With a new law cutting Medicaid funding to certain clinics, Planned Parenthood estimates 200 of its clinics in 24 states are at risk of closure with the cuts, and nearly all of those clinics — 90% — are in states where abortion is legal. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

A federal judge ruled Friday against the Trump administration’s efforts to strip Medicaid funds from primarily Planned Parenthood-affiliated abortion providers.

Massachusetts U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani denied the federal government’s motion to lift a block on a new law, rejecting the U.S. Department of Justice’s argument that allowing Planned Parenthood to continue to bill for Medicaid while their lawsuit plays out would cause the government “irreparable injury.” She said the plaintiffs were more likely to suffer injury if the provision went into effect, such as having to close clinics and reduce services.

“Here, Defendants suffer no irreparable harm where Plaintiffs are substantially likely to succeed in establishing that Section 71113 violates several constitutional provisions,” Talwani wrote in an order, denying the federal government’s request to stay two preliminary injunctions. “[I]t is precisely because Congress targeted only a ‘certain’ group of entities for exclusion from Medicaid programs — all but two of which are Planned Parenthood Federation Members — that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in establishing that Section 71113 is unconstitutional.”

Late last month Talwani ordered a partial and then a full preliminary injunction after Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its Massachusetts and Utah affiliates sued in early July over the new federal reproductive health restriction. After unsuccessfully asking the district court to lift the block, the federal government appealed the preliminary injunctions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Shortly after, the DOJ filed a motion asking the district court to reconsider the preliminary injunctions. Last week, the appellate court declined the government’s request, pending the district court’s decision. Defendants are now expected to re-appeal the injunction to the First Circuit. 

The provision, set to expire July 4, 2026, would primarily affect health clinics affiliated with Planned Parenthood, which has estimated it could lose 200 of its 600 clinics, many of which are in rural areas and others that are critical abortion-access points. 

But two other affected organizations are Health Imperatives in Massachusetts, which according to WBUR, operates seven clinics and serves about 10,000 patients, and Maine Family Planning, which has also sued over the provision. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Lance Walker in Maine, an appointee of President Donald Trump, denied Maine Family Planning’s motion for a preliminary injunction, despite the organization facing losses up to nearly $2 million, potential layoffs, and disruption of care for about 8,000 patients.

“This ruling is a devastating setback for Mainers who depend on us for basic primary care,” said George Hill, president and CEO of Maine Family Planning, according to Maine Morning Star. “The loss of Medicaid funds — which nearly half our patients rely on — threatens our ability to provide life-saving services to communities across the state. Mainers’ health should never be jeopardized by political decisions, and we will continue to fight for them.”

Does the new federal Medicaid rule unlawfully target Planned Parenthood?

Federal funding of abortion is already prohibited in most cases under the Hyde Amendment. But the new funding rule would bar from the Medicaid program reproductive health clinics that provide abortions and received more than $800,000 in federal and state Medicaid funding in fiscal year 2023 for health services like birth control, cancer and gender-affirming care. 

The legislation has caused confusion throughout the Planned Parenthood network because its definition of “prohibited entity” includes a barred organization’s “affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, and clinics.”

The nonprofit health network comprises its national membership and advocacy organization, PPFA, and nearly 50 independently structured and operated affiliates, some of which do not offer abortion, such as co-plaintiff Planned Parenthood Association of Utah. These organizations are reimbursed after the fact for specific health services covered by Medicaid. 

Even though the provision is currently blocked, several Planned Parenthood clinics around the country have already closed, both because of the new rule and the Trump administration’s other restrictions stripping abortion providers of federal family planning grants. 

Many of the recently shuttered clinics did not provide abortion, like in Ohio, and some are in states where abortion is illegal, like in Louisiana. 

Planned Parenthood’s attorneys have argued that the new federal Medicaid rule violates their equal protection, speech and association rights, because it excludes their clinics from the Medicaid program on the basis of their association to other organizations — in this case organizations that provide abortions and advocate for abortion rights.

“[S]ince this Court issued its decision, the government has now admitted that Section 71113 (the “Defund Provision”) was intended to punish Planned Parenthood for its ‘political advocacy,’” the plaintiffs wrote in a recent brief opposing defendants’ motion to lift the injunction. 

Plaintiffs referred to a recent public statement made by Andrew G. Nixon, a spokesperson for co-defendant U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

“States should not be forced to fund organizations that have chosen political advocacy over patient care,” Nixon said, after the district court’s initial preliminary injunction on July 22. 

But in court, the federal government argued the tax and spending cuts law excludes large abortion providers only because they provide abortions. They say they are also excluding smaller or non-abortion-providing affiliates, not because of their speech or advocacy, but because of their “non-expressive activities of corporate control and financing.” Their basic argument is that money to any Planned Parenthood clinic — even for health services unrelated to abortion — is money for abortion. 

“[B]ecause money is fungible, extending the funding restriction to affiliates prevents an organization from undermining federal policy not to subsidize abortion providers by shifting funds between entities that do not perform abortions and entities that do,” defendants wrote.  

The DOJ has also rejected plaintiffs’ claim that the federal legislation is a bill of attainder, which refers to legislation that unconstitutionally imposes punishment on a specific person or group of people without a judicial trial. 

“Halting the flow of federal Medicaid funds to those entities bears no resemblance to the forms of punishment that implicate the Bill of Attainder Clause,” reads the DOJ’s motion. “Historically, bills of attainder involved punishments such as ‘death,’ ‘banishment,’ and ‘imprisonment.’”

But Talwani disagrees with the DOJ’s reasoning.

“[T]here is no indication in the record that Planned Parenthood Members share revenues from Medicaid reimbursements,” she wrote. “The result is a restriction on associational freedom that is in no way ‘essential to the furtherance of [Defendants’] interest’ in withholding funds from certain abortion providers … and instead imposes a wholly unwarranted burden.”

While the new federal tax and spending cuts law does not mention Planned Parenthood by name, a bill introduced this year with similar language is explicitly titled, “Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2025.” Meanwhile, several state legislatures have successfully stripped funding from the organization. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed South Carolina to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program in late June after a long legal fight, but the state’s affiliate just sued again over Medicaid eligibility.

“You have to be living in a cave to believe this isn’t about Planned Parenthood,” said abortion law expert Mary Ziegler. “The reason Planned Parenthood is a target is because it’s a twofer. It’s both the nation’s largest abortion provider and also the nation’s best advocate for abortion rights. … But I think the problem for Planned Parenthood is that disaggregating the two is hard, and proving congressional intent to target one rather than the other is challenging.”

Anti-abortion activists and conservative commentators have accused Talwani, an Obama appointee, of judicial activism.

“Now the abortion industry is suing to block the will of the voters, duly passed by Congress,” wrote Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, in a recent op-ed for National Review. “They argue they’re constitutionally entitled to our tax dollars in perpetuity, and they’ve found a single activist judge willing to take their side and impose that view on the entire nation — for now.”

Ziegler said the bill of attainder argument is rarely used, but is plausible in this case. 

“Generally, with a bill of attainder, you have to show that there’s no other kind of valid legislative purpose, and that it’s selectively targeting the person who’s suing,” she said. “In this case, it seems pretty clear that there’s some targeting of Planned Parenthood happening. … But I think there being no other purpose is more complicated.”

Ziegler said the case will likely be hard to win if it gets to the majority conservative Supreme Court. But if the injunction holds, Planned Parenthood could run out the clock on the one-year Medicaid restriction. She thinks it might seem too politically risky to renew this provision right before the 2026 midterm elections to more moderate Republicans in the House, like Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, who told NOTUS in May, “from the standpoint of providing health care to women, you know, I’m not for taking away people’s health care.”

“They’ll either have to say, ‘All our boasts about defunding Planned Parenthood were not real, because Planned Parenthood is going to get funded again,’ or they’re going to have to make the funding prohibition permanent, which could have the consequences that people like Lawler were afraid of.”

A firefighter moves hazard fuel while working on the Bear Gulch fire this summer. Many in the wildland fire community believe the leadership team managing the fire sent crews into an ambush by federal immigration agents. (Facebook/Bear Gulch Fire 2025)

Wildland firefighters were stunned when federal immigration authorities last week raided an active wildfire response in Washington state, arresting two firefighters and sidelining crews for hours.

Wildfire veterans say the operation was nearly unprecedented, a breach in longstanding protocol that federal agents don’t disrupt emergency responders to check immigration status.

Worse, many wildfire veterans believe the management team overseeing the fire crews played a key role in handing over the firefighters to immigration authorities.

Stateline spoke to nearly a dozen firefighters, agency staffers and contractors familiar with the incident, who shared their belief that the top officials assigned to the fire deployed the crews to a remote location under false pretenses so federal agents could check their immigration status. Most of them spoke privately for fear of retaliation.

The raid has reverberated among fire crews, agency leaders and contractors. Wildfire veterans say the arrests have stoked fear and distrust among firefighters on the ground. They worry that crews may be scared to deploy if they may become a target for immigration raids.

“There’s really no way [the wildfire management team] could not have been involved,” said Riva Duncan, a former wildland fire chief who served more than 30 years with the U.S. Forest Service. “We’re all talking about it. People are wondering if they go on a fire with this team, if that could happen to them.”

Since the incident became public, the wildfire world has been abuzz with anger at that team — California Interagency Incident Management Team 7. Made up of federal, state and local fire professionals, the team was assigned to oversee the response to the Bear Gulch fire, which has burned 9,000 acres in and around Olympic National Park in Washington state.

One firefighter who was present at the raid said he is convinced that Team 7 leaders sent their crews into a trap.

“I felt beyond betrayed,” said the firefighter, who requested anonymity to protect his career. “What they did was messed up. They’d been talking in their briefings about building relationships and trust. For them to say that and then go do this is mind-boggling. It boiled my blood.”

Team 7 Incident Commander Tom Clemo, in an email, declined to comment, citing an active investigation. Tom Stokesberry, the team’s public information officer, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

According to daily Incident Action Plans filed by Team 7 and posted online, the crews had previously been digging holding lines, working to protect structures and conducting mop-up work. The two crews targeted by federal agents had not been assigned to work together in the days leading up to the raid.

Then, on Aug. 27, both crews — workers from private companies contracted to help fight the fire — were told to deploy to a staging area where they would cut firewood for the local community. The firefighter who was present at the raid told Stateline that a division supervisor told the crews he would meet them at the site, but never showed up.

After arriving at the site, the firefighter said, the crews found piles of logs, seemingly from a timber operation. Not wanting to damage a logging company’s property, they waited for a management team leader to show up with further instructions.

After an hour, unmarked law enforcement vehicles pulled up to the site and federal officials began questioning the firefighters. Duncan, the former Forest Service firefighter, said immigration agents would not have been able to access the site without help from Team 7 leaders.

“Fire areas are officially closed, very secure and there are roadblocks,” she said. “Somebody would have had to tell these agents how to get there.”

In a news release, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said its agents assisted with an investigation led by the federal Bureau of Land Management. While the agency’s release did not mention the nature of the investigation, multiple wildfire sources said the feds claimed they had uncovered fraud on time cards submitted by the crews.

Table Rock Forestry Inc., an Oregon-based company whose crew was one of the two at the scene, was allegedly subjected to the raid due to a half-hour discrepancy on a time sheet, said Scott Polhamus, secretary of the Organization of Fire Contractors and Affiliates. Table Rock Forestry is a member of the fire contractors’ group.

Multiple wildfire veterans said that time card discrepancies are not uncommon at wildfires, where crews work long days and it’s not always clear if lunch breaks or errands in town count toward working hours. Such mix-ups are typically sorted out between organizational leaders. Calling law enforcement in such a scenario is almost unheard of.

“This is not the first time a crew has been called on the carpet for maybe padding their time a bit,” Duncan said. “You deal directly with the company. It’s just absolutely mind-boggling to treat it as a criminal issue.”

After about five minutes discussing the time card issue, according to the firefighter who was present at the raid, federal agents spent the next three hours checking each firefighter’s immigration status.

The Customs and Border Protection news release announcing the immigration arrests made no mention of time sheets or any evidence that the investigation had turned up fraud. It did state that the two companies whose crews were raided had their contracts terminated by the government.

Polhamus, with the fire contractors’ group, said that claim is false. While the crews were demobilized and sent home, the feds have not actually ended the companies’ contracts or ability to accept future deployments.

A Customs and Border Protection public affairs specialist did not immediately respond to questions about the investigation, the alleged fraud or federal agents’ coordination with Team 7.

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources, the state’s lead wildfire response agency, said federal officials did not notify their state counterparts about the investigation.

“DNR was not informed of the incident until well after the fact,” said Ryan Rodruck, wildfire on-call public information officer with the agency.

Rodruck noted that the fire response was under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service. Press officers with the Forest Service did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Multiple wildfire sources said the crews would not have been sent to the staging area where they were ambushed without the knowledge of top leaders on the fire’s management team.

The two crews that were raided have a diverse mix of firefighters, many of them Hispanic. One of the crews has many foreign workers who are legally in the country on H-2B visas. Duncan, the former Forest Service firefighter, said it was likely not a coincidence that two crews with many brown-skinned members were targeted in the raid.

Two of the firefighters were arrested, federal officials said, for being in the country illegally.

One of the firefighters who was arrested is represented by Innovation Law Lab, an Oregon-based legal group that defends refugees and immigrants. Isa Peña, the group’s director of strategy, said the Department of Homeland Security has not revealed the whereabouts of their client.

The firefighter, who Peña declined to name, has been in the U.S. since he was four years old and served as a firefighter for the past three years. Immigration advocates are alarmed that the raid was potentially arranged by California Interagency Incident Management Team 7, the leaders charged with overseeing the wildfire response.

“There certainly is concern if that is the case that individuals are being handed over to immigration as they’re trying to keep our communities safe,” Peña said. “Conducting immigration enforcement while brave members of our community are risking their lives to protect us is really disgusting.”

Several wildland fire veterans also noted that the raid took place on Team 7’s final day in charge of the fire response, hours before a Washington team rotated in to take command. The California team headed home and left the new team to face the media scrutiny and angry firefighters in camp.

“If you’ve got ICE teams pulling your contractors out, you’d want to cut and run as soon as you can,” Polhamus said.

On a forum for wildland fire professionals on the social media platform Reddit, many expressed anger at Team 7. Firefighters also took issue with the assertion, shared by federal immigration officials, that the raid did not disrupt firefighting operations.

“It’s total bulls***,” said Duncan, the former Forest Service firefighter. “Whoever made that statement doesn’t understand the work. To take two crews off of a fire that’s only 13% contained, that seems ridiculous at that point in a fire. That does seem very unusual.”

Many wildfire veterans said that conducting a raid at the site of an active wildfire was reckless and irresponsible.

“Having people on the line that you don’t expect to be there is an issue,” said Polhamus, with the fire contractors’ group. “When you need crews and you are taking resources to check them for immigration status, we can all think of better ways to address that.”

Duncan said she’s spoken with firefighters still assigned to the Bear Gulch fire who are disgusted with the situation and want to leave.

“The three principal wildland fire values are duty, respect, integrity,” she said. “Utmost in that is taking care of your people. If you can’t trust the people you’re working with when things get hairy, that’s a concern.”

In Washington and Oregon, elected leaders have decried the raids and are pushing for more information on the status of the firefighters who were arrested. Federal immigration officials have said little since the news release announcing the arrests.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

The report found the median wage for Wisconsin workers — $25.01 per hour — reached a record high for the second year in a row, though the report says this doesn’t represent the full story when it comes to workers’ wages. (Justin Sullivan | Getty Images)

The Trump administration’s policies are defining the current economic moment Wisconsin workers are facing — undercutting economic growth and undermining workers, according to the 2025 State of Working Wisconsin report. 

Every year since 1996, the High Road Strategy Center, a University of Wisconsin-Madison nonprofit think tank, produces the report to present information on the state of work and jobs, including who is “winning” and “being left out” of the economy, though future reports may be in trouble. 

Laura Dresser, a co-author of the report and High Road Strategy Center associate director, said in a statement that the 2025 data shows “some real strengths for working Wisconsin owing to the strong recovery from pandemic shutdowns.” 

“Long-standing inequalities are still with us, and federal policy puts substantial clouds on the horizon,” Dresser said. “I’m especially concerned about the administration’s attacks on the integrity of federal economic data.”

Joel Rogers, director of the center and a UW-Madison professor, and Leslie Vasquez, outreach specialist and communications director, are also authors of the report that was released the Friday before Labor Day. 

Dresser’s concern about federal jobs data stems from President Donald Trump’s decision last month to remove Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, from her position after a dismal jobs report that showed hiring slowed in July and was weaker in May and June than previously reported. He falsely claimed the reports were rigged as his justification. 

The report warns that the approach being taken by Trump is a “disaster for economic decision making and for public trust.” 

“Good economic decisions require reliable data,” the authors stated in the report. “Without reliable independent data, we cannot understand the economy nor, more narrowly, can the High Road Strategy Center continue confidently producing reports that draw on it. With hopes for continued national commitment to reliable data, and fears about the quality of what politically motivated ‘revisions’ will do, we will anxiously monitor changes in leadership and data at the BLS.”

Wage median reaches high, gaps ongoing 

The report found the median wage for Wisconsin workers — $25.01 per hour — reached a record high for the second year in a row, though the report says this doesn’t represent the full story when it comes to workers’ wages. 

While Wisconsin’s median wage reached a new high, a difference in wages exists among workers based on gender, race and ethnicity. Men’s median wage — $27.05 — in 2024 was more than $4 per hour higher than women’s median of $22.97, a 15% difference. 

When race is considered, the differences become more stark. White men have the highest wages at a median of $28.54 per hour. The median for white women was about 17% less at $23.66 per hour. 

The median wages for workers of color fell considerably below that of white men and women. Black men and women had about the same hourly median wage at $19.93 and $20.29 — 29% less than white men. Hispanic men had a median wage of $18.56 and Hispanic women a median of $17.57.

The report also found that over 800,000 workers — nearly a third of Wisconsin’s workforce — make less than $20 per hour. 

The report says raising the minimum wage would be one way to help close these gaps. Wisconsin’s minimum wage is currently $7.25, a number in line with the federal minimum wage and that has been unchanged since 2009. 

“Raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour would not only be politically popular but would directly or indirectly raise the wages of 231,800 (or 18%) of women workers, 36,200 (or 25.6%) Black workers, and 50,200 (or 26.6%) Hispanic workers in the state,” the report states. 

In response to the report, Peter Rickman, president and business manager of the Milwaukee Area Service & Hospitality Workers (MASH) Union, also urged Wisconsin lawmakers to make increasing the state’s wages a priority this fall.

“The service and hospitality working class needs comprehensive living wage legislation with a $20 per hour floor, yearly adjustment for inflation, reduction of the tip penalty, and restoration of local control,” Rickman said. “Democrats and Republicans alike tell us that they want to represent the working class. Now is their time to show us by introducing and passing comprehensive living wage legislation.”

Meanwhile, Wisconsin reached a record of 3,058,500 jobs in July, but the state’s overall jobs growth has been weak. 

Wisconsin has added about 1,400 jobs per month in 2025 — growing about half as fast as the national rate. According to the report, the state has 2% more jobs than before the pandemic, while the U.S. overall has seen 5% more jobs. 

Unemployment remains low in Wisconsin with a 3.1% rate in July 2025. Wisconsin also has a 66.4% labor force participation rate, higher than the national average of 62.6%. 

“The jobs and unemployment data are strong, but the economy is cooling off after the rapid recovery from pandemic shutdowns,” the report states. 

It also finds the economic softening mirrors the national environment where analysts have warned of a slow down or even a recession.

Federal policies undermine growth 

Federal policy changes under the Trump administration are contributing to these outlooks, according to the report.

“For workers, the warning signs and the brewing economic storm of tariffs, immigration crackdowns and federal disinvestment are especially concerning,” the report states. “While the current labor market is solid, these substantial disruptions may not only slow our overall economic growth, but also reduce the power of working people, as opportunities become more scarce.”

The report predicts that tariffs, which are taxes on imports to the U.S., will raise the price of goods for American consumers, the Trump administration’s deportation agenda will undermine the country’s economic strength by hobbling jobs growth and federal cuts to social safety nets will hit the state’s low-wage workers hardest.

“Economists and investors have observed that immigration changes may constrain economic growth even more than the high cost of tariffs. Employers are already complaining about the impact of the raids on their workforce and customers,” the report states. 

According to the report, 320,000 immigrants reside in Wisconsin and generate $23 billion in economic output annually. In 2023, federal data found that immigrants constituted 7% of Wisconsin’s workforce. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests in Wisconsin have doubled under the Trump administration, and of late, the administration, which promised to focus on “criminals,” has been shifting towards deporting people with no criminal convictions and no pending criminal charges. 

“Despite considerable economic and cultural contributions, immigrants face persistent barriers to fully participating in the workforce and community life,” the report states. “The current administration’s anti-immigrant policies have increased fear and dampened new immigration, constricting the Wisconsin economy where labor markets are already tight.”

The Trump administration has also approved cuts to federal Medicaid and food assistance programs, which Gov. Tony Evers’ administration estimates could cost Wisconsin over $284 million and puts thousands at risk of losing support.

“The federal budget, enacted this summer, contains hundreds of provisions with disturbing implications for working people. It holds enormous tax breaks for the rich,” the report states, noting that an analysis by the Institute Taxation and Economic Policy Wisconsin found the “annual tax break to Wisconsin’s richest 1% will be $67,000. And the tax break for the bottom fifth of households in the state? Just $70.” 

“All of this, and more, is coming and will hit lower wage working families across the state especially hard,” the report states. 

The upheaval in federal policies also comes as participation in unions in Wisconsin, which the report says helps with improving conditions for workers, are down as a result of state policies. 

From 2011 to 2024, unionization in Wisconsin fell from 14% to 7%. Over the same time period, union coverage nationally only fell two percentage points from 13% to 11%. 

That drop in Wisconsin, the report notes, comes after over a decade of public sector unions being disempowered in Wisconsin by Act 10, the state law signed by former Gov. Scott Walker in 2011 that significantly reduced collective bargaining powers of public sector employees. 

In addition, the Trump administration has targeted unions, ending collective bargaining for a million federal employees — four out of five federal workers represented by unions at over a dozen federal agencies. He has also fired members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the agency tasked with protecting labor rights, for “unduly disfavoring the interests of employers.” 

“Despite federal and state policies that have impeded unionization over the last half century,” the report states, “unions continue to provide workers with the means to improve wages and working conditions in their jobs.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, pictured July 31, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

The economy-wide tariffs President Donald Trump placed on nearly every U.S. trading partner are illegal, a federal appeals court said Friday.

The International Economic Emergency Powers Act does not give the president the power to impose tariffs, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a 7-4 decision upholding a May decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade and dealing a blow to Trump’s signature trade policy.

The unsigned majority opinion said the tariffs “exceed the authority delegated to the President by IEEPA’s text.”

However, the judges delayed their ruling from going into effect until October, providing the Trump administration an opportunity to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling also does not affect other tariffs Trump issued under different authorities, including industry- or material-specific tariffs on automobiles, steel and aluminum.

In a post to social media, Trump said he would appeal to the Supreme Court, where he predicted victory, and repeated his claim that tariffs were an essential economic tool.

“If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country,” he wrote shortly after the decision was published. “It would make us financially weak, and we have to be strong.… If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America. At the start of this Labor Day weekend, we should all remember that TARIFFS are the best tool to help our Workers, and support Companies that produce great MADE IN AMERICA products.”

Several Democratic states challenged the IEEPA tariffs. Oregon Solicitor General Benjamin Gutman argued on their behalf on July 31. The 11 judges on the appeals court expressed skepticism of both sides during those arguments.

In a statement Friday, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield called the ruling “a huge win for Americans.”

“Every court that has reviewed these tariffs has agreed that they are unconstitutional,” he said. “This ruling couldn’t come at a better time as people are walking into their local stores and seeing price increases for school supplies, clothes, and groceries.”

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

WASHINGTON — A three-judge panel of a federal appeals court unanimously ruled Friday the Trump administration likely acted unlawfully when it revoked extensions for temporary protections for more than 600,000 Venezuelans. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit panel agreed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s March decision to block Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s decision to vacate two extensions of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, to the group until October 2026 that the Biden administration put in place early this year.

One of the groups of Venezuelans had their TPS expire in April and the second is set to expire in September. The three-judge panel found that the Trump administration’s decision to end TPS in April is also likely unlawful.

The panel said Noem did not have the authority to revoke the TPS extensions granted by then-DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. 

Judges Kim McLane Wardlaw, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, Salvador Mendoza Jr. and Anthony Johnstone, who were both appointed by former President Joe Biden, reached the decision.

The judges ruled that the law creating TPS, which grants work visas and deportation protections to nationals from a country deemed too dangerous to return to, was designed to create “predictable periods of safety and legal status for TPS beneficiaries” and the administration’s cancellation of the extension contradicted that goal.

“Sudden reversals of prior decisions contravene the statute’s plain language and purpose,” they wrote. “Here, hundreds of thousands of people have been stripped of status and plunged into uncertainty. The stability of TPS has been replaced by fears of family separation, detention, and deportation.”

“Congress did not contemplate this, and the ongoing irreparable harm to Plaintiffs warrants a remedy pending a final adjudication on the merits,” they continued.

A spokesperson for DHS did not return a message seeking comment Friday.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration in May to end TPS for the group of 350,000 Venezuelans that expired in April. It is unclear how Friday’s order will affect that group.

The roughly 250,000 Venezuelans in another group are set to have their TPS expire Sept. 10 after the DHS revoked the extension.

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell administers the oath of office to Lisa Cook to serve as a member of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve System during a ceremony at the William McChesney Martin Jr. Building of the Federal Reserve May 23, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Friday said she would set an expedited briefing schedule for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s challenge to President Donald Trump’s attempted firing of her earlier in the week. 

Cook is aiming to keep her position until her term expires in 2038, arguing that Trump’s attempt to remove her has no legal basis. U.S. District of Columbia Judge Jia M. Cobb, whom former President Joe Biden appointed in 2021, gave Cook until Tuesday to respond to the government’s brief that seeks to justify her removal.

The deadline is part of a fast-tracked briefing process for the case that could test the ability of the Federal Reserve Board to operate independently. If Cook is removed, Trump would select another member of the seven-person panel, likely meaning a majority of the board would align with the president.

The legal challenge is likely to head to the Supreme Court. 

Cook filed a suit against the president Thursday after he posted to social media Monday that he would fire her over allegations she submitted improper paperwork in order to obtain a favorable mortgage on a second home. She has not been charged with a crime. 

An attorney for Cook, Abbe David Lowell, argued Friday that the allegations against Cook – that she engaged in mortgage fraud – did not qualify as “just cause” for removal. 

Trump has argued that under the Federal Reserve Act, he has the authority to dismiss a governor for “just cause,” which is typically defined as gross misconduct, but Lowell argued Trump was simply seeking to install a governor more aligned with his policy views. 

“Cause for the president means she won’t go along with the interest-rate drop,” Lowell said during Friday’s hearing. 

For months Trump has pressured the Fed to lower interest rates. Cook, the first Black woman appointed to the board, has consistently voted with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell to not lower rates. 

Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth, who is representing the administration, argued the statute defined just cause with open-ended language that gave the president broad discretion to fire a Fed member.

Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, made the accusations of mortgage fraud. He referred Cook’s mortgage application to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.  

In court filings, the Fed did not take a position but pushed for a quick ruling in order “to remove the existing cloud of uncertainty.”

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley announced Friday she will not run for re-election next year. 

Bradley, the most right-wing of the Court’s three conservative justices, has been outspoken in her dislike of the Court’s current liberal majority, regularly complaining in written decisions and the press about the Court’s actions. Bradley is an active member of the right-wing Federalist Society and has been rumored to be interested in a federal judicial seat. 

“For years I have warned that under the control of judicial activists, the court will make itself more powerful than the Legislature, more powerful than the governor,” Bradley said in a statement. “That warning went unheeded, and Wisconsin has seen only the beginning of what is an alarming shift from thoughtful, principled judicial service toward bitter partisanship, personal attacks, and political gamesmanship that have no place in court. The conservative movement needs to take stock of its failures, identify the problem, and fix it.”

Bradley was appointed to the Court by Gov. Scott Walker in 2015 and elected to a 10-year term in 2016. She was part of the conservative majority that upheld the actions by Republican legislators to take power away from the governor and attorney general during the lame duck period after Democrats won those seats in the 2018 election. 

She also authored the Court’s 2021 decision creating the “least change” standard for drawing the state’s new legislative maps. That decision was widely seen as an effort by the Court’s conservatives to ensure that whatever maps were instituted largely kept the Republican’s 2011 partisan gerrymander intact. 

Bradley’s decision not to run comes just 221 days before the April 7 spring election, putting the state’s conservatives, who have lost the two most recent Supreme Court elections by double digits, at a disadvantage. 

State Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor announced her run for the Court in May. Taylor’s July campaign finance report shows she’s already raised more than $580,000.

White House budget director Russell Vought speaks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol on July 15, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The White House budget office moved Friday to yank nearly $5 billion in foreign aid already approved by Congress in a controversial maneuver meant to bypass lawmakers.

The so-called pocket rescission, which a top congressional watchdog and the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee have called illegal, would pull funding that Congress has already approved for the State Department to fulfill overseas commitments.

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office has deemed such actions to circumvent Congress unlawful. And Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Friday that “any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

“Given that this package was sent to Congress very close to the end of the fiscal year when the funds are scheduled to expire, this is an apparent attempt to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval,” the Maine Republican said in a statement. 

According to a summary provided by Senate Appropriations ranking Democrat Patty Murray, the move would claw back $3.2 billion from the State Department’s Development Assistance account that funds food security programs, works to limit irregular migration to the U.S. and to strengthen the market for U.S. companies involved in climate issues to expand overseas.

It would also remove $913 million in U.S. treaty dues to the United Nations to support peacekeeping missions; $445 million in security assistance from the State Department’s Peacekeeping Operations, particularly in Africa; and $322 million from the Democracy Fund, according to Murray’s office.

The White House Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a message seeking the request. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that President Donald Trump is “using his authority under the Impoundment Control Act to deploy a pocket rescission, cancelling $5 billion in foreign aid and international organization funding that violates the President’s America First priorities.”

“None of these programs are in America’s interest, which is why the President is taking decisive action to put America and Americans first,” Rubio said.

Frustration from Congress

When the White House makes a request to Congress to claw back funding already approved, the payments are withheld for 45 days while lawmakers make a decision to approve the rescission or not. Because there are fewer than 45 days before the end of the current fiscal year, funding is essentially paused indefinitely, regardless if Congress approves the move.

As lawmakers face an Oct. 1 deadline in order to avoid a government shutdown, the rescission has already drawn frustration on Capitol Hill.

Murray, of Washington state, blasted the rescission request. 

“Donald Trump wants to zero out more bipartisan investments in our national security and global leadership,” Murray said in a statement. “This time, however, he is attempting to do an end run around Congress altogether. No lawmaker should accept this absurd, illegal ploy to steal their constitutional power to determine how taxpayer dollars get spent.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer slammed the Trump administration for withdrawing funds approved on a bipartisan basis. 

“As the country stares down next month’s government funding deadline on September 30th, it is clear neither President Trump nor Congressional Republicans  have any plan to avoid a painful and entirely unnecessary shutdown,” the New York Democrat said in a statement. 

Pennsylvania Democrat Brendan Boyle, who is the top Democrat on the U.S. House Budget Committee, said in a statement the rescission wasn’t “worth the paper it’s printed on,” and criticized Trump and White House budget director Russell Vought by name.

“It is deeply alarming, plainly illegal, and a blatant abuse of power,” Boyle said. “Congress approved this funding on a bipartisan basis, and the Constitution is clear: it is Congress—not the President—that holds the power of the purse. With this illegal power grab, Donald Trump and Russell Vought are driving us toward a government shutdown.”

This is the Trump administration’s second rescissions request to Congress. The first, which Congress approved, yanked $9 billion in congressionally approved funding. That included about $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, such as National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, for two fiscal years. It also clawed back $8 billion of foreign aid. 

Sydney Badeau, an advocate and outreach worker for people with disabilities, has been able to afford health insurance thanks to enhanced premium subsidies that will end at the end of 2025. (Photo courtesey of Sydney Badeau)

Macy Buhler, a DeForest child care provider, has spent the last several years grappling with the challenges to her business. At the top of the list: hiring and keeping qualified teachers.

Adequate pay is important, of course, but Buhler says good health benefits are as well.  

She would like to offer health insurance, but the margins make that unsustainable. The majority of her employees either have their health insurance on a spouse’s plan or through their parents if they’re younger than 26 — or they go uninsured.

About one-third of her employees are able to get covered through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the ACA’s health care marketplace, HealthCare.gov.

HealthCare.gov was the first-ever national marketplace for people without health insurance to buy coverage for themselves and their families. The law also set standards for what plans sold through the marketplace must cover.

To make insurance more affordable, the ACA included tax credit subsidies tied to the consumer’s income and available for people with household incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty guidelines. 

Those subsidies were substantially increased in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), then extended in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But without another extension, they’ll disappear at the end of 2025.

Buhler says the enhanced tax-credit subsidies have helped make it possible for her employees who use HealthCare.gov to afford their health insurance. 

“I’m thinking I’m very concerned for them next year,” Buhler says of her employees who have been covered under the ACA. “My staff is exposed to everything,” she adds. “Can I keep my staff healthy? … There’s some definite fears going forward.”

For Sydney Badeau, health insurance through the ACA made it possible for her to work two part-time jobs, neither offering health coverage. She does outreach and advocacy working 20 hours a week for The Arc-Wisconsin and 20 hours a week for People First Wisconsin, both of which serve people with disabilities

Badeau has long-term disabilities and was on Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which ended when a review found that she would be able to work.

Being on SSI qualified her for Medicaid. Neither of her jobs provided health benefits for part-timers, but Badeau was able to buy her own through HealthCare.gov, with the enhanced subsidies keeping it affordable for her.

Her premium is expected to increase 30% next year, beyond what she can afford, Badeau says. She has an option — one of her two jobs could take her full time, qualifying her for that employer’s health plan.

But for many people with disabilities who have gotten coverage through the ACA, the options are more difficult. “There’s going to be a lot of people panicking probably in the next six months to a few years, and not insured, because it’s like a giant mess right now,” Badeau says.

Amanda Sherman, a Mequon real estate broker’s assistant, says her current health insurance policy would cost her about $550 a month without the enhanced subsidies, instead of the $300 she’s paying now.

Sherman gets weekly shots for lupus, an autoimmune disorder. Without insurance the injections would cost $4,000 a month. Her plan has brought that down to $500 a month, and the medication’s manufacturer has a program to help cover her copayments and lower that cost further.

Sherman requires monthly bloodwork and sees five different specialists. She’s undergone a bone marrow biopsy, MRI exams and CT scans.

The annual deductible for Sherman’s health insurance is $7,500. She reached that limit in February. Her out-of-pocket expenses are capped at $9,500; she reached that in February as well.

Sherman’s medications reduce the power of her body’s immune system, making her more likely to get infections. Earlier this year she got walking pneumonia and was hospitalized for sepsis. Three days in the hospital would have cost $20,000 without her insurance, she says.

“If I didn’t have the Affordable Care Act I wouldn’t be able to afford health insurance,” Sherman says. “It’s still very hard for me to afford all my medical expenses — even just the copays are a lot.”

Sherman has asked her health insurer how much her premium will increase next year, but the answers have been vague

Pondering her alternatives, “I’m honestly really scared,” Sherman says.

It bothers her when she hears assumptions others make about the people who will be affected as safety-net programs are slashed.

“I just think it’s gotten really ugly the way that people are looking at each other and dehumanizing different groups of people,” Sherman says.

She has heard others assume that people “are just leeching off the system” if they use Medicaid or have relied on the ACA subsidy to afford health insurance.

“Anybody can get a chronic illness. Anybody can end up with a job where they don’t offer insurance, and that doesn’t make them less of a person,” Sherman says.

“Health care should be something that everybody has access to,” she adds. “It shouldn’t be that hard.” 

If coverage declines

When Republicans and President Donald Trump enacted the tax-cut and spending cut reconciliation bill in July, the measure placed new limits on who can qualify for the ACA’s premium tax credit subsidies. The bill also included provisions that will cut Medicaid enrollment and put new barriers to enrollment in federal nutrition aid programs. 

When drawing up the bill, the authors declined to include a provision that would have extended enhanced subsidies based on a person’s income on health plans purchased through HealthCare.gov.

William Parke-Sutherland, government affairs director of Kids Forward, says that the combination of Medicaid cuts and ACA changes could lead as many as 18 million people to lose health care coverage.

“This will mean America will get sicker,” Parke-Sutherland says. “Individuals and families and everybody will have less regular and affordable access to primary care. Uncompensated care is likely to go up. Taking people off of health care coverage doesn’t make their health care needs go away.”

Those factors are likely to drive up health costs and health insurance costs for the rest of the public, according to health care and insurance experts.

Wisconsin Commissioner of Insurance Nathan Hodek says insurers have filed their rate plans for the marketplace with the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI), and while the new rates won’t be announced until early this fall, “what we are seeing is a trend of higher rates.”

The changes are also likely to show up in the Wisconsin Health Care Stability Plan, Hodek says.

The stability plan provides reinsurance to help absorb the risk for insurers and has helped keep rates 13 to 19 percentage points lower than they would have been without the stability plan, he explains.

State lawmakers and the state budget have given the plan full support, Hodek says. Federal support, however, is based on a formula that includes the size of ACA marketplace enrollment in the state.

If enrollment goes down because of the ACA changes this year, “we are concerned that we’ll also see decreased federal funding” for the stability plan,” Hodek says. If so, the plan will need more from the state “to make sure that program is fully funded and continuing to keep rates more affordable.”

Dr. Jill McMullen, a Tomah family practitioner, says that as insurance rates are driven up, people will be driven out of the insurance marketplace.

“Anything that makes it more expensive to get insurance on the health insurance marketplace means that higher percentage of healthy people, younger people will opt out of getting insurance,” McMullen says.

One consequence is that the people who do buy insurance are likely to be sicker, with higher health care costs, she adds — driving up the cost of insurance premiums even more.

The impact on people’s health may take longer to show up — in the form of uncontrolled, chronic illness such as high blood pressure or diabetes.

“That may not show up in terms of what we call poor outcomes, complications, or difficulties for a few years,” McMullen says. “But then when they do come into place, then they will be more expensive because it’s much more expensive to fix the problem than to prevent it.”

Part One: After years of growth, advocates fear Affordable Care Act is going backward

Detail of a mural inside the Madison Labor Temple building celebrating unions and worker rights. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

“This fight is all of labor’s fight,” Kevin Gundlach, president of the South Central Federation of Labor, declared at a “solidarity dinner” for 43 immigrant workers who recently lost their jobs at a Monroe, Wisconsin cheese factory. “Even Wisconsinites who don’t know about the story, should know in a cheesemaking state we should support cheesemakers.” 

The workers, some of whom labored for more than 20 years at W&W Dairy, were told in August they would have to submit to E-Verify screening and confirm their legal status in order to continue their employment after a new company, Kansas-based Dairy Farmers of America (DFA), bought the cheese plant. They walked off the job to protest, hoping DFA, which has a policy of subjecting new hires to E-Verify screening, would exempt them because of their many years of service. The company declined, but asked the workers to return to help train their replacements, one worker said. 

The cheese plant employees I spoke with said they were still in shock, worried about supporting their families as they face the loss of pay and benefits at the end of the month.

Workers who pulled long shifts, kept the plant going through the pandemic and took pride in producing high quality, Mexican-style cheeses — queso fresco, queso blanco, quesadilla and panela — now feel betrayed. 

Their goal is no longer to return to their old jobs. Instead, they are focused on getting severance pay from W&W Dairy, which is still technically their employer until Sept. 1 — Labor Day — when DFA assumes control of the plant.

On Thursday, Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director of the immigrant workers’ rights group Voces de la Frontera, wrote to W&W president Franz Hofmeister to ask that the dairy show appreciation for its longtime workers by offering them a severance package. A Labor Day picnic organized by community members to support the workers, “would be an excellent opportunity to announce that the workers and the company have resolved their differences and that workers are being given some compensation,” Neumann-Ortiz wrote. “This would give the workers a chance to thank you publicly and provide some healing and closure.”

W&W’s success was propelled by its loyal workforce — fewer than 100 people who knew how to do multiple jobs in the plant and switched roles to keep things running smoothly. The quality of the product attracted a high-profile buyer. 

“The growth trajectory for the Hispanic cheese market is more than three times that of the cheese category,” Ken Orf, president of DFA’s Cheese, Taste and Flavors Division, told the trade publication Cheese Reporter, in an article about the benefit to the company of its “strategic acquisition” of W&W, which puts it in a “stronger position for growth with this important dairy category.”

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the Hispanic employees of the plant.

Bibiana Gonzalez, a child care provider and community leader in the Monroe area, said she liked the term “essential workers” when she first heard it. The W&W workers felt they were essential to their employer’s success, and put in long hours during the pandemic, when other people were staying home to protect their health. But “unfortunately, people confuse essential workers with workers who can be exploited,” Gonzalez said.

“They want to toss these workers in the street just for being immigrants,” said Voces de la Frontera organizer Pablo Rodriguez.

DFA wants to distance itself from any thorny political issues around immigration. In a statement to WKOW Channel 27 news, the company asserted it had a goal “to retain 100% of the W&W workforce,” but that “as part of the hiring process to become DFA employees, all W&W workers and other applicants were notified of the need to provide documents to complete both an I-9 form and the E-verify process.” Failing to produce the proper documents, unfortunately, would mean “DFA’s ability to offer employment was impacted.”

Using cold, passive bureaucratic language, DFA casts it as a regrettable accident that its E-Verify policy rendered nearly half the cheese plant’s employees ineligible to continue working there. But as a cooperative with 5,000 dairy farm members, it’s impossible DFA leadership is unfamiliar with its industry’s heavy reliance on workers who don’t have papers.

In Wisconsin, where DFA has 399 member farms and four dairy manufacturing plants, an estimated 70% of the dairy workforce is made up of immigrants who cannot get E-Verifiable legal work papers.

In dairy, as in other year-round, nonseasonal industries, immigrants who make up the majority of the work force are ineligible for U.S. work visas. Congress has simply failed to create a visa for year-round jobs in agriculture, manufacturing, construction, food service and other industries that rely on immigrant labor.

Far from being a drag on the economy, immigrant workers who lack legal authorization are heavily recruited by U.S. employers and “supercharge economic growth,” according to a new Center for Migration Studies research brief. The research brief shows that 8.5 million undocumented workers in the U.S. contribute an estimated $96.7 billion annually in federal, state and local taxes, “filling roles vital to critical industries.”

The brief also warns that mass deportations could cause critical workforce shortages. No one knows that better than Wisconsin dairy farmers, who would go out of business overnight if their mostly immigrant workforce was deported.

Union members who came out to support the W&W workers Tuesday night embraced the idea that all workers are in the same boat, are ill served by an authoritarian, bullying Trump administration, and will do better if they band together.

That’s the whole idea of solidarity: Working people need to unite to protect their common interests against the rich and powerful, who will run roughshod over all of us if they can. Expanding on that unifying message, Al Hudson, lay leader of the Union Presbyterian Church in Monroe, whose congregation supports the W&W workers, brought his social justice gospel to the union hall.

“We are proud to be a gathering place for the Green County Hispanic community,” Hudson said of his church. “We’re proud to do our part to be a Matthew 25 church,” he added, referring to the Bible verse in which Jesus calls on the faithful to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, care for the sick and visit those in prison. “This is what churches are supposed to do,” Hudson said. “I admire your courage,” he told the displaced W&W workers, pledging to continue to “walk with you and support you in your struggle as long as you want us there.”

The union members in the hall cheered. They applauded the W&W workers, they applauded speeches about solidarity among working people of every race and ethnic background. They seemed enlivened by the chance to do something to help.

The warm feeling of pulling together to resist the violent bigotry of the anti-immigrant Trump administration, recognizing the common struggle among all working people, was uplifting.

“Solidaridad!” shouted Gundlach, and the mostly gringo crowd of unionists shouted back, “Solidaridad!” 

U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Bill Cassidy speaks with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after Kennedy's confirmation hearing on Jan. 30, 2025. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Bipartisan leaders of a U.S. Senate committee dealing with health policy expressed alarm with the direction of the country’s top public health agencies after President Donald Trump fired the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other high-level officials resigned. 

Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy — chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee — posted on social media late Wednesday that the “high profile departures will require oversight by the HELP Committee.”

Cassidy separately called on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to indefinitely postpone its September meeting.

“Serious allegations have been made about the meeting agenda, membership, and lack of scientific process being followed for the now announced September ACIP meeting,” Cassidy wrote in a statement. “These decisions directly impact children’s health and the meeting should not occur until significant oversight has been conducted. If the meeting proceeds, any recommendations made should be rejected as lacking legitimacy given the seriousness of the allegations and the current turmoil in CDC leadership.”

Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking member on the committee, called for a bipartisan investigation into the reasons Trump fired Susan Monarez as CDC director less than a month after she received Senate confirmation.

Sanders said that Health and Human Services Director Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Monarez and the handful of high-ranking CDC officials who resigned this week should be able to testify publicly about what’s happening inside the agency. 

“We need leaders at the CDC and HHS who are committed to improving public health and have the courage to stand up for science, not officials who have a history of spreading bogus conspiracy theories and disinformation,” Sanders wrote.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a briefing that Trump had every right to fire Monarez and that he expects to pick a new nominee “very soon.”

“Her lawyers’ statement made it abundantly clear themselves that she was not aligned with the president’s mission to make America healthy again,” Leavitt said. “The secretary asked her to resign. She said she would and then she said she wouldn’t. So the president fired her, which he has every right to do.” 

Kennedy is scheduled to testify before the Senate Finance Committee next week, that panel’s chairman, Idaho Republican Mike Crapo, announced Thursday.

Kennedy “has placed addressing the underlying causes of chronic diseases at the forefront of this Administration’s health care agenda,” Crapo wrote on X. “I look forward to learning more about @HHSGov’s Make America Healthy Again actions to date and plans moving forward.”

Cassidy key vote for RFK

Cassidy was an essential vote to confirm Kennedy as director of HHS, which oversees the CDC, though he expressed concerns throughout that process that Kennedy’s past statements about vaccines weren’t rooted in reputable medical research.

Cassidy said during a floor speech in February after voting to advance Kennedy’s nomination that Kennedy assured him he will protect “the public health benefit of vaccination.” 

“If Mr. Kennedy is confirmed, I will use my authority of the Senate committee with oversight of HHS to rebuff any attempt to remove the public’s access to life-saving vaccines without ironclad causational scientific evidence that can be accepted and defended before the mainstream scientific community and before Congress,” Cassidy said at the time. “I will watch carefully for any effort to wrongly sow public fear about vaccines between confusing references of coincidence and anecdote.”

Vice President J.D. Vance addresses a crowd at Mid-City Steel in La Crosse on Thursday. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Vice President J.D. Vance decried what he described as the crime-ridden streets of American cities and Democrats’ alleged efforts to take health care away from U.S. citizens and give it to undocumented immigrants at an event Thursday afternoon at a steel fabrication facility in La Crosse. 

At the event, which took place on the bank of the Mississippi River at Mid-City Steel, Vance and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum touted the benefits that Republicans’ budget reconciliation law, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, will deliver for working class Wisconsinites. 

The night before Vance’s visit, Democratic elected officials and candidates for state and federal office mingled with voters at state Sen. Brad Pfaff’s (D-Onalaska) annual corn roast. State Dems came to meet voters at the La Crosse County Fairgrounds in West Salem and to search for a path back to power nationally, trifecta of control of  state government and an effective counter to the authoritarian impulses of President Donald Trump.

The back-to-back events highlighted how politically important western Wisconsin is set to become over the next year as attention focuses on the competitive 3rd Congressional District, represented by Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden, and the open race for governor. 

At the fairgrounds on Wednesday, Pfaff’s staff members handed out 350 brats, 150 hot dogs and 500 ears of corn slathered with 13 pounds of butter as a polka band played and candidates for statewide office made their way down long picnic tables with cups of Spotted Cow and Miller Lite, stopping to chat with voters. In attendance were Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, who is running for governor, Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski, who is running for lieutenant governor, and Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor, who is running for a seat on the state Supreme Court. Also in attendance were state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) and Wisconsin Economic Development Coordinator Missy Hughes, both of whom have been testing the waters as possible gubernatorial candidates. 

Pfaff, who ran unsuccessfully against Van Orden for the 3rd District congressional seat in 2022, repeatedly touted the importance of Democrats listening to rural voters and speaking to issues that matter to their lives.

That message played well in front of the group of about 120 attendees who complained that Van Orden does not often face disgruntled constituents. Democrats have frequently highlighted the fact that Van Orden has not held any in-person town halls or debated his Democratic election opponents.

“It’s extremely frustrating. The thing is that we as Democrats, we’ve got a brand that we’ve got to rebuild,” Pfaff said. “And I’m a Democrat. I’m a proud rural Democrat. I was raised with the values of hard work, dedication and resilience. I was raised in the fact that, you know, you need to get up every morning and go to work, and you need to be able to provide for your family and put away for the future. But you need to be able to be part of a community and build a community that is inclusive and welcoming.” 

Pfaff added that Van Orden has not been accessible to his voters or answered for his votes on legislation such as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. 

“You need to be accessible to your constituents, and when you’re not accessible to your constituents, you’re not serving yourself, and definitely you’re not in touch with the people of the district,” he said. “So it’s very concerning. But …  we will have a very competitive congressional race in 2026 and Derek’s gonna have to explain his votes and his actions.” 

Rebecca Cooke, who lost to Van Orden in last year’s election and is running again to unseat him next year, said she’s trying to spend this time, about 14 months before the midterm elections, traveling the district and understanding voters’ concerns. 

“My campaign has always been really focused around working families and working class people, which I think Senator Pfaff too, we have a very similar thought and understanding, because we talk to people, right?” Cooke said. “Brad hosts open events like this so that he can hear from people directly. And I think that that’s the difference with Van Orden, who brings in J.D. Vance, the big guns, because he can’t deliver the message himself. I think we are of and from western Wisconsin, and so we know how to communicate with people in our community, and we listen to them.”

On Thursday, both Burgum and Vance celebrated Van Orden’s vote on the budget reconciliation bill, inspiring Van Orden  to stand from his front row seat and pump his fist. Prior to his vote on the legislation, Van Orden said he wouldn’t support a bill that cut funds from food assistance programs, but ultimately he cast a deciding vote for the legislation that, analysis shows, will boot 90,000 Wisconsinites off food assistance programs and cause 30,000 rural Wisconsinites to lose their health care. 

Burgum also said the Trump administration is working to bring steel manufacturing and shipbuilding back to America. But on Thursday, U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin raised the alarm for shipbuilders in Marinette after Trump announced the purchase of ships built in South Korea. 

“I am deeply concerned by recent reports that indicate the Trump Administration is looking to have U.S. ships made overseas in South Korea,” Baldwin said in a statement. “We need to see the details of this agreement because at the end of the day, America cannot compromise here – we are already losing to China and we have no time to waste. We must be firm on our commitment to supporting our maritime workforce, keeping our country safe, and revitalizing America’s shipbuilding capacity. I have long fought to strengthen our shipbuilding industry, and it can’t be done with shortcuts or quick fixes. The President must prioritize American workers by investing in our shipbuilding industry here at home and buying American-made ships.”

Despite the massive cuts the reconciliation law is making to federal assistance programs, Vance said that the Democratic Party is lying about its effects, claiming Democrats voted against the bill because they wanted to raise taxes and give health care to people who are in the country without legal authorization. 

Vance touted the extension of tax cuts passed by Republicans in 2017 during the first Trump administration, saying they will put money back into the pockets of American workers like the ones at Mid-City Steel. He also celebrated Trump’s tariffs calling them a lever to protect American industry. 

“What the working families tax cuts did is very simple, ladies and gentlemen, it let you keep more money in your pocket, it rewarded you for building a business, for working at a business right here in the United States of America, it makes it easy for you to take home more of your hard earned pay and it makes it easier if you’re an American manufacturer, an American business, it makes it easier for you to build your facility or expand your facility,” Vance said. 

But the cost of the tariffs is being borne by American consumers in the form of higher prices, and the tax cuts have largely gone to benefit the wealthiest Americans. 

An analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that 69% of the benefits of the tax cuts will go to the richest 15% of Wisconsinites.

The vice president also painted American cities as crime-infested slums where everyday Americans cannot walk down the street without being accosted by a person “screaming on a street corner.” The Trump administration has deployed the National Guard and Marines in Washington D.C. and Los Angeles in a show  of force, and Trump has threatened to send soldiers to fight crime in other Democratic cities — even though the highest crime rates in the country are in Republican-controlled states. 

On Thursday Vance said that even though Milwaukee has what he said is a crime problem, the president doesn’t want to send troops in to address it unless he’s asked to by local officials. 

“Very simply, we want governors and mayors to ask for the help. The president of the United States is not going out there forcing this on anybody, though we do think we have the legal right to clean up America’s streets if we want to,” Vance said. “What the president of the United States has said is, “Why don’t you invite us in?’”

William Garcia, the chair of the 3rd Congressional District Democratic Party, said that Vance’s visit showed that Republicans are out of touch with western Wisconsin, noting that a speech at a steel fabricator isn’t representative of what actually drives the local economy and delivering that speech to a hand-selected crowd glosses over the pain the Trump administration’s policies are bringing to local communities.

“If you really wanted to talk to people out here, you would talk about agriculture, and you would try and justify why Canadian fertilizer has a massive tariff on it now, so we have to spend so much more money to just grow our own food,” Garcia said. “Then you have to talk about your immigration policies that are preventing our harvest from being picked after they’ve grown. And so that’s why he’s having to narrow the people he’s talking to, to this super small crowd, because by and large, conservative, liberal, whatever, are being hurt by these policies, and he doesn’t want to hear any pushback about that.”

“The Trump administration is threatening our state’s fundamental values by commanding ICE and its agents to ignore due process, rip people from their communities and repeatedly violate basic human rights,” Rep. Darrin Madison (D-Milwaukee) said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Democrats are calling for prohibitions on state and local support for the Trump administration’s mass deportations and for greater transparency surrounding law enforcement officers and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers helping carry out arrests. 

Lawmakers, led by the Democratic Socialist caucus, proposed a package of five bills to meet those goals at a press conference Thursday. Federal agents have used increasingly aggressive tactics to arrest immigrants as they seek to advance the Trump administration’s immigration agenda. In Wisconsin, ICE arrests have doubled under Trump with agents arresting an average of 85 people per month since January. 

“The Trump administration is threatening our state’s fundamental values by commanding ICE and its agents to ignore due process, rip people from their communities and repeatedly violate basic human rights,” Rep. Darrin Madison (D-Milwaukee) said. The bills, he said, will implement “strong accountability measures so that all Wisconsinites, regardless of their background, are welcome and safe here.”

Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez (D-Milwaukee) said that most of the people being detained by the Trump administration aren’t criminals. According to ABC News, a recent report found that since late May, people with no criminal convictions and no pending criminal charges have started to make up an increasing percentage of those arrested by ICE. 

“The vast majority have been people who pose no public threat,” Ortiz-Velez said. “They are the essential workers that put food on our tables, milk the cows and keep the meat factories operating. They build our homes, and they’re our neighbors, and they’re our friends.” 

Republicans, who hold majorities in the Senate and Assembly, would be necessary for the bills to advance.

Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee) said it’s unlikely Republicans will sign on. 

“We hope that our Republican colleagues will work with us on common-sense legislation, especially when the stakes are this high, but no, I don’t anticipate any support from our Republican legislative colleagues on this,” Clancy said. 

Republicans introduced a bill earlier this year that would require local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE. It passed the Assembly in March. 

One of the bills in the Democratic package is a measure introduced earlier this year by Ortiz-Velez to do the opposite by prohibiting cooperation of law enforcement with ICE

Another bill would require law enforcement officers to identify themselves when arresting someone including making their name and badge number visible, providing the authority for arrest or detention and prohibiting them from covering their face or wearing a disguise. Face coverings would be allowed if worn for safety or protection.

Violations would be a Class D felony and carry a penalty of maximum $100,000 fine.

Leaders of the Department of Homeland Security have said agents are covering their faces to protect themselves from doxing and threats, according to NPR. 

“It’s not normal for any law enforcement officer, any agency to wear masks and hide their identity, nor is it safe,” Ortiz-Velez said. “No exception should be made here.” 

One bill would prohibit state employees and police officers from aiding in the detention of someone if the person is being detained on the “sole basis that the individual is or is alleged to be not lawfully present in the United States.” The bill would also prohibit law enforcement agencies in Wisconsin from participating in 287(g) agreements.

The federal 287(g) program provides the opportunity for state and local law enforcement agencies to partner with ICE, allowing local officers to perform certain immigration-related duties, including identifying, processing and detaining removable immigrants in local jails. 

According to the ACLU of Wisconsin, there are 13 counties in Wisconsin as of the end of July that formally participate in the program. Several have joined this year including Kewaunee, Outagamie, Washington, Waupaca, Winnebago and Wood. 

“It’s important to remember as we’re here at the state capitol that Wisconsin has shown strong opposition to policies like 287(g),” said Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director and co-founder of Voces de la Frontera, a nonprofit immigrant rights organization. 

Neumann-Ortiz noted that in 2016 thousands protested immigration legislation that Republicans were proposing at the time, and it ultimately failed.

“People can make the change,” Neumann-Ortiz said.

Another bill would prohibit state and local facilities from being used to hold detained immigrants and would prohibit funds from being used to establish new immigrant detention facilities. The bill’s co-author, Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire), called it “the Communities, Not Cages” bill. 

“Over the past eight months, my constituents have stopped me at events and contacted my office and shared personal stories of fear and horror that grows and comes with watching the Trump regime abduct, detain and deport people they perceive to be immigrants without due process without accountability, often without even showing their faces,” Phelps said. “Our constituents in every corner of the state wish for us to be welcoming, safe and humane — a state that invests in communities and not in cages.” 

The final bill would establish a grant program run by the Department of Administration for community-based organizations in Wisconsin to support them in providing civil legal services to people and families in immigration matters.

Gov. Tony Evers said in a statement that the bill is “bad for Wisconsin taxpayers, who will be forced to help foot the bill for Republicans’ red-tape requirements.” Evers delivers his 2025 state budget address. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers’ administration released new estimates Thursday showing that President Donald Trump’s recently approved federal tax cut and spending megabill will cost Wisconsin $284 million — $142 million annually — due to shifting costs and new “red-tape” requirements for social programs. 

The “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act — as it is officially named — makes a number of policy changes to federal social safety net programs, including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), that will be implemented gradually until completion in 2028. The cuts to the programs were aimed at balancing out the continuation of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and significant increases in military as well as immigration and border spending, though the law is projected to add $3 trillion to the national debt. 

The estimate from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) comes as Vice President J.D. Vance is scheduled to speak in La Crosse on Thursday to tout the legislation. 

Evers said in a statement that the bill is “bad for Wisconsin taxpayers, who will be forced to help foot the bill for Republicans’ red-tape requirements just to make it harder for folks to get the care they need and food to eat.”

“Wisconsinites shouldn’t have to pay the price for a reckless Republican bill that’s going to add trillions of dollars to our federal deficit and shift hundreds of millions of dollars in costs to hard-working taxpayers, all so Republicans could pay for tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations,” Evers said. “Wisconsinites aren’t getting a fair shake from Republicans in Washington — that’s plain as day.”

Some of the cost-cutting in the law comes from adding additional requirements to qualify for safety net programs that will reduce the number of people benefiting from them and offload some of the federal government’s costs to state and local governments. 

Wisconsin DHS has estimated that the requirements could put more than 270,000 Wisconsinites at risk of losing health insurance and as many as 43,700 could lose access to food assistance. 

Starting on December 31, 2026, childless members of BadgerCare Plus who are between the ages of 19 and 64 will have to report 80 hours of work, training or volunteering per month or risk losing coverage.

The analysis notes that it is now “fiscally and operationally unfeasible” for Wisconsin to expand its Medicaid program due to new provisions in the law. Wisconsin could get an additional $1.3 billion from the federal government if it expanded Medicaid, but the provision that made that a possibility will sunset in 2026. Expansion states will also now be required to redetermine eligibility at the six-month marks for its adult population covered under expansion.

When it comes to the SNAP program, the federal government will only cover 25% of administrative costs under the new law. It previously covered 50%. The shifting of the additional 25% to the states will cost Wisconsin about $43.5 million annually starting in 2027. That cost is also expected to grow in the future. 

The federal law also eliminates funding for SNAP education programs with Wisconsin losing $12 million annually starting in October. DHS said it would need additional funding in the 2027-29 state budget to implement and sustain Medicaid and FoodShare employment and training programs. 

The federal law could also mean additional costs for states if its annual payment error rate for the SNAP program is over 6%. The payment error rate measures mistakes by states in assessing eligibility and payments and, according to the Evers administration, Wisconsin has typically had a low rate. Last year, the state’s error rate was about 4.5%, but the agency said rates fluctuate and new policies and standards could make rates fluctuate more. 

States with a rate over 6% starting in October 2027 will be required to pay 5 to 15% of SNAP costs. 

“Achieving and maintaining Wisconsin’s historically low error rate while implementing the other provisions in the reconciliation bill will require additional state and county quality control staff,” the analysis states. “Failing to do so will have even larger consequences for the state and Wisconsin taxpayers.” 

The agency estimates that if an error rate were over 6%, it could cost the state as much as $205.5 million annually. 

DHS said it will not be able to absorb all of the increased costs associated with the law and additional state funding will be necessary, including $69.2 million to cover additional administrative costs including an  additional 56 state employees and county quality control positions to consistently achieve and maintain a FoodShare payment error rate in Wisconsin below 6% over the long term. The agency  said it would also need additional funding in the 2027-29 state budget to implement and sustain Medicaid and FoodShare employment and training programs. The agency estimated that it would cost the state roughly $72.4 million each year to provide employment and training services to help Medicaid members meet the new requirements. 

DHS Sec. Kirsten Johnson said the potential costs covered in the analysis are “just the tip of the iceberg.” 

“From increases in uncompensated care for hospitals to lost revenue for Wisconsin’s farmers, grocers, and local economies and thousands of Wisconsinites losing Medicaid and FoodShare, these cuts will cause a ripple effect throughout the state and put a financial strain on all of us,” Johnson said. 

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell administers the oath of office to Lisa Cook to serve as a member of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve System during a ceremony at the William McChesney Martin Jr. Building of the Federal Reserve May 23, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, sued President Donald Trump Thursday, calling his move to fire her an “unprecedented and illegal attempt” that jeopardizes the independence of the board. 

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, sets up a fight between the Federal Reserve and the president who has tried to pressure the independent board to lower interest rates. The challenge could go all the way to the Supreme Court. 

The suit argues that the president’s Monday decision to remove her was political and violated her due process rights because she had no chance to respond to the allegations of mortgage fraud a Trump appointee lodged against her. Cook has not been charged with any crime.

“It is clear from the circumstances surrounding Governor Cook’s purported removal from the Federal Reserve Board that the mortgage allegations against her are pretextual, in order to effectuate her prompt removal and vacate a seat for President Trump to fill and forward his agenda to undermine the independence of the Federal Reserve,” according to the suit. 

The suit also emphasized the importance of the Fed’s independence from elected officials.

“The operational independence of the Federal Reserve is vital to its ability to make sound economic decisions, free from the political pressures of an election cycle,” according to the suit.

The case is assigned to Jia M. Cobb. Former President Joe Biden appointed Cobb in 2021. 

The suit asks the district court to allow Cook to continue serving on the Fed as she challenges her removal. 

In a statement to States Newsroom, White House spokesperson Kush Desai defended the president’s decision to remove Cook.

“The President determined there was cause to remove a governor who was credibly accused of lying in financial documents from a highly sensitive position overseeing financial institutions,” Desai said. “The removal of a governor for cause improves the Federal Reserve Board’s accountability and credibility for both the markets and American people.”

Rift highlights policy differences 

Cook, the first Black woman appointed to the Fed, has consistently voted against lowering interest rates since joining the board in 2022. Her term ends in 2038. 

If Trump is successful in removing her and is able to nominate a replacement, he could have a majority of Fed members who are aligned with his desire to lower interest rates to boost the economy.

Despite Trump’s long-running pressure campaign, the Fed has kept rates steady amid concerns that the president’s tariffs will produce price hikes. 

The allegations of mortgage fraud stem from Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Pulte accused Cook of making a false statement on a mortgage application to obtain a more favorable rate on her second home. He referred the matter to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. 

The suit does not address the merits of the allegations.

Pulte has made similar mortgage fraud accusations against two other political enemies of Trump’s: New York Attorney General Letitia James, who investigated the president’s business dealings and won a finding of fraud in state court, and California U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, who led the investigation into Trump’s first impeachment inquiry.

A doctor takes the blood pressure of a pregnant patient. The Affordable Care Act has expanded the number of people with access to health insurance and health care, but advocates say changes being made since President Donald Trump took office could lead people to lose access. (Getty Images)

Months away from 2026, Amanda Sherman worries often about how the new year will change her health care.

Sherman, a broker’s assistant in a real estate office, buys her health insurance through the federal health insurance marketplace, HealthCare.gov. Her coverage has helped her through a chronic illness and critical health setbacks.

Her health plan costs her $300 a month. Without it, she says she couldn’t afford the weekly shots that she gets for lupus — a chronic autoimmune disorder she was diagnosed with five years ago.

HealthCare.gov was established in 2014 as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). “It’s been there as a great resource when I haven’t been able to get insurance at work,” Sherman says.

In 2026, however, Sherman expects the cost of her health insurance to skyrocket. An enhanced federal subsidy that helped her afford the coverage is set to disappear at the end of this year. When that happens, she isn’t sure what she’ll do.

In the last few years, record numbers of Americans, including record numbers of Wisconsin residents, have been signing up for coverage that the ACA has made possible.

“When we look back over the last decade, the number of uninsured people in our state has dropped by over 200,000 thanks to the Affordable Care Act,” Wisconsin Commissioner of Insurance Nathan Houdek tells the Wisconsin Examiner. “So we’ve seen a lot of success in terms of more people getting health insurance coverage and being able to access the health care they need as a result.”

Advocates warn that that is about to change under policies coming from the administration of President Donald Trump and the Republican majority in Congress.

“It’s going to take apart a lot of the advances that have been made to extend coverage to more people,” says Bobby Peterson, executive director of ABC for Health, which provides nonprofit legal services and advocacy for people caught up in medical debt.

Obamacare and HealthCare.gov

The ACA was enacted in 2010 during then-President Barack Obama’s first term and phased in over four years.

Nicknamed Obamacare — by detractors at first but later by its supporters — the law made changes that affected health coverage for everyone. It prevented insurers from rejecting coverage or hiking the premium cost because of a pre-existing health condition, for example.

The ACA also created a first-ever national marketplace where people without health insurance could buy coverage for themselves and their families: HealthCare.gov. And the law set standards for the policies sold in the marketplace.

In addition, the law established a nationwide navigator system — nonprofit agencies that help people who buy coverage at HealthCare.gov review their policy options and assess what might best fill their needs.

Dr. Jill McMullen, a family practitioner in Tomah, says she saw “a big improvement in people having access to care and the consistency of care since the Affordable Care Act went in place.”

The ACA required insurers to cover preventive care visits, for example.

“We could predict what was covered regardless of what insurance a patient was signed up with,” McMullen says. “That just makes it a lot easier for patients to get their care” — and also reduces the chance that providers would not get paid for their services.

To make insurance more affordable, the ACA included tax credit subsidies tied to the consumer’s income and available for people with household incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty guidelines. Those subsidies reduce, but don’t eliminate, the HealthCare.gov premium cost and reduce the annual out-of-pocket deductible that the patient has to pay.

Program improvements, record enrollments

In 2021, after President Joe Biden took office, Congress passed and Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), legislation to provide economic relief in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. ARPA included a provision that supercharged the premium tax credits and lowered patients’ out-of-pocket costs.

For the first time, subsidies were available to people with incomes more than four times the poverty guideline, according to the nonpartisan health research organization KFF. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act extended those enhanced subsidies through the end of 2025.

The Biden administration increased funding for navigator agencies and extended the annual ACA open enrollment period to run from Nov. 1 to Jan. 15.

Those changes helped produce higher-than-ever HealthCare.gov enrollments in Wisconsin in the last few years, Houdek says.

For 2025 alone, a record 313,579 people signed up for coverage at HealthCare.gov. National marketplace enrollment for 2025 also reached a record, 24 million, according to KFF.

Since taking office President Donald Trump and his administration have made or proposed changes in how HealthCare.gov works.

In June the Trump-appointed administration at the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) filed a new administrative rule governing Healthcare.gov enrollment that also would add roadblocks for the premium subsidies and shorten the open enrollment period for HealthCare.gov in future years.

On Friday, however, a federal judge in Maryland issued an injunction halting several provisions in the rule pending the outcome of a lawsuit to overturn it.

Even if the new rule doesn’t get enacted, experts say other Trump administration changes to the ACA are almost certain to make health insurance more expensive for people who buy their own coverage.

Navigator cutbacks, mega-bill changes

The administration has cut back support for the nonprofit health care navigators.

Wisconsin’s navigator agency is Covering Wisconsin, part of the University of Wisconsin Extension. Over the course of 2024, the agency’s 41 navigators helped with 100,000 coverage issues, says Covering Wisconsin Director Allison Espeseth.

Those include about 10,000 people who needed assistance through the full process of enrollment at Healthcare.gov, she says. But navigators up to now have helped people with other related needs, such as getting people who qualify enrolled in Medicaid, called BadgerCare in Wisconsin.

“The role of the navigator is to be that hub,” Espeseth says. “To be that one person who understands the health system, hospitals, health plans, understands government.”

In May, Covering Wisconsin received word from the federal government that, like navigator programs across the country, the Wisconsin program would lose 90% of its federal funding, Espeseth says. The cutback took effect Wednesday, Aug. 27.

Espeseth said that will reduce the number of Covering Wisconsin navigators from 41 to 17. With just one-third the number of navigators, “it’s going to make it more difficult for sure to see as many consumers as we have in the past,” she says.

Espeseth says Covering Wisconsin is connecting with insurance agents and brokers who can help with HealthCare.gov marketplace enrollment. The nonprofit is also coordinating with county agencies that qualify and enroll people in Medicaid and other safety net programs.

During the Healthcare.gov open enrollment period, “Typically we help anybody with any coverage issue that comes up, not just for the marketplace,” Espeseth says. “But this year, we need to prioritize. So we’re going to be really focusing as much as we can on marketplace consumers [who] need to renew or find a plan [or] don’t have coverage.”

The tax-cut and spending cut reconciliation bill that Republicans in Congress passed this summer and Trump signed on July 4 includes new limits on who can qualify for the ACA’s premium tax credit subsidies.

Meanwhile, Trump and the congressional Republicans rejected appeals to keep the ARPA enhanced subsidies in place after 2025.

“The federal reconciliation bill is the biggest change to health care in this country since the passage of ACA, and it goes in the wrong direction,” says William Parke-Sutherland, government affairs director for Kids Forward, an advocacy organization for families and children.

The ARPA enhanced subsidies “made health insurance way more affordable for people under 250% of the federal poverty level,” he says — and also made it possible for middle class families who previously had no support to get “a little bit of support to help pay for the cost of their health insurance.”

KFF reported earlier in August that insurers on the ACA marketplace on average plan to increase premiums 18% for 2026. But without the enhanced subsidies, consumers’ out-of-pocket expenses for health coverage could increase by 75%, the research organization calculates.

“You could see 50,000 or more Wisconsin residents lose their ACA coverage because of some of the changes related to not extending the enhanced premium tax credits, increasing the maximum out-of-pocket cost for consumers, shortening the open enrollment period, reducing funding for navigators,” Houdek says. 

“All of these things are going to have a negative impact on people’s ability to access coverage through the Affordable Care Act.”

Next: The threat to coverage and widespread consequences

A researcher surveys wild rice on the Pine River. (Wisconsin SEA Grant)

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) announced that this year’s wild rice crop yield in northern Wisconsin is low, continuing a pattern of lower yields over recent years. Wild rice crops have been affected by heavy rainfall and powerful storms this year, contributing to an 18% decline in the wild rice crop compared to last year.

“The 2025 season has brought a mix of conditions, including several notable storm systems,” said Kathy Smith, Ganawandang manoomin (which means she who takes care of wild rice), with the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission. “A fast-moving windstorm in mid-June produced widespread wind damage and heavy rainfall across the upper Midwest. In late June, some areas saw 6-7 inches of rain in a short period, contributing to temporary high-water levels on seepage lakes.”

Using satellite-facilitated remote sensing technology, the commission was able to determine the 18% decline in the wild rice crop. A DNR press release notes that these technologies do not provide insights into local wild rice production, bed densities, or seed production. Early scouting reports help fill in the gaps, showing a “mixed bag of production,” the agency stated,  “with some top-producing lakes seeing declines in the crop from last year, while others appear to be rebounding.” 

Wild rice harvesting is open to all Wisconsin residents with a wild rice harvester license. The crop provides nutritious, naturally grown food to people across the upper Midwest. Wild rice also holds an important cultural place for indigenous tribal communities. Around late August through mid-September, the rice reaches maturity. Jason Fleener, a DNR wetland habitat specialist, stresses that it’s important to wait to harvest the rice until it falls with relatively gentle strokes or knocks from  ricing sticks. If no rice falls, then it’s best to wait a few more days before attempting to harvest. 

Harvesting immature beds can negatively affect the overall harvest, as well as the long-term sustainability of the rice. Besides climate effects, human activity such as boating (which creates waves that uproot growing rice plants) can also harm the crop.

Police respond at Annunciation School after a man killed two children and injured several others Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2025 in Minneapolis. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)

Two children, ages 8 and 10, were killed by a shooter who opened fire outside Annunciation Church in south Minneapolis, where students at the Catholic school were gathered Wednesday for Mass to celebrate the beginning of the school year.

Another 17 people were injured — 14 children and three parishioners in their 80s — and are being treated at area hospitals. One adult and six children were in critical condition Wednesday afternoon, according to Hennepin Healthcare.

Annunciation Principal Matt DeBoer said teachers acted within seconds of gunfire erupting to shelter children under pews.

“It could have been significantly worse without their heroic action,” DeBoer said at a news conference Wednesday afternoon. “We lost two angels today. Please continue to pray for those still receiving care. We can’t change the past, but we can do something about the future.”

The shooter, identified as 23-year-old Robin Westman, barricaded the door of the church with a wood board and shot dozens of rounds through the window using a rifle, a shotgun and a pistol, according to Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara.

“The coward that shot these victims took his own life in the rear of the church,” O’Hara said.

Outside the school after the shooting, parents were picking up their children, who wore the green polos that are the school uniform.

Susan Ruff, a neighbor whose children attended the school at Annunciation and has a grandson currently enrolled, said she saw the shooting from her window.

She witnessed a man dressed in black, wearing a helmet, with a long gun, shooting at the church from the outside. She heard 25 or 30 gun shots. “It sounded like someone was dropping a dumpster. That loud bang. But I kept hearing it, so I thought, that’s not a dumpster.” Her grandson was unhurt in the shooting.

Westman purchased the weapons legally and did not have a criminal record, O’Hara said. He said law enforcement were not seeking other suspects.

Court records show a Mary Westman, who retired from Annunciation Catholic School in 2021 according to a now-deleted Facebook post, requested a name change for her child from Robert to Robin in 2019 saying “minor identifies as female.” O’Hara said he could not confirm the suspect’s connection to the school or that the suspect changed their name.

O’Hara said investigators believe Westman is behind videos scheduled to post on YouTube on Wednesday morning, which have since been taken down. One video opens with a four-page handwritten screed that begins, “I don’t expect forgiveness … I do apologize for the effects my actions will have on your lives.”

It also showed an arsenal of guns and ammunition with writing on them reading “Where Is Your God?” and “Suck On This!” Other writings, some in Russian, target President Donald Trump and wish death upon Jewish people.

Numerous law enforcement agencies were on the scene including the FBI, ATF and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office.

O’Hara said law enforcement are executing four search warrants, one at the church and three others at residences in the metro area connected to the suspect where firearms are being recovered.

“We are all working tirelessly to uncover the full scope of what happened, to try and identify a motive, why it happened, and whether there are any other further details,” O’Hara said.

Neighbors and former students said they were shaken by the shooting in the typically quiet southwestern Minneapolis neighborhood.

Jack Friedman, 25, went to the school and lives in the area. He said, “You never think that it’s going to happen at the school you went to, but then you start thinking how naïve to believe that. Because it happens everywhere.”

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, speaking at a news conference outside the school, called for action — not just thoughts and prayers, which has become a rote response to mass shootings.

“Don’t just say, this is about thoughts and prayers right now,” he said. “These kids were literally praying. It was the first week of school. They were in a church.”

Vigils are planned Wednesday night for the victims. Annunciation Church announced a prayer vigil at 7 p.m. in the Holy Angels Gym. Anti-gun violence group Moms Demand Action announced a candlelight vigil at 8 p.m. at Minneapolis Lynnhurst Park.

Minnesota Reformer is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Minnesota Reformer maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor J. Patrick Coolican for questions: info@minnesotareformer.com.

Susan Monarez, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testifies during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on June 25, 2025 in Washington, D.C.. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t appear inclined to leave her post, despite the Trump administration announcing Wednesday that she’s no longer running one of the country’s top public health agencies. 

Attorneys for Susan Monarez, who received Senate confirmation in late July, posted that she hasn’t been fired or resigned, but didn’t announce whether they plan to sue the administration. 

“When CDC Director Susan Monarez refused to rubber-stamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts she chose protecting the public over serving a political agenda,” wrote Mark S. Zaid and Abbe David Lowell. “For that, she has been targeted. Dr. Monarez has neither resigned nor received notification from the White House that she has been fired, and as a person of integrity and devoted to science, she will not resign.”

The statement from Monarez’s attorneys came just hours after the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, wrote on social media that she was no longer running the agency. 

“Susan Monarez is no longer director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” the post stated. “We thank her for her dedicated service to the American people. @SecKennedy has full confidence in his team at@CDCgov who will continue to be vigilant in protecting Americans against infectious diseases at home and abroad.”

The Washington Post first reported the news. 

The U.S. Senate voted along party lines to confirm Monarez as CDC director in late July, giving her just weeks in one of the nation’s top public health roles.

Monarez’s last post on social media from her official account was on Aug. 22, marking the death of a police officer after a gunman opened fire at the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta. 

“A large group of CDC employees and I attended today’s memorial for Officer David Rose, whose Tour of Duty ended on August 8 when he responded to shots fired,” Monarez wrote. “He leaves behind a legacy of love, courage, and service to the community that will never be forgotten.”

The dispute over Monarez’s position as CDC director appeared to potentially mark the beginning of a wave of resignations from other public health officials, including Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Demetre C. Daskalakis.

“I am unable to serve in an environment that treats CDC as a tool to generate policies and materials that do not reflect scientific reality and are designed to hurt rather than to improve the public’s health,” Daskalakis wrote in a lengthy social media post. “The recent change in the adult and children’s immunization schedule threaten the lives of the youngest Americans and pregnant people.”

Monarez second choice after Weldon

Monarez was President Donald Trump’s second choice for CDC director. He originally selected former Florida U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon to run the CDC shortly after he secured election to the Oval Office in November. But the White House pulled Weldon’s nomination in March, after it appeared he couldn’t secure the votes needed for confirmation.

Later that month, Trump announced his plans to nominate Monarez in a social media post.

“Dr. Monarez brings decades of experience championing Innovation, Transparency, and strong Public Health Systems,” Trump wrote. “She has a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, and PostDoctoral training in Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine.

“As an incredible mother and dedicated public servant, Dr. Monarez understands the importance of protecting our children, our communities, and our future. Americans have lost confidence in the CDC due to political bias and disastrous mismanagement. Dr. Monarez will work closely with our GREAT Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert Kennedy Jr. Together, they will prioritize Accountability, High Standards, and Disease Prevention to finally address the Chronic Disease Epidemic and, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN!”

Restoring trust in CDC

Monarez testified in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions in June as part of her confirmation process. The committee voted 12-11 in July to send her nomination to the Senate floor, where Republicans approved her to the post later that month. 

Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La., said during the committee’s markup that he believed Monarez would put science first and help to restore public trust in the agency. 

“The United States needs a CDC director who makes decisions rooted in science, a leader who will reform the agency and work to restore public trust in health institutions,” Cassidy said at the time. “With decades of proven experience as a public health official, Dr. Monarez is ready to take on this challenge.”

The river flowing through Wauwatosa's Hart Park overflowing with flood water. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

On Wednesday, Gov. Tony Evers formally requested a presidential disaster declaration from President Donald Trump to direct federal assistance to parts of Wisconsin still dealing with the aftermath of unprecedented rainfall and flooding earlier this month. The request for additional support from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Individual Assistance Program includes Milwaukee, Washington and Waukesha counties, as well as support from FEMA’s Public Assistance Program for Door, Grant, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, and Waukesha counties. 

The move comes following joint preliminary damage assessments conducted by FEMA and Wisconsin Emergency Management in Milwaukee, Washington and Waukesha counties, which found over 1,500 residential structures which were either destroyed or sustained major damage, racking up an estimated price tag of over $33 million. Many people lost homes, personal property or were displaced after the historic, 1,000-year storm, which dumped a summer’s worth of rain in a single day. Scientists have long warned that climate change would lead to more intense rainfall and flooding events in Wisconsin. 

Local officials have been on the ground surveying flood damage across neighborhoods. “Having been on the ground to see firsthand some of the areas that have been hit hardest by the disastrous storms and flash floods that have affected folks across our state, it’s clear it’s going to take a significant amount of time and resources to recover,” Evers said in a statement. “My administration and I have been working diligently to respond and support clean-up efforts, but it’s clear more help is needed to support the people of Wisconsin and ensure we can rebuild.”

Evers is calling on Trump to “do the right thing and make the appropriate presidential disaster declaration in coordination with the preliminary damage assessment — and quickly and without delay.” The governor added that, “folks and families whose homes, businesses, schools, and community centers were severely damaged by this severe weather event are counting on this relief.” 

WEM Administrator Greg Engle applauded “the swift and collaborative effort for these assessments” as “a powerful demonstration of unity between counties, the state of Wisconsin, and FEMA to get help to those in crisis after this historical flooding event…The speed and precision in which this was accomplished speaks volumes. When different agencies come together, the road to recovery reaches the people who need it faster.” 

Initial damage reports collected by the state suggest that over $43 million in public sector damage occurred across six Wisconsin counties. Residents with damaged property are encouraged to save all receipts for damage repair, and to continue calling 211 to make an official record, which will also help support the case for federal support. FEMA’s ability to provide assistance to Wisconsin has been up in the air as  the Trump administration threatens agency cuts . Recently, several FEMA employees were placed on administrative leave just a day after signing a public letter accusing the Trump administration of politicized firings and “uninformed cost-cutting” at the agency. 

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley also announced that preliminary assessments were completed by FEMA on Aug. 22, and that Wisconsin had likely surpassed the threshold to be eligible for federal support. Crowley said that residents “have shown incredible resilience in the face of this disaster,” adding that the completion of FEMA’s assessment is “an important milestone, but it’s just one step in the process toward federal assistance.” Crowley said in a statement that “we will continue to stand with our communities, fight for the resources families need, and keep residents informed every step of the way….This collaboration helps us respond to disasters with both speed and compassion.”

An emergency shelter in Milwaukee established at Marshall High School will close Wednesday due to the start of the school year. Individuals who were housed at the shelter will be moved to the Milwaukee Environmental Sciences Academy (6600 W Melvina St, Milwaukee, WI, 53216). People displaced from their homes are encouraged to call the American Red Cross at 1-800-RED-CROSS for shelter assistance. Volunteers for clean up operations and to help staff the emergency shelters are also still needed.