A 2024 provision under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protects reproductive health information from disclosure to law enforcement when care was legally obtained, such as in another state with abortion access. (Photo by Dave Whitney/Getty Images)

Two pending lawsuits over a 2024 federal rule protecting certain reproductive health information from disclosure are on hold while the Trump administration decides whether to appeal a Texas judge’s June decision that declared the rule unlawful and void.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued an opinion nullifying the federal rule that shielded reproductive health information from law enforcement when care was legally obtained, such as in another state with abortion access. In this case, Dr. Carmen Purl argued that the U.S. Health and Human Services rule conflicted with the laws requiring her to report child abuse. Purl said in court documents she believes abortion and gender-affirming care fall under the definitions of child abuse.

Purl lives in the judicial district where Kacsmaryk — who has taken anti-abortion stances in the past — is the only judge. His ruling applied nationwide and took effect immediately.

Without the rule, law enforcement officials in states with abortion bans may issue subpoenas for records related to reproductive health care obtained legally in another state, as some have already recently tried to do. According to health policy nonprofit KFF, 22 states and the District of Columbia have laws limiting what reproductive health information can be obtained, but others with legal abortion access do not, such as New Hampshire and Virginia.

Abortion-rights advocates say it’s largely an intimidation tactic meant to sow fear in patients and providers. Since the Dobbs decision in 2022,  anti-abortion attorney Jonathan Mitchell filed nine petitions in Texas seeking to legally question abortion funds, providers and researchers, and two individual women who sought abortions in other states, according to the Texas Tribune.

Carmel Shachar, a Harvard law professor who has extensively researched data privacy and health policy, said it’s possible for a patient to travel to a state with legal access and have that information stored in their medical records that is shared with their providers back home.

“Without the reproductive privacy rule, the concern will be, ‘OK, will some of these states that have taken a very strong stance against abortion be able to pinpoint where residents of their states travel to receive abortion care?’” Shachar said.

Tennessee plaintiffs push for separate ruling after Texas decision

Two lawsuits challenging the legality of the rule are frozen at least until the government’s Aug. 18 deadline to appeal. One case is in Missouri, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed the other. Paxton’s office had also challenged the legality of the underlying privacy rule or HIPAA established in 2000, which could have opened more avenues for state investigations if a judge agreed to throw it out. But according to recent court filings, the state is no longer asking the court to do that.

A Tennessee lawsuit includes 17 other states that heavily restrict or ban abortion as plaintiffs. Their attorneys general asked the court to find the 2024 rule unlawful because they said it impedes their right to investigate cases of waste, fraud and abuse. In the most recent court brief, attorneys for Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said the case can still be decided by U.S. District Judge Katherine Crytzer, an appointee of Republican President Donald Trump.

Until judgment is affirmed on appeal and no further appellate review is available or the deadline to appeal passes, “the plaintiff states’ claims remain live and ready for this court to resolve,” the brief said.

Legal organization continues attempts to intervene so they can appeal

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) allows law enforcement to obtain health information for investigation purposes. But the addition of the 2024 provision under former Democratic President Joe Biden prohibited disclosure of protected health information in investigations against any person for the mere act of seeking, obtaining, or facilitating reproductive health care, to impose criminal or civil liabilities for that conduct, or to identify the person involved in seeking or obtaining that care. It also applied to gender-affirming care.

The U.S. Department of Justice did not respond to a request for comment. Whether it appeals Kacsmaryk’s ruling is in question, as the Justice Department under Trump did not address whether it thought the 2024 rule was proper and lawful prior to Kacsmaryk’s decision. Attorneys instead said they were reviewing the rule but had no other updates. In the Missouri and Tennessee cases, DOJ attorneys have argued for dismissal for other legal reasons, but also have not defended the 2024 rule itself.

In March, the DOJ dropped the case that argued the federal law mandating stabilizing emergency care should apply to those who need emergency abortion care. And in early June, U.S. Health and Human Services rescinded guidance that said that care should be required in emergencies.

Attorneys for Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal organization, are representing Doctors for America and the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Madison, Wisconsin, and attempted to intervene in the case because they did not expect the government to defend the rule. If they were allowed to intervene, they could appeal Kacsmaryk’s opinion striking down the rule regardless of the Trump administration’s decision.

Kacsmaryk denied their motion, while a decision in the other three cases is pending. Carrie Flaxman, senior legal adviser for Democracy Forward, said they have appealed that denial to a higher court. Given that the Department of Justice attorneys chose not to defend the rule on the merits in court proceedings, Flaxman said, she thinks they have a good argument for appeal.

Repealing the rule was a directive in Project 2025, the blueprint document for the next presidential administration published by the conservative Heritage Foundation. Several prominent anti-abortion organizations were part of the panel that drafted Project 2025, and many of the individuals involved in writing the 900-page document now work for the Trump administration.

A six-year veteran of the Milwaukee Police Department has died three days after being shot in an alleyway while responding to reports of a man firing a weapon on the city's west side. Officer Kendell Corder was 32-years-old.

The post Milwaukee police officer Kendall Corder dies three days after shooting appeared first on WPR.

Lambeau Field in Green Bay | Photo by Jason Kerzinski for Wisconsin Examiner

Gov. Tony Evers announced Wednesday that he’s awarding $1.8 million to the city of Green Bay to cover the public safety costs associated with hosting the NFL draft in April. 

The event drew more than 600,000 visitors to the city which, with a population of about 105,000, is the smallest NFL city in the country. Initial estimates say the draft generated $94 million in economic activity across the state and $20 million for the Green Bay area specifically. 

Prior to the draft, a pair of Republican lawmakers had requested that the Republicans in control of the budget writing Joint Finance Committee include $1.25 million in the next state budget to help cover public safety costs. That request has not yet been addressed as Republicans continue to work on delivering a state budget to Evers. 

The money Evers awarded is being disbursed from the Opportunity Attraction and Promotion Fund, a program proposed by Evers in his last state budget proposal to help the state recruit and host large-scale events. The 2023-25 budget included $10 million for the program and Evers had proposed an additional $5 million in his latest budget proposal. 

“The 2025 NFL Draft was a booming success, and I’ve said all along that nobody could have pulled it off other than the Green Bay Packers and the good folks in Green Bay and across the region,” Evers said in a statement. “So, it was critically important to me that Green Bay and our local partners received the support they need to cover public safety costs, and I’m glad we were able to get this done.” 

According to a news release, the grant will also help the village of Ashwaubenon and Brown County cover their costs associated with the event. Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich said the money will keep the burden of the event off city taxpayers. 

“We’re incredibly grateful to Gov. Evers and WEDC for their critical support in covering public safety expenses related to the NFL Draft,” Genrich said. “This was a historic event that brought enormous economic benefits to our community and the entire state of Wisconsin. The allocation of this funding recognizes that positive statewide economic effect and protects our local taxpayers from bearing the costs—a win-win for our state’s and our city’s residents.”

A police officer forced out of a suburban Milwaukee department for appearing to skip a lot of work and claiming many questionable comp days is now working for a small-town department in Waukesha County.

Amanda Lang resigned from the Glendale Police Department in 2021 after an internal investigation found she had more than 230 paid hours unaccounted for between 2019 and 2021. At her wage of $40 an hour, those hours added up to $9,300, the investigation noted.

“Based on the discovery of leaving early, along with the substantial number of full shifts not accounted for, one can only wonder how many other times she has left significantly early without documentation,” then-Captain Rhett Fugman wrote in his investigation, which The Badger Project obtained in a records request.

The captain recommended Lang be fired, and she resigned in April of 2021.

She worked for Glendale in the Milwaukee suburbs for more than 13 years, rising to the level of sergeant, before her resignation.

“As a sergeant, additional responsibility and trust was provided to Sgt. Lang,” Fugman wrote. “Her actions and inactions displayed regarding leaving early and posting off time over the last two plus years have displayed a lack of integrity, honesty and trustworthiness.”

“These characteristics are the foundation of what we are as police officers,” he continued.

Lang was hired by the Lannon Police Department later in 2021 and has worked there since.

Lannon Police Chief Daniel Bell said his department “follows rigorous background checks and screening procedures for all new hires to ensure they align with the standards and integrity expected of our officers,” including for Lang.

“During the interview process, we were satisfied with her explanation of the situation,” Bell said of her resignation.

Lang is “consistently demonstrating professionalism, dedication and a strong commitment to community policing,” he added.

She has been promoted to lieutenant, the second in command of the 12-officer department.

Another officer employed by the Lannon Police Department, Nathaniel Schweitzer, was forced out of the police department in the town of Waterford in Racine County late last year. Like Lang, he “resigned prior to the completion of an internal investigation,” according to the Wisconsin Department of Justice’s database on officers who left a law enforcement position under negative circumstances.

Number of wandering officers in Wisconsin continues to rise

The total number of law enforcement officers in Wisconsin has dropped for years and now sits at near record lows as chiefs and sheriffs say they struggle to fill positions in an industry less attractive to people than it once was.

Unsurprisingly, the number of wandering officers, those who were fired or forced out from a previous job in law enforcement, continues to rise. Nearly 400 officers in Wisconsin currently employed were fired or forced out of previous jobs in law enforcement in the state, almost double the amount from 2021. And that doesn’t include officers who were pushed out of law enforcement jobs outside of the state and who came to Wisconsin to work.

Chiefs and sheriffs can be incentivized to hire wandering officers, experts say. Hiring someone new to law enforcement means the police department or sheriff’s office has to pay for recruits’ academy training and then wait for them to finish before they can start putting new hires on the schedule.

A wandering officer already has certification and can start working immediately.

Nearly 2,400 officers in the state have been flagged by their former law enforcement employers as having a “negative separation” since the state DOJ launched its database in 2017.

Most are simply young officers who did not succeed in a new job during their probationary period, when the bar to fire them is very low, experts say. But some have more serious reasons for being pushed out.

Law enforcement agencies can look up job applicants in that database to get more insight into their work history. And a law enacted in 2021 in Wisconsin bans law enforcement officers from sealing their personnel files and work histories, a previously common tactic for officers with a black mark on their record.

About 13,400 law enforcement officers are currently employed in Wisconsin, excluding those who primarily work in a corrections facility, according to the Wisconsin Department of Justice. Wandering officers make up nearly 3% of the total.

At least one major study published in the Yale Law Journal has found that wandering officers are more likely to receive a complaint for a moral character violation, compared to new officers and veterans who haven’t been fired or forced out from a previous position in law enforcement.

Sammie Garrity contributed to this report.

This article first appeared on The Badger Project and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

The Badger Project is a nonpartisan, citizen-supported journalism nonprofit in Wisconsin.

Milwaukee-area cop quit last police job after appearing to miss 200+ work hours is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies before the House Appropriations Committee's Defense Subcommittee at the U.S. Capitol on June 10, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Tuesday was the first time Hegseth testified before Congress since his confirmation hearings in January.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Trump administration’s deployment of National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles will cost the federal government about $134 million, a Pentagon budget official said Tuesday, as the response to the protests further divided officials in California and Washington, D.C.

The situation in the country’s second-largest city captured the attention of lawmakers in the nation’s capital, even as the Republican-led Congress charted a path forward for the Trump-backed tax and spending cut bill.

Democrats in Congress on Tuesday warned the administration’s actions bordered on authoritarianism, while President Donald Trump said his intervention saved the city from destruction.

“If we didn’t send in the National Guard quickly, right now, Los Angeles would be burning to the ground,” Trump said in the Oval Office Tuesday.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, meanwhile, sought a restraining order blocking the 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines deployed to Los Angeles from assisting with domestic law enforcement. Trump ordered the troops to the city over Newsom’s and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’ objections.

Budget question

Democrats on Capitol Hill criticized the administration over several aspects of the deployment, saying Trump was instigating violence, overstepping his authority and wasting taxpayer money.

At a previously scheduled Appropriations Defense Subcommittee hearing, Democratic Reps. Betty McCollum of Minnesota and Pete Aguillar of California asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth the financial cost of placing 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines in Los Angeles.

Hegseth, who is originally from Minnesota, declined to answer McCollum’s question directly, instead invoking the riots in Minneapolis following the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020 and saying Trump sought to avoid similar chaos in Los Angeles.

“President Trump recognizes a situation like that, improperly handled by a governor, like it was by Gov. (Tim) Walz, if it gets out of control, it’s a bad situation for the citizens of any location,” he said.

When Aguillar asked a similar question about cost, Hegseth deferred to acting Pentagon comptroller Bryn MacDonnell, who estimated the current cost at $134 million, mainly for housing, travel and food. That money came out of existing operations and maintenance accounts, she said.

Hegseth told the panel the deployment was authorized for 60 days.

Just 2 miles away at the White House, though, Trump implied the decision could be more open-ended, saying during the Oval Office event that troops would stay in Los Angeles “until there’s no danger.”

“When there’s no danger, they’ll leave,” he said.

Restraining order

California’s federal lawsuit challenging the deployment, which state leaders filed Monday, includes a request for the court to issue a restraining order by 1 p.m. Pacific time Tuesday. U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer did not issue such an order by that deadline.

The administration intended to use the military personnel “to accompany federal immigration enforcement officers on raids throughout Los Angeles,” the request for a restraining order said.

“These unlawful deployments have already proven to be a deeply inflammatory and unnecessary provocation, anathema to our laws limiting the use (of) federal forces for law enforcement, rather than a means of restoring calm,” the state said.

“Federal antagonization, through the presence of soldiers in the streets, has already caused real and irreparable damage to the City of Los Angeles, the people who live there, and the State of California. They must be stopped, immediately.”

Democrats in California’s congressional delegation and members of the congressional caucuses for Black, Hispanic and Asian and Pacific Islander Democrats also blasted the administration’s role in inflaming the standoff between protesters and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who’d conducted recent raids on workplaces in the area.

“President Trump’s unlawful decision to deploy the National Guard onto the streets of Los Angeles is a reckless and inflammatory escalation, one designed not to restore calm, but to provoke chaos,” Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette D. Clarke said at a press conference.

“Let’s be clear about how this began: with peaceful protests sparked by the unlawful and inhumane targeting, detention and deportation of our immigrant neighbors.”

Clarke, a New York Democrat, said in response to a reporter’s question that she believed the sending in of troops constituted an impeachable act by Trump.

“I definitely believe it is, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it,” she said.

‘Met with force’

Other Democrats on Capitol Hill have said Monday and Tuesday that Trump engineered the conflict to distract from unpopular provisions of Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill” and other issues.

“Donald Trump, cornered by his own failures – from pushing a heartless bill that would rip health care away from 16 million Americans, to raising costs from his reckless tariffs, to waging war with Elon Musk – Trump is desperately seeking a distraction,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said on the floor Tuesday.

“His order to deploy the National Guard and Marines – our own troops – on Americans is not just outrageous and provocative, it’s a dangerous authoritarian overreach that threatens the very fabric of our democracy.”

Rep. Jimmy Gomez led a press conference of California’s U.S. House Democrats Tuesday where he warned that the militarization in Los Angeles could happen elsewhere.

“If it can happen in Los Angeles, it can happen in any state in the union,” he said.

Later, at the Oval Office, Trump said protesters at his military parade on Saturday would be “met with very strong force.”

‘Tarred and feathered’

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Trump acted responsibly to protect Southern Californians and blamed Newsom for “failed leadership” that he said led to the clash this weekend.

Asked if, as Trump and White House border czar Tom Homan have suggested, Newsom should be arrested for interfering with immigration enforcement, Johnson initially demurred before suggesting an 18th-century punishment.

“I’m not going to give you legal analysis on whether Gavin Newsom should be arrested,” the Louisiana Republican said.

“But he ought to be tarred and feathered… He’s standing in the way of the administration and the carrying out of federal law. Right? He is applauding the bad guys and standing in the way of the good guys. He is trying to — he’s a participant, an accomplice — in our federal law enforcement agents being not just disrespected but assaulted.”

Johnson said House Republicans were fully behind Trump’s actions and deflected a question about if there was a point at which he would oppose the administration’s efforts.

“He is fully within his authority right now to do what he is doing,” Johnson said. “We have to maintain order.”

A bus contractor for Boston Public Schools (BPS) is being sued after one of its school driver allegedly caused a crash that injured an 8-year-old student with autism, reported WCVB 5.

The incident reportedly occurred last year, when a school bus veered onto a sidewalk at the Curley School in Jamaica Plain and struck the child, who was walking with a school aide.

According to the article, the lawsuit, filed this month by the child’s family, alleges gross negligence by contractor Transdev and its employees, citing inadequate supervision, failure to ensure alert and competent staff, and systemic safety failures.

The crash was captured by a dashboard camera in the school bus. Footage reportedly shows the bus driver and bus safety monitor, who were not identified, napping in their seats just moments before the driver awoke, started the bus, and swerved into pedestrians standing on the sidewalk.

The injured child’s guardian said the incident almost took her child’s life and that Transdev must be held accountable to protect children and prevent this from ever happening again.

Following the crash, police stated said the bus driver made multiple false claims, including that the bus experienced a “mechanical issue (steering).” But the investigating officer found that all existing mechanical issues on the bus were a result of the crash.

The bus driver also claimed that as he was pulling the bus forward, a vehicle cut in front of him, and that in attempt to avoid the vehicle he turned the steering wheel in the opposite direction but pressed the gas pedal instead of the brake pedal by mistake.

According to the news report, the child sustained a broken femur, which resulted in surgery and months of impatient hospital care and treatment.

The lawsuit follows an independent investigation into school transportation safety by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and BPS, launched after a 5-year-old was struck and killed by a bus in the city’s Hyde Park April 28. The BPS bus driver, identified as Jean Charles, was driving on an expired school bus certificate, which he had been notified about.

Natashia Tidwell, a former federal prosecutor and police officer who specializes in external investigations, will lead the independent review of safety policies and performance under contracts with Transdev, the transportation company that has been contracting with BPS since 2013 to hire, train and manage the district’s approximately 750 school bus drivers.

The case is ongoing.

Related: Massachusetts Woman Arrested After Nearly Hitting Child Boarding School Bus
Related: Florida Students Hit, Two Killed During School Bus Stop Walks
Related: Texas Man Strikes Student with Vehicle
Related: Missouri Child Hit by Pickup Truck While Getting Off School Bus

The post Massachusetts School Bus Contractor Sued After Driver Accused of Striking Pedestrians appeared first on School Transportation News.

Left to right, Denver Mayor Michael Johnston, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, are sworn in during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on sanctuary cities' policies at the U.S. Capitol on March 5, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security over the weekend took down a public list of cities and jurisdictions that the Trump administration labeled as “sanctuary” cities, after a sharp rebuke from a group representing 3,000 sheriffs and local law enforcement.

On Saturday, National Sheriffs’ Association President Sheriff Kieran Donahue slammed the list as an “unnecessary erosion of unity and collaboration with law enforcement.”

“The completion and publication of this list has not only violated the core principles of trust, cooperation, and partnership with fellow law enforcement, but it also has the potential to strain the relationship between Sheriffs and the White House administration,” Donahue said.

DHS published the list Thursday and it was unavailable by Sunday. It’s unclear when it was removed, but internet archives show Saturday as the last time the list was still active.

In a statement, DHS did not answer questions as to why the list was removed.

“As we have previously stated, the list is being constantly reviewed and can be changed at any time and will be updated regularly,” according to a DHS spokesperson. “Designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a Sanctuary Jurisdiction, noncompliance with Federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens.”

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Fox News Sunday did not acknowledge that the list was taken down, but said some localities had “pushed back.”

“They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify,” Noem said. “They are giving sanctuary to criminals.”

List followed Trump executive order

Local law enforcement aids in immigration enforcement by holding immigrants in local jails until federal immigration officials can arrive.

The creation of the list stems from Donald Trump’s executive order in April that required DHS to produce a list of cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration officials in enforcement matters, in order to strip federal funding from those local governments.

Those jurisdictions are often dubbed “sanctuary cities,” but immigration enforcement still occurs in the city — there’s just no coordination between the local government and the federal government.

The jurisdictions are often a target for the Trump administration and Republicans, who support the President Donald Trump campaign promise of mass deportations of people without permanent legal status.

Congressional Republicans in March grilled mayors from Boston, Chicago and Denver, on their cities’ immigration policies during a six-hour hearing before the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

‘Strong objection’

Local officials were puzzled by the list.

One law enforcement association in North Dakota questioned why several counties — Billings, Golden Valley, Grant, Morton, Ramsey, Sioux, and Slope — were listed as sanctuary jurisdictions because those areas cooperate with federal immigration officials.

In a statement, the North Dakota Sheriff’s and Deputies Association said the “methodology and criteria used to compile this list is unknown,” and there has been no communication from DHS “on how to rectify this finding.”

“The elected Sheriffs of these counties take strong objection with language in this release characterizing them as ‘deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endangering American communities,’” according to NDSDA.

“The North Dakota Sheriff’s and Deputies Association is working to gather more information regarding the lack of transparency and reasoning as to why the Department of Homeland Security did not fact check prior to incorrectly naming these North Dakota counties.”

Local advocacy groups also noted the problems with the DHS list.

“I assume they’ve removed (the list) because they were bombarded with complaints about inaccuracy and how and why these various jurisdictions got on the list,” Steven Brown, executive director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, said in an interview Monday.

According to the Internet Archive website Wayback Machine, the states, as well as the District of Columbia, that were on the list included Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington state and Wisconsin.

Christopher Shea and Amy Dalrymple contributed to this story. 

A police department in western Wisconsin lost all of its officers due to resignations this year. Law enforcement veterans say what happened in the Trempealeau County city of Arcadia isn't unusual and highlights unique staffing challenges small departments face in an increasingly tight and competitive job market.

The post A western Wisconsin city lost its entire police force, highlighting staffing challenges for smaller departments appeared first on WPR.

The Clark County Sheriff’s Office seized more than 160 roosters and hens from an alleged cockfighting operation Thursday, according to an animal welfare group.

The post Birds euthanized after being seized from suspected cockfighting operation in Wisconsin appeared first on WPR.

Two men police believe to be Venezuelan gang members have been charged with trying to steal money from an ATM in Superior. 

The post Suspects in string of ATM thefts arrested in Superior appeared first on WPR.

Reports of gunfire in a city building in downtown Milwaukee brought a large police presence to the Zeidler Municipal Building and City Hall.

The post Report of shots fired at Milwaukee municipal building appears to be false alarm appeared first on WPR.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, some of them masked, work alongside Harrison County, Miss., sheriff’s deputies to make arrests in an investigation into illegal immigration and cockfighting in early May. States are increasingly setting policy for sheriffs on how much they can cooperate with ICE at local jails. (Photo by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement)

Local sheriffs are on the front lines in deciding whether to participate in the Trump administration’s mass deportation plans. But states increasingly are making the choice for them.

More and more, sheriffs’ hands are tied no matter whether they do — or don’t — want to help with deportations, though they often get the blame when conservatives draw up lists of sanctuary cities.

“‘Naughty lists,’ as we call them, are not super helpful here,” said Patrick Royal, a spokesperson for the National Sheriffs’ Association. “We all know there are places like Colorado where you can’t [help with deportations], and places like North Carolina where you have to.”

Cooperation between sheriffs and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement lies at the heart of the Trump administration’s immigration detention policy. The administration plans to punish noncooperative jurisdictions with funding cuts — though many legal experts agree that cooperation is voluntary unless state or local laws say otherwise.

Sheriffs, who typically run local jails, must decide what to do when faced with immigration detainers — requests from ICE to hold onto incarcerated people up to two extra days so ICE officers can show up and arrest them. ICE issues those detainers when the agency reviews fingerprints sent electronically for background checks as part of the jail booking process.

Otherwise, arrested suspects who post bond or are otherwise released by a judge might go free despite their immigration status, prompting ICE in some cases to pursue them in the community.

In North Carolina, Sheriff Garry McFadden ran on a platform of limiting cooperation with ICE  when he was elected in Mecklenburg County, home to Charlotte, in 2018. But today, McFadden must comply with detainers because of a state law passed last year.

In a now-retracted Facebook post, U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis in late April accused Mecklenburg and several other North Carolina counties of “shielding criminal illegal immigrants” as sanctuary jurisdictions. Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, said in the post he was writing federal legislation to prosecute sanctuary jurisdictions.

“You can’t say we’re a sanctuary county and have state laws that say we have to work with ICE. You can’t have both,” McFadden said. He added that he’d like more choice about whether to comply with detainers. A federal funding cutoff would endanger important jail programs such as rape counseling, he said.

“Everybody’s focused on immigration like that’s the biggest fire, and nobody wants to address the other things. The losers will be the prisoners who need all these services we provide,” McFadden said.

Conservative sheriffs in Democratic-controlled states also can be frustrated by state policy on detainers. Sheriff Lew Evangelidis of Worcester County, Massachusetts, said he’s been criticized for releasing prisoners wanted by ICE but sometimes has no choice: A 2017 state Supreme Court ruling prohibits holding prisoners based on detainers.

“If they [ICE] want this person and consider them a threat to public safety, then I want that person out of my community. I want to keep my community safe,” said Evangelidis. He supported a Republican-sponsored effort in the state legislature to allow 12-hour holds for ICE if a judge determines the prisoner is a threat to public safety, but the amendment was voted down in April.

States act on detainers

Many experts agree that ICE detainers can be legally ignored if states allow sheriffs to do that.

“That detainer request is just that, a request, it’s not a requirement,” said Cassandra Charles, a staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, which is opposing Louisiana’s lawsuit to reverse a court-ordered ban on cooperation between Orleans Parish and ICE.

The general counsel for the North Carolina Sheriffs’ Association, Eddie Caldwell, agreed that the detainers are voluntary under federal law.

The association supports a state bill now under consideration that would require not only the 48-hour detention but also a notice sent 48 hours before release to let ICE know the clock is running. The proposal has passed the House.

The notification matters, Caldwell said, because there can be criminal proceedings that take weeks or months, so ICE in many cases doesn’t realize the 48-hour window has started.

Tillis’ office said the senator’s disagreement with McFadden, a Democrat, and other sheriffs is about that notification.

“It’s not necessarily that [sheriffs] are breaking the law, but rather making it as difficult as possible for ICE to take prisoners into custody by refusing to do some basic things. Notification is important,” said Daniel Keylin, a senior adviser to Tillis.

States including California, Colorado and Massachusetts ban compliance with the ICE detainers, on the general principle that it’s not enough reason to hold people in jails when they’re otherwise free to go because of bail or an end to their criminal cases. Those three states have made recent moves to defend or fine-tune their rules.

California’s attorney general also has issued guidance to local jurisdictions based on a 2017 state law limiting cooperation with immigration authorities. That law withstood a court challenge under the first Trump administration.

Colorado has a law against holding prisoners more than six hours longer than required, and a new bill sent to Democratic Gov. Jared Polis last week would specify that even those six hours can’t be for the purpose of an immigration detainer.

Iowa, Tennessee and Texas are among the states requiring cooperation with detainers.

And Florida has gone further, requiring sheriffs to actively help ICE write detainers though official agreements in which local agencies sign up to help enforce immigration laws.

Cooperation boosts arrests

Such cooperation makes a big difference, experts say — jails are the easiest place to pick up immigrants for deportation, and when local sheriffs and police help out, there are more arrests.

“A larger share of ICE arrests and deportations are happening in places where local law enforcement is cooperative with ICE,” said Julia Gelatt, associate director for the Migration Policy Institute’s U.S. Immigration Policy Program, speaking at a recent webinar.

“A declining share of arrests and deportations are happening from places like California, where there are really strict limitations on local law enforcement’s cooperation with ICE,” she added.

ICE is making about 600 immigration arrests daily, twice the rate as during the last year of the Biden administration, said Muzaffar Chishti, an attorney and policy expert at the Migration Policy Institute, speaking at the same event.

Reports on deportations are incomplete, Chishti said, but he estimated the current administration is on track to deport half a million people this year and is trying to get that number higher.

“The Trump administration has not been able to change the laws that are on the books, because only Congress can do that,” Chishti said. “It’s going to take congressional action for the Trump administration to achieve its aim of higher [arrest and deportation] numbers.”

President Donald Trump has added more pressure, last month requesting a list from Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem of sanctuary cities, which he says would face funding cuts. The administration also has sued some states, including Colorado, Illinois and New York, over their policies.

Asked for comment on the legality of funding cutoffs for sanctuary policies, Bondi’s office referred to a February memo in which she promised to “end funding to state and local jurisdictions that unlawfully interfere with federal law enforcement operations.” The memo cites a federal law saying local officials “may not prohibit, or in any way restrict” communication about immigration status.

Local jurisdictions in Connecticut, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington joined a February lawsuit led by the city and county of San Francisco and Santa Clara County in California against a Trump administration executive order calling for defunding cities with sanctuary policies, calling the order “illegal and authoritarian.”

In April, a U.S. district court in California issued a preliminary injunction in that case preventing any funding cutoff over sanctuary policies to the cities and counties in the lawsuit. And on Friday, the federal judge, William Orrick, ruled that the injunction applies to any list of sanctuary jurisdictions the administration may target for funding cuts.

Trump’s new executive order seeking the list cannot be used as “an end run” around Orrick’s injunction, the judge wrote, while he decides the legality of detainer policies and other issues.

“The litigation may not proceed with the coercive threat to end all federal funding hanging over the Cities and Counties’ heads like the sword of Damocles,” Orrick wrote.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

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.

A 15-year-old boy was accused of raping a 7-year-old boy on a Jennings County school bus, reported WTHR News.

The alleged incident reportedly occurred April 16 on a school bus for students with disabilities. The Jennings County Juvenile Probation Department is overseeing the investigation.

According to the article, the incident was detected in bus security footage and Jennings County School Corporation is now reviewing other security videos from the entire school year to determine if there were other similar incidents.

The news report states that the 15-year-old, who was not identified at this writing, was taken into custody April 17 and had his initial hearing April 22, where prosecutors filed the rape charge.

The teen reportedly has another court hearing this week and is currently being held at the juvenile detention center.

Local news reports confirmed that the family of the 7-year-old is preparing to sue the school district, claiming “grossly negligent” actions resulted in permanent injury to the boy and violated his civil rights.

The family’s attorneys reportedly say that the 7-year-old was “helplessly left unmonitored by two school employees who were on the bus and charged with caring for his safety.”

The investigation is ongoing.

Related: Maryland School Bus Aid Charged with Sexual Assault
Related: Sexual Abuse Prevention Expert Provides Strategies When Transporting Students with Disabilities
Related: Former Massachusetts School Bus Driver Facing Charges of Sexual Assault
Related: TSD Keynote Speaker to Address Sexual Behavior Concerns on Special Needs Routes

The post Indiana 15-year-old Accused of Sexual Assault on Ohio School Bus appeared first on School Transportation News.

On Oct. 27, a Durand police officer responded to a suspicious person call. He made contact with a woman who had committed no crimes but had nowhere to stay on a cold night. 

She told the officer she was from Fargo, North Dakota, and waiting for a ride, but couldn’t explain how she arrived in Durand.

When that ride didn’t show, the officer asked if she had a credit card, which local hotels require homeless individuals to put down when using a motel voucher to stay overnight. She said she didn’t and didn’t know what to do. 

There are no homeless shelters in Durand or Pepin County.

The officer then suggested she go to Sojourner House, a shelter in Eau Claire about 40 minutes away. She agreed to be transported in handcuffs, in accordance with what the officer said was department policy. He called several other shelters in communities outside of Durand, all of which were full for the night. Sojourner House didn’t answer, but he offered the woman a ride there anyway. She asked if the shelter was open.

“It’s hard to say. Once I get you up there, they might not even have a bed for you to go,” the officer told her, according to body cam footage obtained by Wisconsin Watch. “Once you get up there, ask them for resources — see what else is available to you up there.” 

The officer dropped her off and left without contacting the shelter staff or Eau Claire city officials. 

According to Eau Claire County Corporation Counsel Sharon McIlquham and City Attorney Stephen Nick, the shelter was full, and Eau Claire city police later took the woman to a hospital. She then had a run-in with UW-Eau Claire police for indecent exposure. 

“They still found themselves homeless in an unfamiliar community and committed crimes — had to get medical attention,” Nick told Wisconsin Watch, referring to multiple people who have been dropped off in Eau Claire. “So not a good outcome for them or our community.” 

But what started as a conflict between local agencies is now a legal question being posed to Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul: Should police departments in Wisconsin be allowed to transport someone experiencing homelessness out of their jurisdiction?

Nick said the problem has persisted for years in Eau Claire and extends far beyond the three examples cited in his January letter to the attorney general, asking his office to weigh in on the legality of these drop-offs.

“This is the first time we’ve received a communication along these lines, certainly since I’ve been attorney general,” Kaul told reporters at WQOW. “But I can say more broadly, some of the issues raised are ones that I think are true around the state.”

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers said the drop-offs display a need for more rural resources.

The letter pointed to instances of homeless individuals from neighboring counties being dropped off in Eau Claire by other agencies including the Menomonie Police Department and the St. Croix County Sheriff’s Office. McIlquham and Nick called it “a practice driven by a lack of good options,” but said the drop-offs are “unlawful at worst and unprofessional at best.” 

“None of the individuals we referenced actually received care, and that is the most common outcome from these sort of transports,” Nick said. 

Durand Police Chief Stanley Ridgeway said if his department is barred from carrying out these kinds of transports, the city’s human services department would have to pay other agencies or organizations to transport those in need of shelter. He added that rural communities like Durand lack rideshare services, public transportation or homeless shelters. 

“In the end, it will increase our cost,” Ridgeway said. “Our hands will be tied.” 

A statewide problem

The situation is not unique to Eau Claire. Police chiefs in Waukesha, Green Bay and Appleton told Wisconsin Watch they have dealt with a similar problem. 

“For as long as I can remember, we have struggled with people from outside the Fox Valley coming to this area to utilize this invaluable resource,” Appleton Police Chief Polly Olson said. “We know they … may be given rides by other, outside law enforcement, or they find out through word of mouth about the shelters and resources in this area.”

Green Bay Police Chief Chris Davis told Wisconsin Watch these drop-offs happen occasionally, but he has asked agencies outside the county not to transport people because it strains local resources and makes it difficult for the homeless to return to their city of origin.  

Drop-offs are also prevalent in Waukesha, with unhoused individuals coming from surrounding areas like Delafield, Hartland, Chenequa, Pewaukee and New Berlin. But Chief Daniel Thompson said the issue is complicated because the city is a hub for resources such as hospitals, mental health clinics, trauma centers, charitable organizations and shelters.

He said it makes sense that people experiencing homelessness in smaller, rural jurisdictions would come to Waukesha for services because their own communities often don’t have any.

But it’s a problem when other municipalities drop their homeless off in Waukesha simply because they don’t want to deal with them. This is particularly a problem at Waukesha Memorial Hospital, Thompson said.

In December, Wisconsin Watch reported that the state’s estimated homeless population has been rising since 2021, following national trends. It rose from 4,861 on a single night in 2023 to 5,037 in 2024. In rural Wisconsin, the increase was 9%, according to the annual homeless count. 

Despite accounting for over 60% of the state’s homeless population in 2023, every Wisconsin county besides Milwaukee, Dane and Racine collectively contained just 23% of the state’s long-term housing with on-site supportive services, which experts say is the best way to address chronic homelessness.

‘Only because we have such poor options’

Police departments in Durand and Menomonie quickly responded to the letter sent to the attorney general, emphasizing the transports were voluntary. Police footage from both departments confirms the officers didn’t coerce the individuals, but did suggest the destination. Neither individual knew where Eau Claire was. 

“They’re not looking to come here, they’re being asked if they want to come here,” Nick said. “When that’s being done by a uniformed police officer — that changes the circumstances quite a bit in terms of how voluntary that is.”

In the letter, McIlquham and Nick cited another example in which they say a woman who was a frequent source of contact for St. Croix County sheriff’s officers was dropped off at a gas station in Eau Claire without receiving any services. Eau Claire EMS, the county sheriff’s office and the city police department later responded to multiple complaints regarding the individual, who did not have ties to Eau Claire. 

St. Croix County Sheriff Scott Knudson described the incident to WEAU as a “courtesy ride.” He did not respond to Wisconsin Watch’s interview request. 

“I feel bad for Eau Claire that the facilities that we have available to us are in their jurisdiction, so sometimes they have to deal with the aftermath,” said Ridgeway, the Durand police chief. “But it happens a lot. That’s where the services are.”

Ridgeway told Wisconsin Watch the Durand Police Department will continue this practice as long as the attorney general allows it, adding that his department is not responsible for crimes these individuals may commit in Eau Claire. Asked how those individuals get back to where they came from, Ridgeway said that’s “out of our control.”

“These facilities receive funding from the federal government, state government, grants, donations — they’re not just receiving funding from Eau Claire County residents or city of Eau Claire residents,” Ridgeway said. “This is a service for all of western Wisconsin, and we’re going to take advantage of that service whenever we can.” 

He defended the decision to drop a woman off in front of a shelter that was either full or not open.

“You might not tonight have a place, but they can tell you what time they open tomorrow so you can be in line to get services,” Ridgeway said. “We’ll continue to call and try to get a bed verified as being available, but if a person wants to be dropped off there, we’ll do so.”

In a March 11 press release, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of La Crosse said it is facing a potential decision to reduce Sojourner House’s operations from year-round to just six months, citing a loss of funding and a shortage of volunteers.

On one night in January, Dale Karls of the Western Dairyland Economic Opportunity Council told WEAU, Sojourner House, which has a normal capacity of 53, opened overflow spaces and housed 77 people.

Nick said he doesn’t doubt the officers were trying to help these people, “but the message needs to get out that they weren’t helped.” There’s been a growing need for homeless services since the pandemic as temporary services and funding have been rolled back, he said. 

In the state’s 2023-25 biennial budget, the Republican-controlled Legislature rejected Evers’ recommendations to spend $24 million on emergency shelter and housing grants, as well as homeless case management services and rental assistance for unhoused veterans.

The Legislature also nixed $250 million Evers proposed for affordable workforce housing and home rehabilitation grants.

This year, Evers recommended another $24 million for homeless prevention programs in the 2025-27 state budget. Republican lawmakers who control the powerful budget committee vowed to throw out the governor’s budget and start from scratch this spring.

“The issue here is the disinvestment by the state and needed resources regionally,” Nick said. “It’s a law enforcement issue, but only because we have such poor options.” 

A California city has outlawed the practice

In 2024, the city of Santa Cruz, California, outlawed the practice of transporting homeless people into the city without authorization. Mayor Fred Keeley told Wisconsin Watch the local ordinance has pressured surrounding communities to ramp up their own resources for the homeless. 

The drop-off ban was sparked by an incident last summer when Hanford police drove a homeless woman with a disability nearly 200 miles to Santa Cruz — a city similar in size to Eau Claire — and left her outside a local shelter. 

“I know that for decades, other cities in our county bring people and dump them in the city of Santa Cruz,” Keeley said. “Nobody should do this to us because we would never do it to you without a prior conversation.” 

Keeley said these drop-offs almost never solve someone’s housing problem and instead shift the responsibility to another city. Santa Cruz is sympathetic to smaller municipalities with limited resources that are willing to coordinate with the city to arrange a transport, Keeley said, but that person should have some community ties. 

Keeley said the city’s investments in permanent supportive housing and other programs have reduced the city’s street homelessness by more than 50% in the last two years. 

Now, a bill has been introduced in the California Legislature that would ban local law enforcement agencies from transporting homeless individuals to another jurisdiction without first coordinating shelter or long-term housing for them. Keeley said he’s glad the issue is being taken up at the state level.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

‘A practice driven by a lack of good options’: Homeless drop-offs in Eau Claire showcase need for state action is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

North Providence Schools in Rhode Island is adding video cameras to its school buses to catch motorists who drive past stopped buses and run their stop signs, reported WPRI 12.

A school bus driver from the district, Cynthia Sanchez, told local news reporters that she often sees drivers ignore the stop sign on the side of her bus. Sanchez stated that she often radios dispatch to report a vehicle’s license plate number every time someone runs her red light at 30 mph. Yet nothing changes.

According to the news report, school buses from the district have now been equipped with new cameras to hold those drivers accountable for illegal passing.

Police chief Alfredo Ruggiero told local news reporters that the district received the BusPatrol cameras through a grant. The devices can be found all around the bus, from the stop sign to the windshield.

The cameras begin to record when school bus operators open the loading doors and stop recording when doors close.

According to the article, as of April the town is giving motorists a 30-day grace period to comply with the law by mailing a warning letter. Starting May 1, motorists can face fines between $250 and $500. Their driver’s license could also be suspended for 30 days.

Related: Combatting Illegal Passing with Awareness, Technology
Related: Ohio Bill Seeks School Bus Illegal Passing Fine Increase, Safety Fund
Related: Georgia Gov Signs Law Following Fatal Illegal Passing Incident
Related: School Bus Cameras Could Soon Catch Pittsburgh Drivers That Don’t Stop

The post Rhode Island District Adds School Bus Video to Reduce Illegal Passing appeared first on School Transportation News.