakers to provide funding for two sites that closed last year, one in Green Bay and the other in Chippewa Falls, that housed homeless veterans. He said ideally the Veterans Housing and Recovery Program would receive the nearly $2 million  as he proposed last year.  

Evers said he hadn’t seen the GOP-authored bills that passed the Assembly unanimously that would create a new state grant program that would go to organizations that serve homeless veterans. 

“Whatever we can do to solve that issue,” Evers said. “Any of the things I’ve talked about today, if something happens individually, great. We have to get that done, so if they come up with a plan that I feel confident it’s going to work… then I’d sign it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Republican Party of Wisconsin mixed up former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes (left) and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley (right) in a post to X on Monday.

The Republican Party of Wisconsin mixed up the two Black Democratic candidates for governor in a social media post on Monday before deleting and reposting it.

Wisconsin’s open race for governor has led to a crowded Democratic field in the primary, and the state’s Republican party sought on Monday to call out two of those candidates by name in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. 

“[State Rep.] Francesca Hong, [former Lt. Gov.] Mandela Barnes, and other radical progressives are trying to destroy our state. From wanting to defund police, raise property taxes, and bring socialism to Wisconsin, it is clear that they are out of touch with the needs of Wisconsin families,” the post states. 

However, the initial post made by the party included a graphic of Hong and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, not Barnes. A screenshot of the original post was posted by Civic Media Political Editor Dan Shafer on X.

Crowley is the first Black person to serve as Milwaukee County executive and Barnes, a former candidate for the U.S. Senate, served as the first Black lieutenant governor in the state of Wisconsin. The two Democrats are the only Black candidates in Wisconsin’s race for governor. There are no Black candidates in the Republican field.

That’s not Mandela Barnes… pic.twitter.com/Rqxj1NBvZE

— Dan Shafer (@DanRShafer) January 12, 2026

The post was pulled down and reposted with a photo of Barnes in the graphic alongside Hong, who is the only Asian American in the race. 

The Wisconsin GOP and Crowley campaign did not respond to a request for comment from the Examiner. The Barnes campaign declined to comment.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Two Wisconsin hospital systems have paused gender-affirming medication and hormone care for minors. (Getty Creative)

Two Wisconsin hospital systems have paused providing gender-affirming health care for minors, according to a published report, prompting state lawmakers to urge them to reconsider.

“Wisconsin values include fairness, compassion and looking out for one another,” said state Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) and state Reps. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee), Margaret Arney (D-Wauwatosa) and Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) in a joint statement Monday afternoon.

“This decision moves us away from those values by placing additional burdens on families who are already navigating complex medical health needs. Parents should be able to make informed decisions in consultation with qualified health care providers without political interference or fear,” the lawmakers said.  

The statement was issued under the umbrella of the Legislature’s Transgender Parent and Nonbinary Advocacy Caucus.

The group responded to reporting Monday in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that Children’s Wisconsin, a children’s hospital and health system in suburban Milwaukee, and UW Health, in Madison had both paused prescribing gender-affirming medication such as puberty blockers and hormones for minors.

The news story initially attributed word of the changes to anonymous sources. Representatives of both hospital systems subsequently confirmed the facilities had taken action to stop providing care, except in the area of behavioral health.

On Dec. 18, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department announced that the federal government would stop all Medicaid and Medicare payments to hospitals and clinics that provide gender-affirming care for patients under the age of 18.

“At Children’s Wisconsin, we strongly believe everyone, including LGBTQ+ kids, should be treated with the support, respect, dignity and compassion they deserve,” a Children’s spokesperson told the Journal Sentinel. “We are communicating to patients that due to escalating legal and federal regulatory risk facing systems and providers across the nation, we are currently unable to provide gender affirming pharmacologic care.” Children’s Wisconsin will continue mental health and behavioral health services, the spokesperson said.

A UW Health spokesperson told the newspaper in a statement that the system “is committed to providing high-quality, compassionate and patient-centered care to our patients and families, including LGBTQ+ patients.”

The statement acknowledged that because of federal actions, “UW Health is pausing prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy as part of gender-affirming care for patients under 18 years of age.”

The lawmakers’ caucus statement, which did not name the medical systems, said that halting care could harm the mental health of young people receiving that care.

“Removing access to this care increases the risk of anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts among young people who already are facing disproportionate mental health challenges,” the caucus statement said. It urged the health systems “to reconsider their decision.”

Abigail Swetz, executive director of the LGBTQ+ advocacy organization Fair Wisconsin, said in a statement that the Trump administration has been engaged in “disgusting” attacks on trans people since before taking office.

In pausing care the hospital systems made “an awful decision, and I believe it is the wrong decision — it’s a decision that is putting young patients, their families, and even their own providers in a very tough place,” Swetz said. “And at the same time, these clinics should never have been bullied by this federal administration into making any kind of decision in the first place, especially one that reduces access to this life-affirming care.”

Swetz said Fair Wisconsin was organizing public comment opposing the federal proposed rule and urged Wisconsinites to join the effort.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly speaks with reporters in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly sued Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the department on Monday for trying to demote Kelly’s retirement rank and pay after he appeared in a video where he and other lawmakers told service members they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. 

Kelly’s suit, filed in the federal district court for the District of Columbia, says attempts by the Trump administration to punish him violate the First Amendment, the separation of powers, due process protections and the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution.

“Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my twenty-five years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States Senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable,” Kelly wrote in a statement. “His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: if you speak out and say something that the President or Secretary of Defense doesn’t like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted.”

Kelly appeared in the video alongside Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander — all of whom are former members of the military or intelligence agencies, though none of the others are still subject to the military’s legal system.

President Donald Trump was irate after seeing the video, posting on social media that he believed it represented “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

DOD investigation

The Defense Department announced in late November that it was looking into “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly, a retired Navy captain, for participating in the video. 

Kelly said during a press conference on Capitol Hill in December the Defense Department investigation into him, along with one by the FBI into all of the lawmakers in the video, marked “a dangerous moment for the United States of America when the president and his loyalists use every lever of power to silence United States senators for speaking up.”

Hegseth, who originally threatened to court-martial Kelly, said in early January the Defense Department would instead downgrade his retirement rank and pay. 

“Captain Kelly has been provided notice of the basis for this action and has thirty days to submit a response,” Hegseth wrote in a social media post. “The retirement grade determination process directed by Secretary Hegseth will be completed within forty five days.”

Kelly said at the time he would challenge Hegseth’s course of action. 

First Amendment cited

The 46-page lawsuit marks the next step in the months-long saga, with Kelly asking a federal judge to declare the effort to demote him “unlawful and unconstitutional.”

“The First Amendment forbids the government and its officials from punishing disfavored expression or retaliating against protected speech,” the lawsuit states. “That prohibition applies with particular force to legislators speaking on matters of public policy. As the Supreme Court held 60 years ago, the Constitution ‘requires that legislators be given the widest latitude to express their views on issues of policy,’ and the government may not recharacterize protected speech as supposed incitement in order to punish it.”

The lawsuit alleges that the Pentagon’s actions against Kelly “also trample on protections the Constitution singles out as essential to legislative independence.” 

“It appears that never in our nation’s history has the Executive Branch imposed military sanctions on a Member of Congress for engaging in disfavored political speech,” the lawsuit states. ”Allowing that unprecedented step here would invert the constitutional structure by subordinating the Legislative Branch to executive discipline and chilling congressional oversight of the armed forces.”

Kelly’s legal team asked the judge to grant “emergency relief” in their favor by Friday, Jan. 16.

The case was assigned to Senior Judge Richard J. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.

U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., left, and Rep. Angie Craig, D-Minn., arrive at the regional ICE headquarters at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building on Jan. 10, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The lawmakers attempted to access the facility where the Department of Homeland Security has been headquartering operations in the state. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A dozen Democratic members of Congress Monday asked a federal judge for an emergency hearing, arguing the Department of Homeland Security violated a court order when Minnesota lawmakers were denied access to conduct oversight into facilities that hold immigrants.

The oversight visits to Minneapolis ICE facilities followed the deadly shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good by federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross. Federal immigration officers have intensified immigration enforcement in the Twin Cities following the shooting, leading to massive protests there and across the country. 

“On Saturday, January 9—three days after U.S. citizen Renee Good was shot dead by an ICE agent in Minneapolis—three members of Congress from the Minnesota delegation, with this Court’s order in hand, attempted to conduct an oversight visit of an ICE facility near Minneapolis,” according to Monday’s filing in the District Court for the District of Columbia. 

Democratic U.S. Reps. Ilhan Omar, Angie Craig and Kelly Morrison of Minnesota said they were denied entry to the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building shortly after arriving for their visit on Saturday morning.

Lawmakers said in the filing the Minnesotans were denied access due to a new policy from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The new Noem policy, similar to one temporarily blocked by U.S. Judge Jia Cobb last month, requires seven days notice for lawmakers to conduct oversight visits.

“The duplicate notice policy is a transparent attempt by DHS to again subvert Congress’s will … and this Court’s stay of DHS’s oversight visit policy,” according to the new filing by lawyers representing the 12 Democrats.

DHS cites reconciliation bill

Noem in filings argued the funds for immigration enforcement are not subject to a 2019 appropriations law, referred to as Section 527, that allows for unannounced oversight visits at facilities that hold immigrants.

She said that because the facilities are funded through the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act” passed and signed into law last year, the department does not need to comply with Section 527.

The OBBBA, passed through a congressional process called reconciliation, is allowed to adjust federal spending even though it is not an appropriations law.

“This policy is consistent with and effectuates the clear intent of Congress to not subject OBBBA funding to Section 527’s limitations,” according to the Noem memo.  

Congress is currently working on the next funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security. The lawmakers in their filing argue “members of Congress must be able to conduct oversight at ICE detention facilities, without notice, to obtain urgent and essential information for ongoing funding negotiations.”

“Members of Congress are actively negotiating over the funding of DHS and ICE, including consideration of the scope of and limitations on DHS’s funding for the next fiscal year,” according to the filing.

The Democrats who sued include Joe Neguse of Colorado, Adriano Espaillat of New York, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Robert Garcia of California, J. Luis Correa of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Dan Goldman of New York, Jimmy Gomez of California, Raul Ruiz of California, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Norma Torres of California.

Neguse, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that the “law is crystal clear.”

“Instead of complying with the law, DHS is abrogating the court’s order by re-imposing the same unlawful policy,” he said. “Their actions are outrageous and subverting the law, which is why we are going back to court to challenge it — immediately.”

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks during a press conference following the Federal Open Markets Committee meeting at the Federal Reserve on Dec. 10, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s feud with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has escalated into a Department of Justice investigation, raising alarm bells among some Republicans in the Senate, where Trump will need broad backing from GOP lawmakers to get his choice for the next Fed chairman approved after Powell’s term ends in May. 

Retiring North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, who sits on the narrowly divided Banking Committee that will hold hearings on the next nominee, wrote in a statement he won’t approve anyone to fill Powell’s seat if Trump or administration officials try to further erode its independence. 

“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump Administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” Tillis wrote. “It is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question.”

Tillis added he plans to “oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed—including the upcoming Fed Chair vacancy—until this legal matter is fully resolved.”

Powell fights back in a video

Trump has criticized Powell repeatedly since retaking the Oval Office in January, pressing him to reduce interest rates faster and signaling he wanted to fire him. 

Powell said in a video released this weekend that Justice Department officials on Friday “served the Federal Reserve with grand jury subpoenas, threatening a criminal indictment related to my testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last June.”

Powell alleged the DOJ investigation is not purely about oversight of the multi-year renovation project at the Fed’s offices in Washington, D.C., but “a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president.”

“This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation,” Powell said.

Trump first nominated Powell to be chairman of the Federal Reserve in November 2017 for a four-year term that began in February 2018, writing in a statement that Powell had “demonstrated steady leadership, sound judgment, and policy expertise.”

“Mr. Powell will bring to the Federal Reserve a unique background of Government service and business experience,” Trump wrote. “He previously served as Under Secretary at the Department of Treasury in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. Mr. Powell also has nearly three decades of business experience.”

The Senate voted 84-13 in January 2018 to confirm Powell to the role. 

President Joe Biden re-nominated Powell in November 2021 for another four-year term that began in May 2022 after the Senate voted 80-19 to confirm him for a second time. 

Tillis leverage on committee

Trump hasn’t said publicly whom he will nominate to succeed Powell as Fed chairman, but whoever he picks will need to move past the Senate Banking Committee in order to receive a confirmation vote on the floor and actually take on the role. 

The Banking Committee holds 13 Republicans and 11 Democrats, giving Tillis considerable leverage to block any Trump nominee from advancing if all of the Democrats on the panel also vote against reporting that person to the floor.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, ranking member on the committee, wrote in a statement that “Trump is abusing the authorities of the Department of Justice like a wannabe dictator so the Fed serves his interests, along with his billionaire friends.”

“As Donald Trump prepares to nominate a new Fed Chair, he wants to push Jerome Powell off the Fed Board for good and install another sock puppet to complete his corrupt takeover of America’s central bank,” Warren wrote. “This Committee and the Senate should not move forward with any Trump nominee for the Fed, including Fed Chair.”

Chairman Tim Scott, R-S.C., had not released any public statements about the Department of Justice investigation into Powell as of Monday morning. 

Murkowski sees ‘attempt at coercion’

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who isn’t on the committee, released a written statement after speaking with Powell on Monday morning, saying “it’s clear the administration’s investigation is nothing more than an attempt at coercion.” 

“If the Department of Justice believes an investigation into Chair Powell is warranted based on project cost overruns—which are not unusual—then Congress needs to investigate the Department of Justice,” Murkowski wrote. “The stakes are too high to look the other way: if the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer. My colleague, Senator Tillis, is right in blocking any Federal Reserve nominees until this is resolved.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement the Justice Department’s actions represent “the kind of bullying that we’ve all come to expect from Donald Trump and his cronies.” 

“Anyone who is independent and doesn’t just fall in line behind Trump gets investigated,” Schumer wrote. “Jay Powell and the Fed aren’t the reason Trump’s economy and his poll numbers are in the toilet. If he’s looking for the person who caused that he should look in the mirror.”

Former Federal Reserve chairmen, Treasury secretaries and White House economic advisers released a written statement that the Fed’s “independence and the public’s perception of that independence are critical for economic performance, including achieving the goals Congress has set for the Federal Reserve of stable prices, maximum employment, and moderate long-term interest rates.”

“The reported criminal inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell is an unprecedented attempt to use prosecutorial attacks to undermine that independence,” they wrote. “This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions, with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly. It has no place in the United States whose greatest strength is the rule of law, which is at the foundation of our economic success.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters in the afternoon she didn’t know if Trump had seen Powell’s video but defended the president’s right to denounce the Fed’s actions under his leadership. 

“Look, the president has every right to criticize the Fed chair. He has a First Amendment right, just like all of you do,” Leavitt said. “And one thing for sure, the president has made it quite clear that Jerome Powell is bad at his job. As for whether or not Jerome Powell is a criminal, that’s an answer the Department of Justice is going to have to find out and it looks like they intend to find that out.” 

Julia Coehlo leads a song at a vigil outside the Wisconsin State Capitol after the killing of Renee Good by ICE agent Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis, MN. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

At a vigil outside the Wisconsin State Capitol Friday evening, a few days after a federal agent shot and killed Minneapolis mother Renee Nicole Good, hundreds of people held candles and raised their voices in a call and response song led by Madison Community Singing leader Julia Coehlo: “This is way too big for you to carry it on your own …  you do not carry this all alone.”

Tiny lights flickered in the darkness. “This is not a rally centered on chants or speeches,” an organizer from the immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera told the crowd. Instead, it was a moment to acknowledge our collective shock and grief, to support each other as we face the sickening and disorienting shift in the world around us, and to try to hold onto a protective sense of community. 

It was a needed respite from watching the video, obtained by the Minnesota Reformer, of the shooting of Good in broad daylight as she sat at the wheel of her minivan on a Midwestern residential street, apparently trying to move away from the agent who shot her. The horror of that scene was compounded by the propaganda from the Trump administration that followed, immediately blaming Good for her own death and calling her a “domestic terrorist,” while claiming that the real victim was the ICE agent who, after he shot her, walked away unhurt. 

Stoking political division and hate, justifying murder, treating people’s real lives like a video game — our poisonous political atmosphere is overwhelming. We need to put down the screens and restore our sense of human connection if we are going to overcome it.

Dane County Judge and Pastor Everett Mitchell, speaking at the vigil, quoted Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s eulogy for the three little girls killed in the 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama. Their deaths, King said, “have something to say to every minister of the gospel who has remained silent behind the safe security of stained-glass windows. They have something to say to every politician who has fed his constituents with the stale bread of hatred and the spoiled meat of racism,” as well as to those who “stood on the sidelines in a mighty struggle for justice.”

“Madison,” Mitchell said, “we can no longer stand on the sideline and feel like we are protected. We must substitute courage for caution.”

Here in Wisconsin, the Minneapolis shooting hits close to home. Minnesota is our near neighbor. My daughter, who lives in the Twin Cities, was driving past the area of the ICE surge when Good was shot. She texted us about the unfolding chaos in real time, as ICE vehicles sped past her — putting our whole family on edge. 

Maybe we have had the false sense, as Mitchell said, that we were protected. 

The “Midwest nice” culture of Minnesota and Wisconsin — whether that describes taciturn conflict avoidance or genuine warmth — doesn’t fit with political violence. 

It’s impossible to see ourselves in Trump’s heated rhetoric about the “Radical Left Movement of Violence and Hate.” Nicole Good, whose last words were, “I’m not mad at you,” certainly doesn’t fit that profile. 

The killing of a U.S. citizen by federal agents, justified after the fact by the president, vice president, and secretary of Homeland Security, is a turning point for all of us. As investigative reporter Ken Klipperstein points out, Trump’s national security order targeting so-called leftwing domestic terrorist groups, and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s tag-along directive, “Ending Political Violence Against ICE” broadly justify the targeting of Americans who protest Trump’s immigration crackdown or attempt to help their immigrant neighbors who are being terrorized.

In a video filmed by the agent who shot Renee Good, released by a right-wing news outlet that tried to spin it as exonerating him, you can hear a man’s voice, immediately after the shooting, cursing Good, calling her a “f-ing bitch.” 

A Customs and Border Patrol Agent who shot Chicago resident Marimar Martinez five times and bragged about it in text messages, also allegedly used the word “bitch” as he rammed into her car, according to Martinez’s attorney. The Justice Department initially claimed Martinez, who survived. was the aggressor, saying she used her car to try to harm the agents — the same dubious claim made against Good — but then dropped all charges after Martinez challenged the government’s evidence.

Turning hyped-up, poorly trained agents onto the streets to pursue civilians is, contrary to Trump administration propaganda, making America much less safe. And pouring fuel on the fire with hateful rhetoric about “the radical Left” and the need to round up immigrant “criminals” —  a majority of whom have committed no crimes — is exacerbating this disaster.

The Trace puts the number of ICE shootings at 16, four of them fatal, since the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown began — including Silverio Villegas González, a father from Mexico who worked as a cook, killed just after he dropped off his children at school, while reportedly trying to flee from ICE officers during the Midway Blitz in Chicago. At the vigil Friday night, Mitchell connected those killings to racist violence from the Civil Rights era to the 2020 murder of George Floyd. “And now carved into the same, sorrowful stone is the name of Renee Nicole Good,” Mitchell said.

People are struggling to figure out what to make of our frightening new reality. At the Madison vigil, one activist declared that the escalating ICE crackdown “is not because they are inevitably powerful. It is because we are powerful.” But the escalation, which is targeting people who are decidedly not powerful, is coming directly out of the more than $170 billion allocated to immigration enforcement in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — more than the yearly budget for all local and state law enforcement agencies in the U.S. combined, according to the Brennan Center. The Trump administration is using this newly empowered militarized police force to target civilians the administration characterizes as enemies. 

Most of the people I know are aghast at this scary turn of events. But one Wisconsinite I spoke with waved away the shooting, saying, “Minneapolis has a lot of problems.” There’s that false sense of being protected Mitchell called out. It’s really just denial — a powerful wish to believe that bad things only happen to other people, that violence is far away and somehow the fault of people who are different from us and who bring it on themselves.

But this touches all of us. And it won’t go away unless we get to the root of the problem — the unAmerican national security directives, the insane ICE budget, the lack of accountability — what Vice President JD Vance, astoundingly, asserted was “total immunity” for the rogue, masked agents targeting people in a political crackdown that has nothing to do with keeping us safe.

We have to see this for what it is. We need members of Congress to demand a rollback of the massive funding for Trump’s unaccountable police force. We need leaders who will state clearly, as Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey have done, that political violence against civilians waged by the Trump administration is immoral, illegal and has to stop. 

Most of all, we need each other. This is too heavy for one person to carry. We need to connect, to combine all of our efforts and to build a massive popular movement to take care of each other and reject the hateful forces that are trying to tear us apart.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Milwaukee Police Administration Building downtown. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Milwaukee Police Department says it doesn’t have a plan in place if federal immigration authorities mobilize into the city at a scale similar to operations in nearby Chicago and Minneapolis. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement launched one of the largest operations in its history last week, sending about 2,000 agents into the Twin Cities. That mobilization resulted in an ICE agent shooting and killing 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good Wednesday morning in Minneapolis. Minneapolis schools were closed Thursday because, in a separate incident, ICE agents deployed tear gas at a high school as students were being dismissed.

Late last year, ICE’s “Operation Midway Blitz” similarly sent a large number of federal agents into the Chicago area. While the operation was underway, ICE and other federal agents killed a 38-year-old Mexican man during a traffic stop and in another incident rammed into the car of a woman who was warning neighbors about ICE presence before shooting her five times. 

The Chicago operation included at least another dozen incidents in which federal agents pointed their guns or fired less-lethal weapons at residents, according to data compiled by The Trace. 

In both cities, the massive presence of immigration authorities has caused significant ripple effects through local communities, straining the ability of local law enforcement to control crowds of observers and protesters and respond to the disruptions in traffic caused by caravans of federal SUVs traveling over city streets. 

“Local police departments and many state governors have been very firm in their communication to federal law enforcement that federal law enforcement is not welcome in their cities conducting these sorts of major operations because of the fact that it is so disruptive,” says Ingrid Eagly, a law professor at UCLA who focuses on immigration enforcement. “Because people you know can be injured and harmed, and communities are living in fear. It’s causing a great amount of disruption in communities to have this kind of strong law enforcement presence.” 

In cities across the country where ICE agents have been deployed in large numbers, local officials have had to decide how local cops engage with the operations and what that engagement communicates to local residents. Eagly says that operating as “a backup service for unprepared ICE agents” would be using local resources to legitimize ICE’s presence. 

“To send in local law enforcement, as backup, as sort of part of the enforcement team, would be essentially being part of the of the federal police force conducting ICE operations,” she says.

The operations in Chicago and Minneapolis, two largely Democratic Midwestern cities  that are frequent targets of rhetorical attacks by Republicans, are prominent displays of force in communities similar to Milwaukee. Even though Wisconsin has so far avoided the brunt of the Trump administration’s stepped-up immigration enforcement efforts, that could change. 

Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that the city had to be prepared for the “eventuality” that an ICE surge is coming.

“Given what happened [Wednesday] and the young woman who was killed by a federal agent in Minneapolis, we got to prepare on the ground,” Johnson said.

But when asked if the Milwaukee Police had a plan for managing a potential ICE operation in the city, a spokesperson for the department only pointed to the department’s existing immigration policy. 

The department’s immigration policy states that Milwaukee Police officers are not allowed to cooperate with ICE’s civil immigration enforcement actions. 

“Proactive immigration enforcement by local police can be detrimental to our mission and policing philosophy when doing so deters some individuals from participating in their civic obligation to assist the police,” the policy states. 

But the written policy does not include any provisions for how police personnel should respond in the event of massive ICE presence in the community. Having a noncooperation or “sanctuary” policy could make Milwaukee a target for Trump’s mass deportation program. Despite that, when pressed for clarification because the policy does not state now the department would manage the fallout of an ICE surge, the spokesperson refused to answer.

“It states what our policy [is] in regards to immigration enforcement,” a Milwaukee police spokesperson said in an unsigned email on Tuesday, before the Minneapolis incident. “We do not have an operation like Chicago therefore cannot provide information about a policy of something that we do not have in our city.” 

Pressed again for an answer to the specific question about managing the traffic and crowd control implications of a massive ICE operation in Milwaukee, the spokesperson again refused to answer. 

“We have an immigration enforcement policy just because you do not like the answer does not mean we are going to answer different to you,” the spokesperson wrote. 

After the shooting in Minneapolis, in answer to a follow-up question from the Examiner, the MPD spokesperson again cited the department’s existing policy preventing cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin lawmakers, journalists and members of the public returned to the Capitol last week for a packed slate of committee hearings and executive sessions but for the first time in nearly 20 years, WisconsinEye was not broadcasting daily legislative proceedings. Wisconsin State Capitol on a snowy day. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

After WisconsinEye, the state’s version of C-Span, went off the air in December, Republican lawmakers rediscovered rules that bar members of the public from making video and audio recordings of committee hearings and decided to start enforcing them.

Wisconsin lawmakers, journalists and members of the public returned to the Capitol last week for a packed slate of committee hearings and executive sessions but for the first time in nearly 20 years, WisconsinEye was not broadcasting daily legislative proceedings.

A notice passed around Assembly committees listed two rules. Assembly rule 11, related to committee procedures, states that “insofar as applicable, the rules of the Assembly apply to the procedures of standing committees and special committees.”

Assembly rule 26, which relates to members of the public observing from visitor galleries in the Assembly chambers, states that they “may not use any audio or video device to record, photograph, film, videotape, or in any way depict the proceedings on or about the Assembly floor.” 

Senate rule 11 also states that “no persons other than members of the chief clerk’s staff, members of the staff of the sergeant at arms, members of a senator’s staff, and accredited correspondents of the news media may engage in any audio or video recording of the proceedings of the Senate or any committee without permission of the committee on Senate organization.” According to the Senate Chief Clerk Cyrus Anderson, the rule was first adopted in 2005. 

Wisconsin’s open meetings law expressly states that governmental bodies “shall make a reasonable effort to accommodate any person desiring to record, film or photograph the meeting,” but the law includes a provision that says that “no provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule.”

Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac) told the Wisconsin Examiner that the rules were reviewed in caucus at the start of the year.

“Many of [the members], like me, I didn’t know there was a rule,” O’Connor said. “So it was a reminder.” 

Rep. David Steffen (R-Howard), who has served in the Assembly since 2015, said he couldn’t remember looking at the rule in the last decade. 

“How many times have I just kind of breezed past it? I guess I never really thought of it, primarily because I’ve always had WisconsinEye to rely on to assist with that coverage, as well as present media and in-person public,” Steffen said. 

Steffen said lawmakers, seeking to understand their options in the absences of WisconsinEye, looked over the Assembly rules.

“One of the things that immediately became apparent is that under our Assembly rules, we already have some things that are readily available — for example, credentialed media — but we also have things that have always been prohibited,” Steffen said. “It remains the rule of the day, so this isn’t a new rule… In terms of the enforcement, I think it’s more of an awareness campaign than anything.”

The rule enforcement caused some confusion throughout last week.

Notices related to the rules were passed around and posted outside committee rooms. Committee chairs issued directions at the start of meetings. Reporters in committees were asked to show their credentials as they set up cameras and stood to take photos, and others, including staff members and members of the public without credentials, were stopped from doing so.

Rep. Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit), seeking to help fill the gap left by the absence of WisconsinEye, livestreamed on Facebook the meeting of the Assembly Local Government Committee on Wednesday, writing that “we have to step up and do what we can.” Anderson said on Thursday that he sought to do the same in the Assembly Agriculture Committee but was stopped from doing so as Rep. Travis Tranel (R-Cuba City) reminded the room of the rules related to recording.

“We’re now hearing that this will become standard practice across committees. If that’s the direction Republican leadership is heading, it represents a clear move to restrict public access,” Anderson said in a statement. “After WisconsinEye went dark, the response should have been to expand transparency, not quietly close another door on the public. I am disappointed to see the Assembly GOP go after the public’s First Amendment rights.”

Testimony from two Republican lawmakers on a bill to exempt overtime from income taxes was interrupted during an Assembly Ways and Means committee meeting on Thursday afternoon by  a point of order relating to video recording.

“I don’t have a problem, video all you want,” said Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona), the committee’s ranking member, to someone who was holding up a cellphone “You’ve got nothing to hide. These guys have nothing to hide, but if we’re going to have a rule…”

“I know that there was staff taking a photo, yes, and I gotta challenge that if you’re videoing… if you’re doing a video that you’re not allowed in the committee area,” O’Connor said. 

O’Connor told the Examiner after the meeting that he is fine with photos being taken in his committee and he believes committee chairs can use their discretion on whether to allow photos. He said video is different because of  its potential use for political purposes.

“If it’s staff taking photos of their rep, I don’t have a big problem of it,” O’Connor said. “You could have somebody, an outsider, come and testify, and their best friend is sitting in this seat and wants to take a picture, that’s not the issue.”

“Trying to capture video, quite frankly, it gets down to it can be used politically,” he added. “So WisconsinEye tapes this, you cannot use a WisconsinEye clip in political campaigns. That’s why the rules originated, and I get that… I don’t want either side to violate that or benefit from it adversely.”

Bare said he wanted to ensure that the rules were being applied evenly if they were going to be enforced. 

“We have a long, rich tradition in Wisconsin of open government, open access to government, and we shouldn’t have be limiting that access to members of the public to staff to members and to the media in any way,” Bare said, adding that the enforcement of the rules is “clearly a response to WisconsinEye being offline, being dark, which seems like a preventable problem.”

“There’s plenty of states in the country who provide funding for broadcasting… We shouldn’t be in the situation where we members or our staff have to livestream onto social media,” Bare said. “We’ve got decades now of precedent of these things being broadcast out to the public.”

WisconsinEye halted its coverage in December due to a lack of funding after failing to raise sufficient funds to meet a matching requirement for the release of $10 million in state funds.  WisconsinEye leadership has been in discussions with lawmakers about a potential solution, including releasing part of the  $10 million that is intended to build an endowment.

“We’re only going to be in session for maybe eight to 10 more weeks, and if we’re unable to get WisconsinEye back up and running in that timeframe, I’m hopeful the public isn’t going to be impacted any more than they already have been,” Steffen said. 

Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, told the Examiner that the enforcement of the rule is a bad idea.

“Regardless of the law, denying the public the ability to record and film legislative meetings, especially in the absence of a functioning WisconsinEye, is deeply undemocratic and, in my opinion, foolhardy. Nothing that goes on in these meetings is anywhere near as insidious as what people will assume is happening if the ability to film and record it is being curtailed,” Lueders said.

Lueders said the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (WFIC) doesn’t support anything that treats the media differently from ordinary citizens.

“Although they may legally be able to pass their own rule and enforce their own rule to deny people an opportunity, it doesn’t make it any less of a good idea,” Lueders said.  

Steffen said he would be open to having options for the public to record and photograph meetings as long as they are not obstructing the activity of a committee. “I think that this situation, this hopefully short-term downtime, has created an opportunity to discuss some of those rules that have been on the books for some time, and perhaps there’s some that need to be modified.”

In the meantime, Steffen said lawmakers are focused on finding a solution to make up for the loss of  WisconsinEye and options for the public are limited to attending in person and consuming coverage by journalists in the Capitol.

Steffen called on local reporters to “fill the gap” in a press release on Friday.

“All of them have the ability to record, maybe sometimes just audio, but they all have the ability to record a proceeding and put that on their website,” Steffen said. “That at least would provide some opportunity for transparency during this interim.”

Lueders said local media “absolutely does not have the resources to film as many legislative hearings and sessions as WisconsinEye was doing; it just doesn’t have that capacity. Cameras can come and show up for part of a hearing, but they’re not there filming entire meetings on a daily basis, and that’s not a function that can be replicated… It’s more important than ever that ordinary citizens who attend these meetings are able to film and record it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Becky Pepper-Jackson attends the Lambda Legal Liberty Awards on June 8, 2023 in New York City. Her mother sued on her behalf over West Virginia's law barring trans athletes from competing on girls’ and women’s sports teams in public schools and colleges. (Photo by Roy Rochlin/Getty Images for Lambda Legal )

WASHINGTON — A pair of blockbuster cases to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court could carry far-reaching implications for transgender rights, even as the Trump administration during the past year has rolled out a broad anti-trans agenda targeting everything from sports to military service.

The court on Jan. 13 will hear challenges to laws in Idaho and West Virginia banning transgender athletes from participating in women’s sports. Both cases center on whether the laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The West Virginia case before the Supreme Court also questions whether the state’s law violates Title IX — a landmark federal civil rights law that bars schools that receive federal funding from practicing sex-based discrimination. 

Lower court rulings have temporarily blocked the states from implementing the bans, to varying extents, and Republican attorneys general in Idaho and West Virginia have asked the Supreme Court to intervene. 

“We know we have an uphill fight, and our hope is certainly that we prevail,” Joshua Block, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT & HIV Project, who will be presenting oral arguments in the West Virginia case, said at a Jan. 8 ACLU press briefing. 

“But we also hope that regardless of what happens, this case isn’t successfully used as a tool to undermine the rights of transgender folks more generally in areas far beyond just athletics.” 

The outcome of the oral arguments before a court dominated 6-3 by conservative justices will be closely watched. Nearly 30 states have laws that ban trans students’ participation in sports consistent with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an independent think tank.

Idaho case  

The justices are taking up both cases in one day. First will be Little v. Hecox, which contests a 2020 Idaho law that categorically bans trans athletes from competing on women’s and girls’ sports teams. 

Lindsay Hecox sued over the ban in 2020, just months before the law was set to take effect. 

Though Hecox wanted to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University, the Idaho law — the first of its kind in the nation — would have prevented her from doing so because she is transgender. 

A federal court in Idaho halted the law from taking effect later that year. A federal appeals court initially upheld the ruling in 2023 but later adjusted the scope of it in 2024 to only apply to Hecox, not other athletes. 

Idaho appealed to the Supreme Court in July 2024.

Since that time, Hecox has asked both an Idaho federal court and the Supreme Court to drop the case. 

An Idaho federal judge in October rejected that attempt, but the Supreme Court deferred the request until after oral argument — meaning justices could still dismiss the case.

“The Supreme Court is trying to decide whether Idaho can preserve women’s sports based on biological sex, or must female be redefined based on gender identity,” Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador said at a Jan. 8 press briefing ahead of the oral arguments.

“I think Idaho is just trying to protect fairness, safety and equal protection for girls and women in sports,” Labrador said at the briefing alongside West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey, hosted by the conservative legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom.  

West Virginia case

After the Idaho case, the justices will hear arguments in West Virginia v. B.P.J., which centers on a 2021 Mountain State law that also bans trans athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams. 

McCuskey argued that his state’s law “supports and bolsters the original intent and the continuing intent and purpose of Title IX.” 

McCuskey said the law complies with the Equal Protection Clause because it “treats all biological males and all biological females identically” and “doesn’t ban anyone from playing sports.” 

Becky Pepper-Jackson, who was 11 at the time, wanted to try out for the girls’ cross-country team when starting middle school, but would have been prevented from doing so under the West Virginia law because she is transgender. 

Her mother sued on her behalf in 2021.

A federal appeals court in 2024 barred West Virginia from enforcing the ban, prompting the state to ask the nation’s highest court to intervene.  

White House, Congress zero in on trans athletes

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump’s administration has taken steps at the federal level to prohibit trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports teams aligning with their gender identity. 

Trump signed an executive order in February 2025 that banned such participation and made it the policy of the United States to “rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy.”

The NCAA promptly changed its policy to comply with the order, limiting “competition in women’s sports to student-athletes assigned female at birth only.” 

In late 2024, prior to the policy shift, NCAA President Charlie Baker told Congress that of the more than half-million total athletes in NCAA schools, he knew of fewer than 10 who were transgender. 

The GOP-led House passed a measure in January 2025 that would bar transgender students from participating on women’s school sports teams consistent with their gender identity. 

But Senate Democrats in March blocked an attempt at imposing such a ban and codifying Trump’s executive order. 

Forty-eight GOP members of Congress argued in a September amicus brief supporting Idaho and West Virginia that “if allowed to stand, the interpretation of the lower courts will unsettle the very promises that Congress made to generations of young women and men through Title IX.” 

On the flip side, 130 congressional Democrats stood behind the two transgender athletes in a November amicus brief, noting that “categorical bans preventing transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity impose significant harm on all children — especially girls.” 

The group argued that such bans “do not meet the standards this Court has put in place to assess discrimination based on sex — whether as a matter of Title IX or under the Equal Protection Clause.” 

Trump’s broader anti-trans agenda has extended beyond athletic participation in the nearly one year since he took office. 

He signed executive orders that: make it the “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female;” restrict access to gender-affirming care for kids; and aim to bar openly transgender service members from the U.S. military. 

‘Textbook discrimination’ 

The Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, has noted that there has been “considerable disinformation and misinformation about what the inclusion of transgender youth in sports entails” and that trans students’ sports participation “has been a non-issue.”

In a statement ahead of oral arguments, HRC’s senior director of legal policy Cathryn Oakley said “every child, no matter their background, race, or gender, should have access to a quality education where they can feel safe to learn and grow — and for many kids that involves being a part of a school sports team.”

Oakley added that “to deny transgender kids the chance to participate in school sports alongside their peers simply because of who they are is textbook discrimination — and it’s unconstitutional.” 

A police officer uses the Flock Safety license plate reader system. Many left-leaning states and cities are trying to protect their residents’ personal information amid the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, but a growing number of conservative lawmakers also want to curb the use of surveillance technologies. (Photo courtesy of Flock Safety)

As part of its deportation efforts, the Trump administration has ordered states to hand over personal data from voter rolls, driver’s license records and programs such as Medicaid and food stamps.

At the same time, the administration is trying to consolidate the bits of personal data held across federal agencies, creating a single trove of information on people who live in the United States.

Many left-leaning states and cities are trying to protect their residents’ personal information amid the immigration crackdown. But a growing number of conservative lawmakers also want to curb the use of surveillance technologies, such as automated license plate readers, that can be used to identify and track people.

Conservative-led states such as Arkansas, Idaho and Montana enacted laws last year designed to protect the personal data collected through license plate readers and other means. They joined at least five left-leaning states — Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York and Washington — that specifically blocked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from accessing their driver’s license records.

In addition, Democratic-led cities in Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Texas and Washington last year terminated their contracts with Flock Safety, the largest provider of license plate readers in the U.S.

The Trump administration’s goal is to create a “surveillance dragnet across the country,” said William Owen, communications director at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a nonprofit that advocates for stronger privacy laws.

“We’re entering an increasingly dystopian era of high-tech surveillance,” Owen said. Intelligence sharing between various levels of government, he said, has “allowed ICE to sidestep sanctuary laws and co-opt local police databases and surveillance tools, including license plate readers, facial recognition and other technologies.”

A new Montana law bars government entities from accessing electronic communications and related material without a warrant. Republican state Sen. Daniel Emrich, the law’s author, said “the most important thing that our entire justice system is based on is the principle against unlawful search and seizure” — the right enshrined in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“It’s tough to find individuals who are constitutionally grounded and understand the necessity of keeping the Fourth Amendment rights intact at all times for all reasons — with minimal or zero exceptions,” Emrich said in an interview.

ICE did not respond to Stateline’s requests for comment.

Automated license plate readers

Recently, cities and states have grown particularly concerned over the use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs), which are high-speed camera and computer systems that capture license plate information on vehicles that drive by. These readers sit on top of police cars and streetlights or can be hidden within construction barrels and utility poles.

Some cameras collect data that gets stored in databases for years, raising concerns among privacy advocates. One report from the Brennan Center for Justice, a progressive think tank at New York University, found the data can be susceptible to hacking. Different agencies have varying policies on how long they keep the data, according to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, a law enforcement advocacy group.

Supporters of the technology, including many in law enforcement, say the technology is a powerful tool for tracking down criminal suspects.

Flock Safety says it has cameras in more than 5,000 communities and is connected to more than 4,800 law enforcement agencies across 49 states. The company claims its cameras conduct more than 20 billion license plate reads a month. It collects the data and gives it to police departments, which use the information to locate people.

Holly Beilin, a spokesperson for Flock Safety, told Stateline that while there are local police agencies that may be working with ICE, the company does not have a contractual relationship with the agency. Beilin also said that many liberal and even sanctuary cities continue to sign contracts with Flock Safety. She noted that the cameras have been used to solve some high-profile crimes, including identifying and leading police to the man who committed the Brown University shooting and killed an MIT professor at the end of last year.

“Agencies and cities are very much able to use this technology in a way that complies with their values. So they do not have to share data out of state,” Beilin said.

Pushback over data’s use

But critics, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, say that Flock Safety’s cameras are not only “giving even the smallest-town police chief access to an enormously powerful driver-surveillance tool,” but also that the data is being used by ICE. One news outlet, 404 Media, obtained records of these searches and found many were being carried out by local officers on behalf of ICE.

Last spring, the Denver City Council unanimously voted to terminate its contract with Flock Safety, but Democratic Mayor Mike Johnston unilaterally extended the contract in October, arguing that the technology was a useful crime-fighting tool.

The ACLU of Colorado has vehemently opposed the cameras, saying last August that audit logs from the Denver Police Department show more than 1,400 searches had been conducted for ICE since June 2024.

“The conversation has really gotten bigger because of the federal landscape and the focus, not only on immigrants and the functionality of ICE right now, but also on the side of really trying to reduce and or eliminate protections in regards to access to reproductive care and gender affirming care,” Anaya Robinson, public policy director at the ACLU of Colorado.

“When we erode rights and access for a particular community, it’s just a matter of time before that erosion starts to touch other communities.”

Jimmy Monto, a Democratic city councilor in Syracuse, New York, led the charge to eliminate Flock Safety’s contract in his city.

“Syracuse has a very large immigrant population, a very large new American population, refugees that have resettled and been resettled here. So it’s a very sensitive issue,” Monto said, adding that license plate readers allow anyone reviewing the data to determine someone’s immigration status without a warrant.

“When we sign a contract with someone who is collecting data on the citizens who live in a city, we have to be hyper-focused on exactly what they are doing while we’re also giving police departments the tools that they need to also solve homicides, right?” Monto said.

“Certainly, if license plate readers are helpful in that way, I think the scope is right. But we have to make sure that that’s what we’re using it for, and that the companies that we are contracting with are acting in good faith.”

Emrich, the Montana lawmaker, said everyone should be concerned about protecting constitutional privacy rights, regardless of their political views.

“If the government is obtaining data in violation of constitutional rights, they could be violating a whole slew of individuals’ constitutional rights in pursuit of the individuals who may or may not be protected under those same constitutional rights,” he said.

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org.

Kathy Briggs is assisted by case manager Kim Immel, left, and nursery program manager Kim Perkins as she puts on a front-loading baby carrier with her daughter Melody inside at the Women’s Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center in Vandalia, Mo. Prison nursery programs allow babies to live behind walls with their mothers — a rare and controversial approach. (Photo by Amanda Watford/Stateline)

VANDALIA, Mo. — Kathy Briggs slipped her arms through the thick straps of a brand-new baby carrier, tugging it over her beige shirt as two other women stood beside her, tightening buckles and adjusting the padded waistband.

The carrier was still stiff from its packaging, and Briggs shifted her feet as one of the women gently lifted then-6-month-old Melody into the front pouch.

Melody’s gray-blue eyes tracked the women’s hands, and her wispy blond hair — gathered into a tiny pink bow — bobbed slightly with the movement. She blinked up at the adults.

“Put your foot in there,” one of the women said, guiding Melody’s leg through the opening.

“She’s just a little chunk,” the other woman said.

Briggs’ eyes widened, and she squealed, half laughing, as Melody settled against her chest. Across the room, a few women looked up from boxes of newly arrived donations — tiny onesies and hip carriers still wrapped in plastic.

Someone let out a soft “aww.” Briggs, 29, bounced on her heels, testing the weight, her palms hovering protectively near Melody’s back.

For a moment, the room felt like any early childhood nursery: adult chatter and baby babbles, women comparing baby gear and swapping soothing techniques.

Yet the jangling of keys and the watchful eyes of uniformed officers were a reminder that this colorful corner of the world existed not in a day care, but inside a women’s prison in rural Missouri.

Programs like this one allow babies inside prisons — a rare and controversial approach that forces states to confront how punishment, public safety and early childhood development collide. As more women enter state prisons while pregnant, lawmakers and corrections officials are expanding prison nursery programs, betting that keeping mothers and infants together can reduce trauma and recidivism — even as critics question whether any prison can ever be an appropriate place for a child.

Missouri’s program, which opened last February at the Women’s Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center, is the ninth nursery program currently operating inside of a prison in the country. The program was adopted into state law in 2022.

Each year, thousands of pregnant offenders are admitted to local jails and state prisons — most for nonviolent crimes. In 2023, the latest year with data available, about 2% of women who were admitted to state prisons were pregnant, according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics.

The number of incarcerated women has climbed sharply over the past several decades, making them one of the fastest-growing segments of the prison population. Some experts say the trend has forced states to confront a basic reality: Most correctional facilities were never designed to accommodate new mothers.

“Routine aspects of prison operations just really don’t consider the distinct needs of women, and particularly not of pregnant women,” said Alycia Welch, the associate director of the Prison and Jail Innovation Lab at the University of Texas at Austin. Welch researches carceral conditions and oversight with a focus on women’s experiences.

Federal reports and research have found that pregnant inmates face systemic barriers to timely care — from guards controlling access to medical treatment to logistical delays and medical fees. Shackling during pregnancy and childbirth persists despite restrictions in at least 42 states.

Prison nursery programs benefit relatively few women, and some criminal justice advocates say they reinforce the notion that incarceration — rather than community-based drug treatment or diversion — should remain the default response for pregnant women in the criminal legal system.

Some research suggests that prison nurseries can strengthen early bonding, improve maternal mental health and support the transition from incarceration back into the community after new mothers have time to parent their infants in a structured, supportive environment.

“This community just lifts us up,” Briggs said.

Inside Missouri’s nursery program

The room Kaley McDowell shares with her infant daughter, Kimber, is arranged for two mothers and two babies — twin beds on each wall, a pair of cribs nearby and space left open for feeding, rocking and play.

McDowell’s rocking chair sits in the corner, draped with a warm, butter yellow blanket. She settled into the rocker with Kimber in her arms just as a soft, classical melody drifted from one of the crib-soother toys. Kimber curled tightly against her chest; her cheek pressed into her mother’s shirt.

“She thinks she’s gonna eat now,” McDowell joked, shifting her baby upright on her thighs as the two rocked slowly back and forth. She then set Kimber down so the child could try standing.

Kimber steadied herself, then reached down toward her tiny toes as if surprised to find them there.

McDowell, 34, is a girl mom through and through. All four of her daughters — ages 13, 9, 2 and now-7-month-old Kimber — have “K” names, a small bit of continuity she’s proud of.

Inside the nursery unit, she’s the experienced mom, the one other women seek out for advice.

McDowell isn’t set for release until August, which means Kimber will leave the nursery around 15 months old. In the meantime, McDowell is taking classes to get her GED diploma and hopes to earn her license as a certified nurse assistant.

Missouri’s prison nursery program allows eligible women to live with their newborns for up to 18 months. Women must have no more than 18 months remaining on their sentence at the time of delivery, and those who have committed violent sexual offenses or crimes against children cannot participate.

Prison officials also review disciplinary history, physical and mental health, and engagement in programming before approving someone for one of the unit’s seven bedrooms, which collectively can house up to 14 babies at a time.

About two dozen infants are expected to cycle through the nursery each year, and staff anticipate that number will climb — a sign of growing demand for the program.

“I have watched moms transform their lives,” said Kim Perkins, the nursery’s program manager.

Across the day, the nursery fills with the kinds of small, steady interactions that shape early childhood: Mothers reading baby books, caregivers rocking fussy infants, babies sprawled across play mats surrounded by stuffed animals. Correctional officers and nursery staff also often help, whether by holding a wiggly baby or fetching supplies.

“They like to come and steal the babies when they can,” McDowell said. “They’re like our in-house grandmas.”

The unit’s officers also are trained to expect round-the-clock movement, and the team includes male officers, so infants grow accustomed to hearing different voices.

“It’s going to be a good thing for these women,” said Lisa Unger, one of the unit’s correctional officers. While she was initially apprehensive about the program, she said she has watched women genuinely change over time with the support they receive.

When mothers cook group meals — something that happens at least once a week — the unit feels briefly like a crowded family kitchen, with women passing plates, joking and handing off infants so someone else can finish stirring a pot.

Movement across the unit is tightly restricted, though. Babies are not allowed upstairs to the sleeping and living quarters of caregivers — incarcerated women trained for the role — and mothers go there only to “shop” in the storage room stocked with donated clothing. When the weather is nice and staffing allows, the mothers can take their babies outside to the play area. The babies do not enter other parts of the prison.

Turning point

For much of her life, Kathy Briggs did not imagine a future that included her. She was first incarcerated at 15, and has now been in and out of incarceration three times.

Addiction shaped nearly every corner of her adulthood — where she slept and whom she trusted. Some nights were spent in drug houses, others on the street. She lost two pregnancies.

At her lowest point, Briggs tattooed “DNR” — which stands for “do not resuscitate” — above her left eye.

When Briggs learned she was expecting again — this time while in county jail awaiting adjudication — she doubted her ability to stay sober, to find housing, to understand motherhood at all. When she learned she was carrying twins, her panic deepened and she considered placing them up for adoption.

Who would take them? Who would trust her with them?

The turning point came with a sentence delivered calmly from the bench. Facing drug possession and firearm-related charges, Briggs expected another familiar outcome and that she’d be released shortly. Instead, the judge told her she would go to prison — and have her babies there.

Briggs protested — babies did not belong in prison. But the judge insisted. More importantly, he told her he believed in her. It was the first time, she said, anyone in a position of authority had made her feel like she could overcome her past.

She arrived at the prison nursery unit seven months pregnant. When her daughters were born, she nicknamed them “Little Lyric” and “Mighty Melody,” inspired by the music that always made her feel free.

The infants’ play space is awash in color: Rugs patterned with swirling motifs and florals; shelves crammed with books, dolls and stacking toys; rocking chairs with tufted pillows. A baby swing clicks rhythmically in one corner. Near a window overlooking an outdoor play area, a potted plant soaks up the morning sun.

Inside the nursery, Briggs’ daughters, whom she calls her “best friends,” thrive. Their father also is incarcerated, and the nursery staff are working to make sure he can receive regular updates and photos of the girls.

“Some of us didn’t grow up with good families or a lot of love,” Briggs said. “Here, they’re teaching us how to grow with our babies, and that is such a beautiful thing.”

Some of the program’s caregivers say the strength of the unit comes from the fact that no one is raising a baby in isolation — and that some caregivers bring their own lived experience as mothers to guide the others.

One morning, caregiver Tara Carroll sat on the floor, sorting a pile of donated baby clothes while several women gathered around her — some seated at a nearby table, others standing and talking among themselves.

She organized the outfits by size, slipping the clothes onto tiny colorful hangers. As she logged each item, a few of the women began matching tops and bottoms, holding them up for one another to weigh in.

“This one will fit her, and it’s got cute little pants and a snowflake,” Carroll told one mother.

“That’s cuuuuuute,” another mom chimed in.

Carroll, 34, has been incarcerated for several years on property-related charges, and she remembers what it was like before the nursery existed.

In 2022, she delivered her now-3-year-old daughter, Dillon Rayee, at a nearby hospital and spent 48 hours with her before her husband took their newborn home.

“It was heart-wrenching, and I promised my daughter that I would do everything that I could to come home to her,” Carroll said. She hopes to use her experience in the prison to become a doula.

Until the nursery opened, her birth experience was the norm: a day or two with a newborn, then the baby went into foster care or with family and the mother returned to her cell. For Carroll, helping the women in the unit now — guiding them through feedings, showing them how to swaddle, offering advice during long nights — feels like a way of honoring her promise to her daughter.

Policies across the states

Across the country, fewer than a dozen states operate nursery programs that allow incarcerated mothers to live with their newborns.

New York operates the nation’s oldest prison nursery, which opened in the early 1900s at the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility. The program allows up to 25 incarcerated mothers to live with their infants — typically until age 1 — under a system governed by state law and administered by a nonprofit provider, Hour Children.

Newer programs — in Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota, Ohio, Washington state and West Virginia — vary widely in size, eligibility and funding. Many rely heavily on nonprofit partners or donations to cover essentials such as diapers, cribs and parenting classes.

Nebraska’s program, which launched in 1994, allows mothers to participate if their parole eligibility date or release date falls within 18 months of their child’s birth.

Rosita Vizcarra, 29, said the program has been a “blessing,” giving her the chance to bond with her now-9-month-old son, Liam, while also learning how to be a better parent to her two older daughters.

“He’s crawling and starting to stand,” Vizcarra wrote in a message to Stateline through the facility’s messaging platform. “He’s such a happy baby.”

Miranda Messenger, 37, told Stateline in a message that the program has given her what she and her now 4-month-old son, Kyle, need to succeed and stay connected to her support system while separated from her three older children.

“It’s gonna help Miranda tenfold,” said Shannon Fune, Kyle’s father, who has been able to visit the pair a few times. “I was a little bit jealous or disappointed that I wasn’t gonna be there.”

A 2018 study of Nebraska’s program found participation was associated with a 28% reduction in recidivism within three years of the initial offense and a 39% reduction in returns to prison custody within 20 years over the 20-year period of the study. The author, Joseph R. Carlson, a former professor at the University of Nebraska, also estimated that the program saved the state more than $6 million between 1994 and 2012.

A handful of states — Kansas, North Dakota, Virginia and Wisconsin — are considering or expanding nursery programs. Idaho and Wyoming explored nursery plans in recent years, but abandoned them due to space, budget and staffing issues, according to state corrections officials.

Many other states offer other programs they say benefit incarcerated mothers, such as doula programs during pregnancy or during labor and delivery, extended visitation for young children or mother-child facilities based in communities rather than a prison.

Although interest in programs for pregnant and postpartum women in the criminal legal system has grown, experts across the country say there is still not enough research to know how well these programs work — and even basic data on the number and experiences or outcomes of incarcerated pregnant people remains limited.

“It’s, for me, really unfortunate that we are doing this without evidence to inform the policies we’re putting in place,” said Rebecca Shlafer, a child psychologist and associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Minnesota. Shlafer also evaluated the implementation of Minnesota’s 2021 Healthy Start Act, which allows pregnant and postpartum women to participate in community-based alternatives.

‘A real patchwork’

It’s hard to know exactly how many pregnant people enter jails and prisons each year. The federal government does not require correctional systems to track pregnancy data, and reporting varies widely by state.

By the end of 2023, 305 pregnant women were housed in state prisons, according to the latest federal data, which was released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics in April. At least 75 women lived in prison nurseries or residential programs with their infants in 2023.

A 2019 study of incarcerated pregnant women — drawing from both state and federal facilities — estimated roughly 58,000 admissions to prisons and jails between 2016 and 2017. The study, conducted by the Advocacy and Research on Reproductive Wellness of Incarcerated People group and published in the peer-reviewed American Journal of Public Health, is considered the first national investigation into pregnancy frequency and outcomes in prisons.

There are no federal standards for prison nursery programs, and each state sets its own rules — who qualifies, how long mothers can stay, what staffing and safety protocols look like and what reentry support is offered.

Studies of long-running programs in Nebraska and New York found that mothers who participated were less likely to return to prison than similar women who weren’t admitted. But those results, some experts say, may be shaped by the programs’ strict eligibility rules: Nurseries typically accept people with lower-level offenses and short sentences.

A study published in April in the peer-reviewed Women & Criminal Justice journal found that the existence of prison nursery programs caused stress and anxiety for those who weren’t eligible after giving birth, leaving them feeling like unfit mothers, and diverted resources from other ways to help incarcerated moms maintain bonds with their babies.

“We can think outside the prison walls for how to keep moms and babies together in ways that still maintain safety and accountability,” said Dr. Carolyn Sufrin, a medical anthropologist and an obstetrician-gynecologist at Johns Hopkins University. Sufrin also leads the Advocacy and Research on Reproductive Wellness of Incarcerated People group.

Critics of prison nurseries argue that the correctional environment is fundamentally ill-suited to meet the health, developmental and emotional needs of pregnant or postpartum women and their infants.

Prisons are usually not staffed with maternal health experts or pediatricians, and medical care is often inconsistent. The environment itself limits babies’ movement and ability to form relationships with other family members. The children can’t go outdoors every day.

Financial stability also is a major concern. Some of the existing prison nursery programs nationwide primarily depend on donations or nonprofit support instead of consistent state funding. Critics argue that this makes nurseries a fragile, resource-heavy solution that helps only a small number of women while reinforcing the broader system of incarceration rather than providing a reliable, scalable alternative.

“It’s a real patchwork out there, and every state is different, but again, just not ideal to have women and babies in these settings,” said Erin McClain, a research associate and the assistant director of the University of North Carolina Collaborative for Maternal and Infant Health, a research center focusing on high-risk pregnancies and infants.

A path forward

Briggs is set to leave Missouri’s Women’s Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center for a halfway house, again with her babies, later this month. She has thought extensively about what she’ll one day tell her daughters about their first few months of life — and about how far she has come from the days when her “DNR” tattoo reflected a very different outlook.

“I want to live life, and I want to show them that they can live a good life,” Briggs said. “I want to be the light that makes them feel warm.”

Inside the program, she learned how to care for her daughters and, just as critically, how to care for herself, she said. For someone who had grown up without much love or guidance, the nursery became a place where both were taught, deliberately and daily.

She hopes to return someday to help others navigate the early months of parenthood behind bars.

“More mothers in this situation deserve an opportunity to learn to be a better mother.”

Stateline reporter Amanda Watford can be reached at ahernandez@stateline.org.

A memorial grows Thursday, Jan. 8, 2026 on the spot where an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Good, 37, the previous day. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

Renee Nicole Good, who was fatally shot by an ICE agent in Minneapolis on Wednesday, was a poet and a mother of 3. She moved to the city with her wife and 6-year-old son almost a year ago.

Good’s wife, Rebecca Good, told the Washington Post that they had stopped to support neighbors when she was shot by the ICE agent, who has been identified as Jonathan Ross by the Star Tribune. 

“On Wednesday, January 7th, we stopped to support our neighbors. We had whistles. They had guns,” Rebecca Good said in a statement to the Post and other media outlets on Friday.

“We were raising our son to believe that no matter where you come from or what you look like, all of us deserve compassion and kindness,” the statement continues. “Renee lived this belief every day. She is pure love. She is pure joy. She is pure sunshine.”

Renee Good, 37, was a mother to a 15-year-old daughter and two sons, ages 12 and 6, her first husband told the Post. Online records and interviews with media outlets from family and friends paint her as a caring person and an avid writer who enjoyed movies, making art, singing and playing guitar. Her first husband described her as a devoted Christian to the Post.

She studied creative writing at Old Dominion University* in Norfolk, Virginia, graduating in December 2020. She won an undergraduate poetry prize in 2020 for her poem “On Learning to Dissect Fetal Pigs,” which the contest judge described as “a meditation that leads the reader into the unknown.”

“May Renee’s life be a reminder of what unites us: freedom, love, and peace,” university president Brian O. Hemphill said in a statement. “My hope is for compassion, healing, and reflection at a time that is becoming one of the darkest and most uncertain periods in our nation’s history.”

She was originally from Colorado Springs, Colo. She lived in Kansas City, Mo., with her wife before moving to Minnesota. Their former neighbor in Kansas City told the Post that the couple said they wanted to move out of the red state after President Donald Trump was elected in 2024.

Her second husband, Tim Macklin, died in 2023 and was a military veteran who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, reported the Post. He was also a comedian with whom she co-hosted a podcast, according to a post on the Old Dominion University English department Facebook page.

A faculty member who taught her, Kent Wascom, described her to the Post as a poet who was focused on improving her fiction writing and who, unlike peers, never talked about politics.

“She was kind and talented, a working class mom who put herself through school despite circumstances that would’ve crumpled the pathetic rich boy politicians who sadistically abetted her murder,” Wascom said in an X post.

Good described herself as a “poet and writer and wife and mom and sh*tty guitar strummer from Colorado” who is “experiencing Minneapolis” on what appears to be her now-private Instagram page.

Good’s life was honored by thousands at a vigil Wednesday in Minneapolis. The site of her killing has become a memorial to her, where people have placed candles and flowers.

*Correction: A previous version of this article misidentified the name of the university. 

Local police officers stand guard as Renee Good's car is towed away after ICE officers shot and killed a woman through her car window Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026 near Portland Avenue and 34th Street. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

The Trump administration made its opinion known almost immediately after an ICE agent shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday: The officer acted heroically in defending himself from Renee Nicole Good, who was intent on running him over with her Honda Pilot in an act of “domestic terrorism.”

“The officer, fearing for his life and other officers around him and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots. He used his training to save his own life and that of his colleagues,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a news conference in Minneapolis.

A jury might very well disagree after seeing footage of the incident, like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey who called ICE’s claim of self-defense “bullsh*t.”

But the Trump administration seems intent on blocking local prosecutors from even bringing charges against the ICE officer, who the Star Tribune identified as Jonathan Ross.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office took the unusual step soon after the shooting of ousting the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension from the investigation into the killing.

The BCA typically investigates police shootings in the state, and was on the scene in south Minneapolis on Wednesday collecting evidence as part of a joint investigation with the FBI.

Then the U.S. Attorney’s Office “reversed course” and decided the investigation would be led solely by the FBI, said Drew Evans, BCA superintendent, in a statement.

“Without complete access to the evidence, witnesses and information collected, we cannot meet the investigative standards that Minnesota law and the public demands,” Evans said. “As a result, the BCA has reluctantly withdrawn from the investigation.”

Gov. Tim Walz during a Thursday press conference expressed doubt about the results of any investigation conducted by the federal government because Minnesota officials have been purposefully excluded.

“Now that Minnesota has been taken out of the investigation, it feels very, very difficult that we will get a fair outcome,” Walz said. “People in positions of power have already passed judgment … and told you things that are verifiably false.”

If federal investigators don’t share their findings with local prosecutors, they’ll struggle to put together a case to bring charges, said former Acting U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Anders Folk, who brought federal charges against former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin for killing George Floyd in 2020.

“I don’t know how any prosecutor could make a charging decision without facts,” Folk said. “The local authorities are going to have to figure out a way to do their own investigation if they want to be able to evaluate whether a criminal charge can be brought.”

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, who has jurisdiction in Minneapolis, said in a statement on Thursday that her office is searching for a way for a state level investigation to continue.

“If the FBI is the sole investigative agency, the state will not receive the investigative findings, and our community may never learn about its contents,” Moriarty said in a statement.

The FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.

A spokesperson for U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who will make charging decisions based on the FBI investigation, pointed the Reformer to a post on X when asked if she has commented on the case and if she believes the use of force was justified.

“Obstructing, impeding, or attacking federal law enforcement is a federal crime. So is damaging federal property. If you cross that red line, you will be arrested and prosecuted. Do not test our resolve,” the post says.

Who might do a local investigation is unclear. Folk, who is now running for Hennepin County attorney, said he’s not aware of any cases of officers shooting someone in Minnesota in which the BCA was not involved.

“They are the law enforcement organization that we as Minnesotans look to do this kind of investigative work,” Folk said.

If the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office is able to complete a criminal investigation and file charges, they face another difficult task: convincing a federal judge that the ICE officer was not acting reasonably in carrying out his lawful federal duties.

If state charges are filed, the officer will likely ask to move his case to federal court to assert immunity under what’s known as the Supremacy Clause, which protects federal officials from state criminal prosecution if they are reasonably carrying out their duties. Attorneys with the Department of Justice may then assist with his defense.

Whether the officer’s actions are deemed reasonable could hinge on a range of facts from his training to his duties to his subjective beliefs and the U.S. Supreme Court has provided only minimal guidance on how to answer that question, according to Bryna Godar, a staff attorney with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

Still, she emphasized local prosecutors can and have brought charges against federal officials.

“The baseline understanding here is that states can prosecute federal officials when they violate state criminal laws,” Godar said.

If state prosecutors convince a federal judge the officer’s actions were not reasonable, they could continue bringing the case in federal court on state crimes. That’s significant because a conviction for a state crime cannot not be pardoned by the president.

Godar points in a recent article to cases going back to antebellum, when free states charged U.S. marshals for capturing enslaved people under the Fugitive Slave Act. During the Prohibition Era, local prosecutors charged federal officers for using excessive force in shutting down distilleries.

More recently, local prosecutors in Idaho brought a charge of involuntary manslaughter against an FBI sniper who shot and killed an unarmed woman during the siege on Ruby Ridge in 1992. A divided federal appeals court ruled that the case could proceed because of disputed facts over whether the agent acted “reasonably.”

“Where we see those state prosecutions going ahead is where the use of force is deemed unreasonable or excessive or unlawful,” Godar said.

But that case may offer a cautionary tale for Minnesota: The case wasn’t allowed to proceed until 2001, nearly a decade later. Then the case was dropped by the newly elected prosecutor.

Good’s killing was the ninth shooting by an immigration officer in just the past four months and at least the second killing, with all of them involving firing at people in vehicles, according to a New York Times report. On Thursday, federal agents shot two more people in Portland, Ore.

In each of the recent ICE shootings, the government has claimed the officer was acting in self-defense.

A 2024 investigation by The Trace and Business Insider found in 23 fatal shootings by ICE officers from 2015 to 2021, no officers were indicted.

Minnesota prosecutors have won convictions in recent years against officers for killing people in the line of duty — Chauvin, Kim Potter and Mohamed Noor — but they are rare and juries are generally reluctant to convict.

Yet even if a conviction seems unlikely, filing charges allows local prosecutors to register a strong protest against ICE’s aggressive enforcement actions in the state and communicate that officers may not operate with impunity. Not charging would be an admission that federal agents are immune from local accountability as the Trump administration pushes for mass deportation.

Folk said a transparent investigation with clear standards is also important for the public’s faith in the justice system.

“Minnesota has seen firsthand how important it is to do these high-profile investigations the right way,” Folk said. “We deserve a good, thorough investigation, free of any kind of influence.”

Teng Vang, 43, assigned to Oshkosh Correctional Institution died Thursday at a hospital. | Photo courtesy Wisconsin Department of Corrections

A ‘physical disturbance’ involving three incarcerated people occurred on Wednesday afternoon at Oshkosh Correctional Institution, Oshkosh police said in a statement. The department said it is investigating a death that occurred after the disturbance. 

Beth Hardtke, communications director for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, told the Examiner that Teng Vang, 43, died Thursday at a hospital. He was assigned to Oshkosh Correctional Institution. 

Police said a 43 year-old incarcerated person who assaulted another incarcerated person was secured by prison staff. He experienced a medical emergency and was transported to a local hospital. 

Hardtke wrote that the Oshkosh Police Department is investigating the death and the Department of Corrections is fully cooperating with the investigation.

Vang was found guilty of crimes including attempted first-degree intentional homicide and first-degree recklessly endangering safety. He was released on extended supervision in 2022, which was revoked in 2024. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A section of the U.S.-Mexico border wall near El Paso, Texas, on June 6, 2024. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader John Thune, joined at the U.S.-Mexico border Friday by a handful of other Republican senators, highlighted the president’s signature tax cuts and spending package passed last year that provided billions for immigration enforcement.

The press conference in McAllen, Texas, came after a federal immigration officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday, and two people were shot by Border Patrol agents late Thursday in Portland, Oregon.

Thune, a South Dakota Republican, touted how the tax cuts and spending package signed into law last summer also provided “for additional reinforcements,” such as the hiring of more Border Patrol and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. 

On Jan. 3, ICE announced it hired 12,000 new officers, more than doubling its force from 10,000 agents to 22,000. Thousands more are set to be hired.

The GOP-passed bill also included $4.1 billion for Customs and Border Protection to hire 5,000 customs officers and 3,000 Border Patrol agents over the next four years.

Thune said because migration at the southern border has slowed, the time has come for President Donald Trump to shift his focus to immigration reform. CBP data from November, the most recent available, shows total apprehensions at the southwest border slowed to 7,350 that month.

“I think President Trump is probably the president best equipped to lead the effort to reform immigration law in his country in a way that it creates, again, those better paying jobs, opportunities for people who come to the country legally,” Thune said. “We are a nation of immigrants, but we’re also a nation of laws, and we have to make sure we’re enforcing our laws, and that’s where it starts.”

The Trump administration has continued with its aggressive mass deportation efforts throughout the interior of the country and has moved to revoke the legal status of more than 1.5 million immigrants since taking office last January. 

Thune added that the GOP bill, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill, also provided billions for border security.

“As a result of the passage of the One Big, Beautiful bill … we got more resources down here, not only for physical infrastructure, for the wall, but for also that virtual infrastructure, for technology and counter drone technology, all those sorts of things that make it possible for the Border Patrol to do their job,” he said.

Thune was joined by Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming and Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Ashley Moody of Florida, Jon Husted of Ohio, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Pete Ricketts of Nebraska.

Rounds said that under the Trump administration the southern border has undergone “a remarkable transformation.” 

“There is no such thing as a country that can be a superpower, or, for that matter, be free if they can’t defend their own borders,” Rounds said. 

Cornyn also highlighted how the bill will reimburse, up to $13.5 billion, those border states who have spent money on immigration enforcement. He said of that money, Texas will get $11 billion. 

A hemp plant at a Cottage Grove farm. Hemp, used for industrial purposes and now grown legally in Wisconsin, is made from a variety of the cannabis plant that is low in THC, the active ingredient that is responsible for the intoxicating effect of marijuana. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin lawmakers are backing competing visions for the future of hemp in the state. One proposal, (SB 682), was discussed during a Thursday meeting of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Revenue. The bill would create a regulatory structure for hemp-derived cannabis products which would preserve the state’s hemp industry despite a federal ban set to take effect in November. Without state-level intervention, or the federal government choosing to reverse course, hemp growers and distributors fear that Wisconsin’s $700 million industry and about 3,500 jobs will disappear.

Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), chair of the  Agriculture and Revenue Committee presented the bipartisan hemp bill to his committee, which he authored with bipartisan support. Testin’s legislation would define hemp as cannabis plants with no more than 0.3% of delta-9 THC (or the maximum concentration allowable under federal law up to 1%, whichever is greater) and define “hemp-derived cannabinoids” as any such compound extracted from the hemp plant. THC concentrations would be determined using specific high-performance testing methods. 

Wisconsinites would need to be at least 21 years old to purchase hemp-derived cannabinoid products under the bill, which mandates that products undergo independent lab testing to ensure that they contain the amount and type of cannabinoids described on the product’s label. This practice, known as truth-in labeling, is something the hemp industry has called for in recent years. 

Products could not be sold under the bill without labeling including contact information for the manufacturer or brand owner, serving sizes per container of product, ingredient lists including allergens, potency labeled in milligrams, and any necessary warnings. Under the bill, hemp-derived products could not contain more than 10 milligrams of THC in a single serving. 

Testin said Thursday that globally, the industrial hemp market was valued at roughly $11 billion in 2025, and is expected to reach $48 billion by 2032. “Despite its wide availability, the regulation of [hemp-derived cannabinoid] products is essentially non-existent, leaving a patchwork of different approaches taken by states across the country,” he said. 

In Wisconsin, such products “are generally recognized as legal but unregulated,” Testin said. “There are no state laws that restrict the sale to minors, regulate the potency or content of [hemp-derived cannabinoid products], or establish labeling or packaging requirements.” Minnesota, Kentucky, Tennessee and other states have moved to enact their own regulations, Testin said. “Regulations are needed to eliminate the current uncertainty regarding the status of [hemp-derived cannabinoid products], provide stability and certainty for businesses looking to enter this segment of the economy, and enact public safety regulations.”

Both Testin and Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) have worked on hemp laws for Wisconsin since the federal Farm Bill passed in 2018. “I’ve actually grown hemp,” said Kurtz, recalling that in 2019 “it was kind of a wide open market.” People that Kurtz and others called “bad actors” throughout the hearing also rode the hemp wave, seeing it as a “get rich quick scheme.” Kurtz said that today, the hemp industry is filled with people who want to do the right thing, but that “bad actors” have persisted. 

Kurtz said SB 682 is designed to ensure that Wisconsinites “get the very best product, and they know what they’re getting.” He stressed that “if we do nothing, then hemp is going to be illegal at the federal level…but it will still be legal here in the state of Wisconsin. So I think it would behoove us to work together, get a good compromise, a good common sense piece of legislation to make sure that we — in my humble opinion — protect our constituents, but also protect an industry that I think is needed.” 

Although hemp would be illegal at the federal level, a state-level industry could still operate similarly to the way some states have fully legal recreational or legalized cannabis programs, largely because the federal government has not cracked down on those industries. 

Testin added that “regardless of anyone’s thoughts as it relates to cannabis and cannabinoids, it’s here. And obviously we have a lot of different approaches as to how to best move forward.” He repeatedly took aim at the “stupidity” of what he described as “our overlords” in Washington D.C., but also criticized other hemp-related bills being pushed in Wisconsin. Whereas some Republicans are seeking to ban hemp products outright, others have differing ideas about how a legal industry should be regulated. 

A bill introduced by Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), SB 681, would require that manufacturers and distributors of hemp-derived cannabinoid products have permits. Products would be sold under a three-tier system, and would be regulated similarly to alcohol under the Division of Alcohol Beverages, a component of the Department of Revenue, which would be renamed to the Division of Intoxicating Products. 

Although both Testin and Wimberger’s bills have gained bipartisan support, Testin described Wimberger’s bill as “the dead bill” and “deader than dead.” Testin argued that SB 681 would over-regulate the hemp industry, and even lead to a monopolization effect where a small number of entities could control who gets hemp permits, shape an otherwise competitive market, and operate in a “good ol’ boys club” manner. 

Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi) highlighted  the divide among state Republicans over hemp and cannabis products, stressing that Democrats are not the ones holding up legalization and regulation.

The committee room was filled with people from across the hemp industry who listened to the conversation. When lawmakers questioned how to ensure that children do not acquire intoxicating hemp products, distributors and manufacturers pointed to age-verification software even for online sales, which require a photograph and image of a driver’s license to approve an order. There was also discussion about how to prevent products from being marketed to children using cartoon-like advertising and appealing candy wrappers. 

Some veterans testified, describing how hemp helped them alleviate pain, kick addictive pain killers, soothed PTSD symptoms, and calmed the body for sleep. Other testimony centered on the danger involved in crossing state lines to Michigan or Illinois to acquire cannabis to treat various medical conditions. Hemp farmers stressed that they need to know now how they will be affected by a looming federal ban as they decide when or whether to plant their crops in the spring. 

Much of the public testimony was supportive of  Testin’s bill, though some speakers said that it needed to be amended to protect farmers and growers, and also expand the kinds of products it would cover including drinks and gummies. 

“Yes, we are now in a scenario where there are intoxicating hemp products,” said Testin. “But just no different than anything like beer, wine, or alcohol, we need to have some sensible regulations put in place, which this bill aims to do just that.”

As for “concerns about getting baked or getting high from these products,” Testin added, “it’s no different than those individuals who go out and consume too many old fashioneds at fish fry on a Friday night, or have too many beers. It’s about personal choice and responsibility, but at the same time making sure that we have some regulations put in place.”

The hemp industry deserves to “thrive and grow,” Testin said, while the public deserves protection and to know “that this stuff isn’t falling into the hands of people it shouldn’t be in, like kids.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy speaks to Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) after delivering testimony on AB 678. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin school districts would be required to establish policies on appropriate communication between students and staff members before the next school year, under a bill that received a public hearing Thursday. 

The bill comes in reaction to a report from the Capital Times in November that found over 200 investigations into teacher licenses due to allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023. Another bill coauthored by Nedweski, AB 677, making grooming a felony crime in Wisconsin received a public hearing earlier this week.

“Many of these cases begin with the erosion of professional boundaries when a school employee starts communicating with the students inappropriately often outside of school hours and without parent knowledge usually through the use of text messaging and social media,”  Nedweski told the Assembly Education Committee. “While the vast majority of school staff use these tools responsibly, a small number have exploited that access — sometimes leading to devastating consequences.”

AB 678 would require Wisconsin school boards to adopt a policy on appropriate communications between students and employees or volunteers in the school district.

“This bill preserves local control. It does not mandate a one-size-fits-all policy; instead it allows each school district to determine what communication policies work best for its own community,” Nedweski said.

The policies would need to include specific consequences for staff who violate the policy and specify that it applies to communications during and outside of school hours. The policy would need to include standards for appropriate content and methods of communication.

An amendment to the bill, which Nedweski said came at the request of the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and other stakeholders, would require annual training for employees on identifying, preventing and reporting grooming and professional boundary violations. 

The Department of Public Instruction has worked with Nedweski on the legislation and supports it. 

“We think this is a good effort to get the conversation started,” Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy said, noting the agency has been working on policy related to appropriate communication for over eight years. He said there are a lot of districts that are using technology for software that allows them to track communications. 

“There’s a bit of a dichotomy with this issue. We know that in order to educate kids we need to foster and build relationships with students and families, and so we do encourage appropriate communication in every school district,” McCarthy said, adding that the policy and training would be critical. “You will find some circumstances where you’re going to want communication and it might not be as neat and tidy as you’d expect it to be. There are always emergency circumstances where a teacher might need to call a student directly… so we want some policies to be flexible to address those areas.” 

Chris Kulow, director of government relations for the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB), said the organization had some concerns about the language in the bill related to consequences. He testified for information only, noting the issue of communication between staff and students is not new to school districts. 

“Although recent news coverage and increased interest from state policymakers may make this appear to be a new issue, it is not new to schools. School boards have long recognized the need for policies addressing appropriate communication and professional boundaries between pupils and staff. Many districts have already adopted such policies,” Kulow said. “This bill may require some districts to update existing policies to reflect its specific language and to the extent it prompts boards to review and strengthen policies is beneficial.” 

Kulow said complying with the provision related to consequences as currently written would be challenging as violations can vary widely and require a wide range of responses. The organization wanted the provision removed, but said Nedweski wanted something related to be included in the bill. 

“Attempting to predetermine specific consequences for every specific scenario may be impractical and could complicate the disciplinary process,” Kulow said. “We suggested revising the language in the bill to read that ‘the school board shall include in the policy a range of consequences up to and including termination.’”

The bill currently only covers Wisconsin public schools, though Nedweski told Democratic lawmakers, who expressed concerns about the bill not including the state’s private voucher schools, that she is working on an amendment. 

“We need to protect all kids. This is such a growing problem. We’ve seen just an increase in inappropriate communication,” Nedweski said.

Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), also asked whether lawmakers would be open to including funding for school districts to support the implementation of the bill. 

Nedweski said she hasn’t had any requests for funding from schools or the DPI throughout the development of the bill.

“I think it’s a serious enough issue, a weighty enough issue, that all schools can find the resources to craft a policy and do some training to make sure they are protecting children,” Nedweski said, adding that DPI already has modules related to this type of training.

McCarthy said additional funding, including the release of $1 million set aside for the agency in the state budget, could help speed along the process. Those funds, which sit in a supplemental fund, can only be released by the Joint Finance Committee. He said without the funds the agency could potentially have to cut down on staff and other areas of its operations, which could affect how quickly work is done.

Under the bill in its current form, school boards would need to adopt a policy by July 1, 2026. 

McCarthy said DPI would like to see an amendment that would move the deadline for policy adoption to a later date, saying DPI may need a longer “runway” to ensure the agency has time to change and update policies and training if needed. He told the Wisconsin Examiner that some of the changes could be necessary if Nedweski’s grooming bill becomes law. 

Rich Judge, assistant state superintendent for the division of government and public affairs, also noted that school boards would need to have time to meet, develop and approve policies. 

Nedweski said in a written statement to the Examiner that she is taking the agency’s suggestion under consideration and is discussing potential dates. One potential date could be Sept. 1, 2026, she said. 

“If AB 678 is signed into law, the goal is for school districts to have these policies in place for the 2026–27 school year,” Nedweski said. She noted that some of the agency’s concerns are tied to her other bill. “This only underscores the importance of passing AB 677 and getting it signed into law promptly to ensure that districts across Wisconsin can take the necessary steps to better protect students in school.”

The U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 1, 2025, at the beginning of a government shutdown of historic length. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats in Congress are cautiously optimistic they can enact the remaining government funding bills before their deadline at the end of the month, avoiding another shutdown. 

The milestone would represent an accomplishment for the typically gridlocked Congress, though it comes months after lawmakers’ original October deadline and the longest shutdown in history that reverberated throughout the country.  

Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said recently negotiators are making “progress” toward agreement on the unresolved bills, which include funding for the departments of Defense, Health and Human Services and Homeland Security.

Those three bills are the most complicated to resolve and this year will be no exception given President Donald Trump’s actions on immigration, deportation and military intervention in Venezuela. 

Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, ranking member on the committee, was somewhat less optimistic than her colleague about the likelihood all of the bills become law. But she didn’t rule it out. 

“It’s up to the Republican leadership,” Murray said. “We’re working hard to get our end of it done.”

House approves some spending

Congress approved three of the dozen annual spending bills in the package that ended the shutdown in November, providing funding for their own offices and operations; military construction projects; the Agriculture Department; and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The package provided stopgap spending for the remaining federal programs in the other nine bills. 

The House voted 397-28 Thursday to approve the Energy-Water, Commerce-Justice-Science and Interior-Environment spending bills, sending them to the Senate, where Collins expects that chamber will take a procedural vote Monday.

Collins said the remaining six unresolved bills will likely move through Congress in two separate packages — one funding financial services, homeland security, the State Department and foreign operations as well as one funding defense, education, health care, housing and transportation programs. 

If Congress finishes work on the full slate of bills, which will likely account for about $1.8 trillion in spending, it would mark the end of the first annual appropriations process of Trump’s second term in office.

Minnesota ICE shooting jolts process

The biggest hurdle to completing work on all of the bills will be reaching consensus on funding for the Homeland Security Department, especially after an immigration agent shot and killed a woman in Minnesota. 

Collins said a day after the Jan. 7 incident that members of both political parties in both chambers continue to work on the bill and praised subcommittee Chairwoman Katie Britt of Alabama for “doing a really good job.”

Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, ranking member on the subcommittee, however, said there must be “constraints” on how immigration agents are operating. 

Murphy said the sharp increase in hiring at Immigration and Customs Enforcement as well as Customs and Border Protection, spurred by billions in additional funding included in Republicans’ big, beautiful bill, “likely resulted in people being out there on our streets who don’t have the necessary training.”

“Now I’m not saying that’s part of the story yesterday, but we know that they are not applying the same standards and the same training that they have in the past,” Murphy said. “There’s a broader question about whether CBP is qualified to operate in the interior at all. From my understanding, CBP was part of that deployment yesterday that resulted in the murder of this young woman.”

Murphy said he has a “handful of ideas” about how to address his and other Democrats’ concerns about how the Trump administration has approached immigration enforcement, while acknowledging any final agreement will need Republican support to move through Congress. 

“I won’t be asking for the moon. We’re not going to fix all of these issues. And I’m not looking for comprehensive immigration reform at all,” Murphy said. “But some targeted improvements in the way that ICE and CBP are operating, I think, are going to be necessary.”

Murphy said he believes there is time to work out a bipartisan solution on that spending bill before the Jan. 30 shutdown deadline. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a press conference that the leaders on the Appropriations Committee and the subcommittee are having an “important and serious discussion” about the funding bill after the shooting. 

Congress could pass a stopgap spending bill for programs within the Homeland Security Department, which includes the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to keep everything up and running for the rest of the fiscal year. The fall-back option can be used when consensus on a full-year bill isn’t possible. 

That type of funding bill, known as a continuing resolution, would keep DHS’ funding mostly flat and avoid the need for it to shut down after the current funding law expires at the end of the month. It would leave in place the types of policies that DHS has been operating under all year. 

Negotiations continue

House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said Wednesday talks on the unsettled bills are “going well” and that she expects lawmakers to meet their Jan. 30 deadline.

House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said his “goal” is to approve the leftover bills before the end of the month, avoiding the need for Congress to use another stopgap measure to keep the government up and running or face a shutdown. 

While the groupings Collins outlined may seem random, Cole said appropriators spent a good bit of time contemplating how to package the remaining bills. 

“There was a lot of thought given to how to work these things together and what would maximize support on each side,” Cole said. “Obviously, those discussions were had not just amongst Republicans but our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and in the other chamber. So we think that’s the best package to move forward.” 

Congress rarely approves the final versions of the government funding bills one-by-one and used to approve all 12 in one omnibus package, though Republican opposition to that has led to smaller “minibuses.”

Cole said negotiations between Republicans and Democrats on final versions of the full-year spending bills are being undertaken by subcommittee leaders. 

“If you can solve these problems at the subcommittee level, you’ve got the most knowledgeable people, the people that care the most on both sides of the aisle,” Cole said. “The further up the food chain it goes — whether to my colleagues in the four corners (of the Appropriations Committee) or to leadership — the more political decisions come, and the less knowledgeable the people making the decision are about the topic.”

Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin, the top Democrat on the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Subcommittee, said that “great progress” had been made so far toward final agreement on that bill.

“I’m very hopeful and encouraged, given the work that’s been done so far, that we can do that,” Baldwin said. 

Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy cast doubt on his colleagues’ ability to reach consensus on the last six bills, saying it will be “difficult” to work out final agreements in the time left. 

“I wouldn’t bet my house on it,” Kennedy said. “And if I were betting your house, it would be just a maybe.”

Kennedy said he isn’t involved in the negotiations on those bills but expects negotiators are “fighting over something.” Kennedy is chairman of the Energy-Water Appropriations Subcommittee, which already completed work on its bill. 

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report. 

Portland police officers stand behind police tape in front of an apartment building in east Portland. (Photo by Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle)

Federal agents reportedly shot and injured two people near a medical clinic in east Portland on Thursday afternoon, according to the Portland Police Bureau.

The Department of Homeland Security acknowledged the shooting on social media, though it referred to a U.S. Border Protection agent firing “a defensive shot.” Police had few immediate details to share about the incident, which occurred the day after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis. 

Like Minneapolis, Oregon’s largest city has been the subject of an intense immigration crackdown by federal agents in recent months. While a federal judge stymied President Donald Trump’s efforts to mobilize the Oregon National Guard and deploy guardsmen from other states to Portland, federal officials revealed in court in December that they’ve brought ICE agents from around the country to the metro as part of a major operation.

The Homeland Security Department claimed that agents were conducting a targeted stop against a Venezuelan national affiliated with the transnational Tren de Aragua criminal group, and that the driver attempted to run over agents when they identified themselves. The agency made similar claims about the Minneapolis shooting, though bystander videos from multiple angles showed that the officer fired into Renee Nicole Good’s car after he was clear of the car’s path. 

No such videos were immediately available of the Portland incident, which occurred near a medical campus on Southeast Main Street. 

“We are still in the early stages of this incident,” Portland Police Chief Bob Day said in a statement. “We understand the heightened emotion and tension many are feeling in the wake of the shooting in Minneapolis, but I am asking the community to remain calm as we work to learn more.”

Multnomah County Sheriff Nicole Morrisey O’Donnell said in a statement that the FBI is handling an investigation into the shooting. Attorney General Dan Rayfield announced Thursday evening that his office will investigate whether any federal officers acted outside the scope of their authority, in keeping with a November warning he and district attorneys of the state’s three largest counties gave the federal government that the state will investigate and prosecute federal agents who engage in excessive force.

“We have been clear about our concerns with the excessive use of force by federal agents in Portland, and today’s incident only heightens the need for transparency and accountability,” Rayfield said. “Oregonians deserve clear answers when people are injured in their neighborhoods.”

Shooting reported mid-afternoon

Police received reports of a shooting on the 10200 block of Southeast Main Street at 2:18 p.m. Six minutes later, they received a call for help from a man at Northeast 146th Avenue and East Burnside, a 10-minute drive away. 

The shooting occurred near an Adventist Health building with several offices and medical clinics, the health organization confirmed in an email. The clinics closed for the rest of the day, and Portland Police were seen escorting people out in the evening. 

Police found a man and woman with apparent gunshot wounds. Emergency responders transported both people to the hospital and their condition is unknown, according to police. 

State Rep. Ricki Ruiz, D-Gresham, represents a neighboring state House district and spoke to the Capital Chronicle near an apartment complex where the shooting victims called for help. He said the two were hospitalized at Oregon Health & Science University and he was unsure of their condition.

A woman he spoke to said she spotted U.S. Border Patrol agents roaming the area earlier this morning, Ruiz said.

Lilian Rubi Herrera, who spoke to the Capital Chronicle in Spanish outside the apartment building, receives donations from her followers on social media to buy groceries for immigrants who are fearful of leaving their homes. She was in the neighborhood distributing food when she heard about the shooting and went to the scene. 

Herrera said her social media followers are extremely sad because of the shooting in Minneapolis.

“Out of all the years I’ve lived here, I never thought I would witness this type of treatment from the federal government.” she said. “They treat us worse than dogs, and that’s not fair. We must use our voices and seek help for our community.” 

A Capital Chronicle reporter saw men wearing FBI gear walking around the apartment complex behind police tape. 

State, local leaders condemn shooting, urge caution

Within hours of the shooting, about 150 people had gathered outside Portland City Hall, chanting “abolish ICE.” Some held candles and anti-ICE signs as they waited to hear from city councilors.

Portland City Councilor Angelita Morillo, speaking to the crowd, called upon Congress and local officials to resist ICE operations and strip funding from the agency.

“The reality is that anyone who chooses to stand in solidarity with our community is putting themselves directly in harm’s way, because that’s what it means to sacrifice and to love your neighbor,” she said. “And what I see here is we have a group of people that is prepared to do anything and everything to take care of our immigrant community.”

Councilor Candace Avalos said the recent shooting victims were her constituents in her city councils’s district, arguing that “this is what the Trump administration’s deportation agenda looks like.” She called for the audience to keep organizing until ICE agents leave the city.

“We keep each other safe when ICE shows up in our neighborhoods, it’s not politicians who stop them,” she said. “It’s neighborhood whistles, with their phones out, standing shoulder and shoulder, forcing them out of our communities.”

Portland Mayor Keith Wilson called on ICE to immediately pause its operations in Portland and urged residents to remain calm.

“We cannot sit by while constitutional protections erode and bloodshed mounts. Portland is not a ‘training ground’ for militarized agents, and the ‘full force’ threatened by the administration has deadly consequences,” Wilson said. “As mayor, I call on ICE to end all operations in Portland until a full investigation can be completed.”

U.S. Rep. Maxine Dexter, a Democrat who represents Portland, also urged her constituents to stay calm and said local law enforcement must be able to conduct a full investigation. 

“ICE has done nothing but inject terror, chaos, and cruelty into our communities,” Dexter said. “Trump’s immigration machine is using violence to control our communities—straight out of the authoritarian playbook. ICE must immediately end all active operations in Portland.”

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, added that he was monitoring reports, and that “Trump’s deployment of federal agents in my hometown is clearly inflaming violence — and must end.”

Reporter Mia Maldonado contributed to this report.