Reading Time: 4 minutes

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Tuesday that its agents arrested 39 people across Wisconsin over the final weekend in June — among the largest enforcement operations in the state since President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025.

An ICE spokesperson claimed that “many” of those arrested had criminal records, including convictions for sexual abuse, driving under the influence and drug possession; Wisconsin Watch and NNS could not independently verify the agency’s count nor the number of detainees with prior convictions.

“All of the illegal aliens arrested have or will receive full due process. They will remain in ICE custody pending their removal or removal proceedings,” the spokesperson wrote.

The operation sent shock waves through the city’s immigrant neighborhoods as residents shared video and photos of alleged ICE enforcement actions in Milwaukee across social media. 

Immigrant rights advocacy group Voces de la Frontera told reporters at a Tuesday morning press conference that its network of volunteers has recorded more than two dozen arrests over the past week, primarily in and around Milwaukee. Executive Director Christine Neumann-Ortiz interrupted her remarks to share reports of an additional three arrests in Fitchburg, a Madison suburb. Neumann-Ortiz said her team is aware of Wisconsin detainees held as far away as Florida, though many remain in detention facilities in Wisconsin and Illinois.

Neumann-Ortiz, flanked by Milwaukee Ald. Marina Dimitrijevic and Milwaukee County supervisor Juan Miguel Martinez, also noted that ICE agents used the Milwaukee Police Department’s (MPD) District 2 station parking lot as a staging area for operations at least once during the weekend’s operation. MPD has since clarified that it did not give ICE officers permission to use the parking lot and, upon learning of the incident, asked the federal agency not to stage in the lot.

The Common Council voted unanimously in March to bar ICE officers from using city property as staging areas during enforcement operations. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson enacted a similar rule via executive order last fall as ICE mounted a much larger enforcement push in Illinois.

Milwaukee’s policy includes no clear enforcement mechanism, nor does Milwaukee County’s new requirement that immigration authorities secure permission before staging in county parks — a policy Martinez claims agents also violated over the weekend by gathering at Mitchell Park on Milwaukee’s South Side. “It’s not that (the city’s rule) is not working,” said Dimitrijevic. “It’s not being respected.” 

While both MPD and the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office do not conduct immigration arrests as a matter of policy, both agencies have raised questions about their roles in enforcing local laws intended to constrain ICE activity. “No one has given us an answer” as to the circumstances in which local law enforcement officers could arrest a federal counterpart, Milwaukee County Sheriff Denita Ball said during a February town hall on Milwaukee’s South Side. 

“Given the legal questions that have been presented,” an MPD spokesperson wrote in an email on Tuesday afternoon, “the Department has requested a formal written legal opinion from the City Attorney’s Office regarding the ordinance’s applicability and enforceability.” The Milwaukee City Attorney’s Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Martinez suggested that local governments could sue the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — ICE’s parent agency — for violating city and county rules. “Right now, we’re just gathering as much information as we possibly can,” he said on Tuesday.

ICE’s ongoing operation in Wisconsin seems to mark a departure from the agency’s standard operations in the state over the past year. Agency records indicate most of the at least 1,700 immigration arrests in Wisconsin over the past year took place in prisons, jails, courts and the DHS field office in downtown Milwaukee. 

While roughly 80% of those arrested by ICE in Wisconsin between January 2025 and March 2026 had prior criminal convictions or pending criminal charges, most immigrants arrested during check-ins at the DHS office had no prior criminal history.

Daylight arrests in full view of the public have been relatively rare, but relatives of those arrested over the weekend — and some detainees themselves — describe a shift in tactics. 

Galo Suárez, a Nicaraguan asylum seeker detained alongside his fiancee and her brother on Sunday, offered a vivid account of his arrest on Milwaukee’s South Side. An unmarked truck pulled in front of his car along S. 13th Street, and four more appeared to box him in. “An agent broke the window with his gun drawn,” he told reporters. “They didn’t ask for our identification, they didn’t ask for our names. They just took us down violently, and when my fiancee tried to ask why, one of them pushed her against the car (and) said she was provoking him.” 

He also alleged that an agent called his fiancee a “bitch” during the arrest.  

Asylum seekers like Suárez, his fiancee and her brother are eligible for work permits while awaiting rulings on their asylum applications. The agent who found his work permit while searching his wallet insisted it was forged, Suárez said. 

Agents released Suárez later that day, but his fiancee, 25-year-old Reyna Elizabeth Garcia, remains in custody in Kenosha County. He doesn’t know the whereabouts of his would-be brother-in-law, 37-year-old Teodoro Rafael Garcia. “They took the cuffs off and told me to not look back,” he said. Shaken by his run-in with immigration authorities, Suárez said he plans to leave Milwaukee for the time being. 

Friends and relatives of Estenderly Marte Polanco, an undocumented immigrant from the Dominican Republic, shared photographs of bruises, scrapes and cuts on Marte Polanco’s neck, arms and lip — all allegedly left by immigration officers who pulled her out of her car on Saturday morning during a traffic stop on Milwaukee’s South Side. Marte Polanco’s son watched the arrest from the car’s back seat. 

“Our kids are not doing well,” said Frankeli, the father of Marte Polanco’s children. Frankeli, who is undocumented, asked Wisconsin Watch to refer to him by his first name alone while he navigates the aftermath of Marte Polanco’s arrest. 

Wisconsin court records show no prior convictions or citations under Marte Polanco’s name, nor any prior convictions or citations tied to Suárez, his fiancee or her brother.

Olivia Villarreal, the wife and business partner of El Rey grocery store chain co-founder Ernesto Villarreal, said a manager of her store on West Burnham Street saw ICE agents follow a vehicle into the parking lot, arrest a man and leave quickly Monday. An onlooker caught the arrest on video. 

Villarreal’s message for the wary public: “Don’t be intimidated and try to live your normal life.  You have to live and feed your family, attend church and school.”

ICE announces 39 Wisconsin arrests in one of state’s largest immigration enforcement sweeps 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.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Wisconsin will begin enforcing new federal eligibility restrictions for FoodShare and Medicaid this week, cutting off thousands of refugees, asylees and other legally present immigrants from public benefits they were previously eligible to receive.

The state’s refugee services providers warn that fallback options are already stretched thin.

The Trump administration narrowed eligibility for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps low-income households purchase groceries. The Wisconsin program, called FoodShare, is federally funded but administered by states. The new rules —  which President Donald Trump last July signed into law as part of his “big beautiful” spending bill — exclude many noncitizens previously eligible for the program, including refugees, asylees and victims of human trafficking.

Wisconsin’s Department of Health Services (DHS) will begin enforcing the FoodShare eligibility rules on July 1, barring immigrants who fall into one of the now-excluded categories from enrolling in the program or renewing their benefits. The state will implement the Medicaid eligibility restrictions beginning Oct. 1, with some exceptions. DHS estimates roughly 7,200 people will lose access to one or both programs, nearly two-thirds of whom live in greater Milwaukee.

Neighboring states have already begun enforcing the new SNAP restrictions. Illinois, for instance, began barring refugees and asylees without green cards from the program in April. DHS spokesperson Elizabeth Goodsitt attributed Wisconsin’s slower rollout to the state’s “complex, combined eligibility system” and effort needed to “design and implement” changes.

Refugee services providers spent months bracing for impact, receiving formal notice of the cutoffs at roughly the same time as affected refugees and asylees. To ensure language barriers didn’t leave families in the dark, Lutheran Social Services of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan refugee program director Omar Mohamed said his team is checking in with affected households individually. 

Those with green cards will retain access to the programs, but Mohamed noted that a recent barrage of visa restrictions leaves green cards out of reach for many recent arrivals. Refugees can typically apply for green cards a year after settling in the U.S., but the Trump administration in January froze green card processing for anyone from 39 countries — including Myanmar, the largest source of refugees resettled in Wisconsin in recent years. Of the nearly 170 people Lutheran Social Services resettled in Wisconsin between October 2024 and September 2025, only one has secured a green card, Mohamed said. 

Ongoing legal battles over the visa restrictions have yet to clear the path to legal permanent residency. 

Without access to legal permanent residency, refugees and asylees face what amounts to an  “indefinite ban on the eligibility” for SNAP and Medicaid, said Matthew Soerens, vice president of advocacy and policy for refugee services nonprofit World Relief, which has offices in Appleton, Eau Claire and Oshkosh.

Food pantries may be many refugees’ and asylees’ best backup when they lose access to SNAP, but advocates say donated food cannot directly replace lost benefits. Milwaukee food bank Hunger Task Force has seen pantry traffic increase by 50% in the past two years, said public policy and advocacy director Reno Wright. 

The nonprofit is helping other food pantries prepare for the cutoff, but those programs are “meant to provide supplemental assistance and not long-term ongoing assistance,” Wright said. 

What families should know

Mixed-status households should still apply for benefits for the members of their families who still qualify, Wright added. U.S. citizen children of refugee parents, for instance, will remain eligible for nutrition assistance — albeit only for their own needs, not their parents’.

Children who lose access to FoodShare can turn to Milwaukee’s summer meal program, organized by Hunger Task Force and a coalition of school districts and community organizations. The program provides free meals to children ages 18 and under at more than 100 locations in greater Milwaukee. 

Alternatives to Medicaid benefits are even harder to find. Free clinics often operate at capacity, Soerens said, and while refugees may still qualify for emergency medical coverage through  Medicaid Emergency Services, the program sets a high bar for eligibility and does not cover preventative care or ongoing treatment for chronic conditions. 

While some Milwaukee-area clinics are mulling subscription-based alternatives to Medicaid, Mohamed said many of the families his organization supports can’t fit a health care subscription into their budgets.

For now, Lutheran Social Services and its counterparts elsewhere in Wisconsin will rely on donors and community partners to shore up the assistance they provide to refugees and asylees. That need has grown since the Trump administration largely suspended refugee admissions last January, cutting off funding tied to new arrivals and forcing agencies to lay off staff.

But refugee arrivals haven’t ceased entirely. At least 218 refugees have resettled in Wisconsin since last January, all from South Africa.

Wisconsin to cut FoodShare, Medicaid for thousands of refugees under new federal rules 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.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Federal immigration authorities conducted a wave of arrests in greater Milwaukee over the final weekend in June as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) launched what it called a “targeted operation” in and around the city.

The operation — likely the largest in Milwaukee since President Donald Trump took office in January 2025 — sent shock waves through the city’s immigrant neighborhoods as residents shared video and photos of alleged ICE enforcement actions in Milwaukee across social media. 

Immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera tallied 18 arrests in the metro area within the last week, though Wisconsin Watch and NNS have not yet independently corroborated that total.

Details remain scarce, but an attorney representing several of the arrestees says none of his clients have prior convictions in Wisconsin or outstanding removal orders. 

Milwaukee immigration attorney Marc Christopher cited three examples from the past weekend: a woman from the Dominican Republic arrested in front of her 7-year-old son; twins from Mexico cornered in their driveway on Milwaukee’s South Side; and a Salvadoran man picked up outside the Waukesha County Courthouse after appearing for a traffic ticket. 

ICE activity

ICE officers surrounded Estenderly Marte Polanco near South 23rd and Greenfield streets on Milwaukee’s South Side Saturday morning. 

“There were four of them,” said Frankeli, the father of Marte Polanco’s children. Both Marte Polanco and Frankeli are undocumented; he asked NNS to refer to him by his first name alone out of fear that authorities could target him next.

The pair were running errands with their son when agents stopped their car, shattered a window and handcuffed Marte Polanco, he said. Wisconsin court records show no prior convictions or citations under Marte Polanco’s name. Frankeli said he heard the ICE agents shout that she had an arrest warrant as they took her away. 

“They didn’t give us anything (on paper),” he said. Marte Polanco was in custody at the Waukesha County jail as of Monday, according to Christopher — one of six county detention facilities in Wisconsin that hold ICE detainees. 

Christopher’s client from El Salvador was awaiting a hearing in his ongoing immigration court case at the time of his arrest in Waukesha on Saturday. “He hadn’t even missed a court date,” Christopher said. Federal immigration courts do not hear criminal cases, but the Trump administration broke with decades of precedent last year by requiring detention for any immigrant facing an active removal case.

Court records confirm the 32-year-old has no prior criminal convictions in Wisconsin. His traffic ticket — a May citation for driving without a license — is a common infraction for undocumented immigrants barred from obtaining driver’s licenses under Wisconsin law. Wisconsin Watch and NNS have not been able to reach the man to ask permission to use his name. An ICE detainee locator listed him in custody in Greene County, Missouri, as of Monday morning.

Federal authorities informed the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) that they planned to conduct “targeted enforcement for criminal activity in the area,” according to an MPD spokesperson. Both the police department and the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office referred questions about the operations to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE’s parent agency.

DHS did not respond to questions about the scope of the operation. Instead, a spokesperson offered details about a June 26 traffic stop in which officers “encountered three illegal aliens including some with criminal histories including misappropriating identification to obtain money.” 

The arrests prompted advocacy group Forward Latino to issue a community alert on June 27, and other immigrant rights organizations are still gathering details on the weekend’s events. 

“We know how ICE has arrested people for everything from parking tickets to — whatever — in the past,” said Milwaukee Turners Executive Director Emilio De Torre. “I have no confidence that they’re just seeking people that are under lawful deportation orders.”

Voces de la Frontera, an immigrant rights organization based on Milwaukee’s South Side, issued alerts on Friday and Monday of confirmed ICE sightings in the city and also Waukesha. The group has been canvassing the South Side sharing information with residents on what to do if they encounter ICE agents. 

Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director of Voces de la Frontera, also issued a video statement, urging residents to stay cautious and know their rights. 

“You are not obligated to answer any questions and should demand to speak to a lawyer before you respond or sign anything,” she said. 

Immigration enforcement records through March 2026 released by the nonprofit Deportation Data Project suggest ICE officers arrested at least 1,700 people in Wisconsin between January 2025 and March 2026. Roughly 20% of immigrants arrested in Wisconsin during that period had neither prior convictions nor pending criminal charges, including more than 100 people arrested during check-ins at the DHS field office in downtown Milwaukee. 

The tactics on display over the weekend — daylight traffic stops and multiple alleged uses of force — have been rare in Wisconsin up to this point. 

Devin Blake and Edgar Mendez of Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service contributed reporting.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correctly identify the gender of the child who witnessed Estenderly Marte Polanco’s arrest.

ICE ramps up operations in Milwaukee while advocates rush to catch up 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.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Milwaukee’s Public Transportation, Utilities and Waterways Review Board waded into the statewide fight over utility regulation on Wednesday with a three-hour hearing discussing forming a publicly-owned electric utility. 

The proposed starting point: assuming control over We Energies’ infrastructure within city limits.

“Energy networks are best delivered by monopolies,” said Jim Carpenter, a board member. “The problem is that We Energies is a profit-driven monopoly, and sometimes profits get in the way of providing the best solution to a problem.”

The board has no power to recommend action by Milwaukee’s Common Council; Wednesday’s meeting was the board’s first since 2023. Instead, Aldermen Alex Brower and Robert Bauman used the hearing to open a discussion about the viability, risks and potential benefits of a possible city-owned electric utility. Backers and critics alike packed the board room, some eager to weigh in on the proposal.

“Everyone deserves to have savings. Everyone deserves to have the option to have control over their power,” said Cleopatra White, a working-class single mother in Milwaukee’s Southgate neighborhood. 

She said she wanted to show support for creating a publicly-owned utility because it’s an issue that affects everyone in Milwaukee, regardless of political party. 

What is a public utility? 

Wisconsin’s publicly-owned utilities — Manitowoc Public Utilities, for instance — generate roughly 11% of the electricity produced in the state, often with lower electric rates than their investor-owned counterparts. 

Wisconsin law allows municipalities to acquire utilities’ property, but that option is largely untested.

Brower pitched the takeover as a means to shield residents from electrical rate increases. We Energies filed its most recent rate case in April, projecting a roughly 9.3% increase in customers’ electricity rates over the next two years. 

But the plan faces pushback from We Energies and the union representing its workers. They argue that residents benefit from the economies of scale that a large, well-established utility provides.

“Reliability is not created by changing who owns the utility,” said James Meyer, business manager for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 2150. “It comes from trained workers, proven emergency response systems and the ability to move crews, equipment and materials quickly when customers need help. Milwaukee has that today, and this proposal puts it at risk.”

We Energies spokesperson Brendan Conway said his company is responsive to ratepayers’ concerns about costs and service. 

“We know many families in Milwaukee are feeling pressure from rising energy costs, and we’re focused on keeping bills low while delivering the reliable energy customers count on every day,” Conway wrote in an email. 

How would a municipal utility be created? 

State law offers two routes for municipalities to assume control of utility infrastructure within their territory: seizing the facilities through eminent domain or negotiating a purchase agreement. 

The eminent domain route would likely require legal action by the city to prove the “necessity of the taking,” attorneys working with the Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) wrote ahead of Wednesday’s hearing. 

Brower won his seat representing District 3 in a special election last April with the backing of Milwaukee’s DSA chapter, which helps organize the “Power to the People” campaign drumming up support for a municipal electric utility. Many of its members attended the hearing. 

Both options would require a referendum and a hearing before Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission to determine a fair price for We Energies’ property. But Milwaukee’s suburbs rely  on much of the same infrastructure as the city, which could block Milwaukee from acquiring shared infrastructure. 

Shorewood Village Manager Rebecca Ewald, whose community shares a substation with Milwaukee, told Wisconsin Watch that she hasn’t discussed the idea with its sponsors. Oak Creek City Administrator Andrew Vickers declined to comment on the plan; his city, which borders Milwaukee’s southern edge, hosts several We Energies power plants. 

Milwaukee itself has only one We Energies power plant: the Valley Power Plant along the Menomonee River near the city’s central business district. It generates enough electricity to meet roughly 10% of Milwaukee’s annual needs, Conway said. 

Brower argues the current lack of generation within city limits wouldn’t hinder his goals. “We have the power to purchase (electricity) on the wholesale markets,” he told Wisconsin Watch.

State law allows municipal utilities to construct generators outside of their boundaries. In Brower’s view, Milwaukee could expand rooftop solar and battery storage to meet some energy needs — possibly sited on the city’s abundant vacant land.

Municipal control of We Energies’ substations and transmission assets could also mean shrinking the pool of customers paying for that infrastructure, including We Energies’ new mixed-use Juneautown substation in the city’s Historic Third Ward.

Act 10, a 2011 state law stripping most public-sector employees of collective bargaining rights,  also complicates the picture. 

Brower believes a Milwaukee public electrical utility should aim to hire the We Energies workers who currently operate infrastructure within the city, but doing so would make them public-sector employees. “We don’t want that,” he said.

“We are seriously considering a legal option of outsourcing the day-to-day management to a third-party entity once we acquire the utility infrastructure,” he added — a possible workaround to ensure that  employees under a municipal utility would retain their current rights. 

His pitch has yet to sway the IBEW, which generally supports We Energies in cases before the PSC and Legislature. 

“If the workers are forced into uncertainty over pensions, healthcare, seniority, contracts and union protections, many may not move to the city from the utility,” said Sam Rozenberg, an IBEW member and We Energies dispatcher who spoke at the hearing. “They have options. And if they leave, Milwaukee loses more than employees. It loses the people who know this system and know how to restore service safely.”

While there is no guarantee current We Energies workers would join a new municipal electric utility, Ursula Schryver, senior vice president of education, training and events for the American Public Power Association, told the board that Milwaukee could tap into a national network of public utilities to respond to natural disasters.

Other cities explore municipal utilities

Milwaukee isn’t the only city exploring this option. 

St. Petersburg, Florida’s city council approved a feasibility study earlier this year. Ann Arbor, Michigan’s city council voted down a proposal to study a municipal takeover of electric infrastructure last spring, though the plan’s backers now plan to take the matter to voters as a ballot petition.

A similar study commissioned by the San Diego, California city council produced an $8 billion cost estimate,  prompting some city leaders to balk at the idea. The same study also suggested that San Diego residents could recoup the costs in the long run. 

Brower said  San Diego’s deliberations offer a chance to pressure an investor-owned utility to make concessions. Even if the possibility of a municipal takeover in Milwaukee acts as a bargaining chip during an upcoming rate case, he said, “there’s power in winning concessions. But we are fighting for the entire thing.”

Samuel Mendoza, who recently moved with his wife to Milwaukee near the Harambee neighborhood, discussed his experience working in public works for the City of Los Angeles. While he didn’t work under the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, he said the municipal utility paid its nearly 12,000 workers well.

“I’m surprised coming here that there wasn’t already something municipal,” Mendoza said. “Especially things that are really specific to the city, you’d want to have a utility company that could handle those issues instead of just being so widespread.” 

What happens next?

We Energies was absent from the hearing. Brower invited the company to join a meeting with the board or the city’s representatives to make its case. 

As for next steps, Bauman suggested exploring the public utility concept through a task force made up of members of the Common Council, mayoral administration and Department of Public Works and then requesting that the council fund a feasibility study.

Could Milwaukee create its own electric utility? Officials explore taking over We Energies infrastructure within city limits  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.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Tech firm Oracle is suing Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission (PSC) in Ozaukee County Circuit Court, opening a new front in a fight over financial protections for Wisconsin ratepayers. 

The June 19 lawsuit comes as Oracle and We Energies — the utility set to power the company’s planned data center in Port Washington — are asking the PSC to reconsider credit rating requirements for data center developers that could cost the company millions of dollars a year.

Oracle’s lawsuit seeks to accomplish the same ends through the courts.

The PSC approved We Energies’ “very large customer” rate structure in April, requiring the utility to exclusively bill data center customers for new energy generation infrastructure needed to serve them, among other protections for existing ratepayers. The agreement also requires data center developers with credit ratings below A- to post financial guarantees to reduce the risk of shifting costs to other customers if a developer runs into financial trouble.

Oracle currently holds a BBB credit rating — a tier below the PSC standard, but still considered investment-grade by ratings agencies — largely because of aggressive borrowing to finance new artificial intelligence infrastructure. Under the current rate structure, the Oracle subsidiary involved in the Port Washington project would need to provide cash deposits or letters of credit exceeding $100 million per year to receive service from We Energies.

“If the Commission does not reopen its decision on this issue, the implications for Wisconsin would be significant and limit the ability of numerous investment-grade companies to invest in Wisconsin,” the utility’s attorneys wrote in a June 10 request to reopen the case.

We Energies also contended that Oracle runs little risk of defaulting on its obligations.

“Tens of billions of dollars in Oracle’s value would need to be destroyed before creditors and counterparties, such as Wisconsin Electric and its other customers, could experience losses,” the utility’s attorneys wrote. Even in a bankruptcy, they added, generators built to serve data centers “will still have value and will be able to provide electricity to other customers.” 

We Energies and Oracle asked the PSC to consider a stepped approach to security requirements that eases the burden on companies with “investment-grade” credit ratings, including BBB ratings, and to waive the Oracle subsidiary’s financial backing obligations. 

In its lawsuit, Oracle asked the court to “set aside, reverse and remand” the credit rating limits in the PSC-approved agreement, arguing that the commission acted outside of its authority and without sufficient evidence to justify the rule. The company maintains that the A- bar isn’t “needed to prevent harm” to We Energies’ other customers or shareholders, and that the commission “failed to consider the significant, adverse impacts” of the requirement on Oracle.

Ratepayer advocates and clean energy groups support the PSC credit rating requirements, and some of the same groups are pushing back against Oracle’s efforts to reopen the issue. 

“We believe that PSC did its job,” Clean Wisconsin spokesperson Amy Barrilleaux said. “It cannot leave all these other thousands of customers vulnerable.”

The company hired attorneys from the Madison office of law firm Husch Blackwell. One of those attorneys, David Zoppo, has previously represented investor-owned utilities before the PSC. Oracle’s attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 

The credit rating dispute could shape future electrical service contracts between data center developers and utilities. 

Northern States Power Company, a subsidiary of utility giant Xcel Energy that provides electrical service to parts of northwestern Wisconsin, asked the PSC on Monday for its own “very large” customer rate structure. 

That proposal would set the credit rating bar at BBB-,  the lowest investment-grade category. Potential data center customers below that threshold would need to provide additional financial guarantees.

Oracle sues Wisconsin regulators as it seeks relief from data center credit requirements 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.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Wisconsin dairy farmers may have a new avenue to hire workers under new seasonal labor visa rules the Trump administration announced Wednesday.

The U.S. Department of Labor and Department of Homeland Security will give dairy farmers broader access to the federal H-2A program, through which farmers can secure temporary visas for seasonal agricultural workers. 

The dairy industry has lobbied for years to ease program rules barring visas for ostensibly year-round farm roles like milking; those rules also exclude many livestock and mushroom farms from the program. 

“This is a welcomed policy change for our dairy members, and we are hopeful it is just the beginning of continued H-2A program expansion,” John Hollay, president of the National Council of Agricultural Employers, wrote in a press release. “By opening the door for the dairy industry to take advantage of the only legal program for foreign agricultural workers, President Trump continues to move us in a direction of needed reform.”

The administration’s initial announcement was light on details about which dairy farm roles now qualify for H-2A visas.

The updates to the H-2A program are dairy-specific, and the USDA made no indication of changes to the visa’s one-year duration, or a maximum of three years with extensions.

Wisconsin’s agricultural sector increasingly relies on the H-2A program to meet its labor needs. Wisconsin farmers’ annual H-2A hiring increased at least six-fold over the past decade, and the White House’s ongoing immigration crackdown has amplified the program’s importance as a source of workers with legal status. 

Some dairy farms already hire H-2A workers for non-milking jobs; at least 14% of Wisconsin farms approved for visas this year have dairy herds, U.S. Department of Labor and Wisconsin milk producer license data shows. 

Calumet County dairy farmer Amy Woldt hired three H-2A workers from South Africa this year as heavy equipment operators. “We don’t really need them for working with the cattle,” she told Wisconsin Watch, but they do need a crew to run the farm’s skid steers and other farm machinery.

So far, nearly all H-2A workers on Wisconsin dairy farms are heavy equipment operators, at least according to farmers’ applications to the Department of Labor. Many, including the workers on Woldt’s farm, are from South Africa.

Fellow Calumet County farmer Kurt Schneider also hires South African H-2A workers to harvest his feed crops. “It’s because they speak English,” he said, and the ease of communication justifies the cost of flying in a crew from across the Atlantic. South Africans make up the second-largest cohort of H-2A workers after workers from Mexico, outnumbering the third-largest nationality — workers from Jamaica — more than 3-to-1 in 2024.

Schneider added that he would be thrilled to hire for his milking operations through the H-2A program. His current 35-person milking crew is mostly Spanish-speaking, so Schneider would favor H-2A workers from Mexico to supplement his dairy workforce. “That’s our culture,” he said. “We don’t want to change our culture.”

For Schneider, the H-2A program could offer a more stable workforce than the current cutthroat competition between farms allows. The pool of often-undocumented immigrant dairy workers is shrinking, in part because some workers are opting to return to their home countries amid the immigration enforcement push, and remaining workers can now hop between farms to earn higher wages. “I’m getting really sick of (it),” he said. “Somebody’s paying 50 cents an hour more and they jump ship.” 

The Trump administration cut the program’s minimum wage last year; workers on Wisconsin farms classified as “less-skilled” now receive a minimum $12 per hour this year, down more than a third from their 2025 minimum wage. Woldt says she hasn’t cut her crew’s wages, hoping “to keep the guys we have” rather than competing with other farmers for new workers next season.

The USDA’s announcement didn’t specify where dairy workers will fall on the wage scale.

While a seasonal H-2A crew would also require regular turnover, Schneider said his farm’s current attrition rate justifies the switch. “We’re having bottom 10% turnover anyway,” he said, as new dairy hands move along in search of higher wages. “They’re only there two weeks or a month, and they leave, and you’re constantly training.”

But he isn’t inclined to let go of his current crew. If the new rules allow him to hire dairy hands through the H-2A program, Schneider said he would apply for enough visas to backfill openings as they arise, even if that means some visas go unused. 

That strategy could also limit the risks of relying entirely on the H-2A program. A backlog at an American consulate in South Africa delayed the arrival of Schneider’s harvest crew this spring. Farmers pay steep overhead to secure H-2A visas, and when delays force workers to book last-minute flights, costs often skyrocket. Program rules require farmers to cover workers’ plane tickets and lodging, so delays can inflate the up-front costs of participating in the program — or, if a farm relied entirely on H-2A workers, possibly leave cows unmilked. 

Processing delays also hit Woldt’s team this year, forcing one of her workers to return to South Africa while awaiting approval of his visa extension. She has no immediate plans to hire dairy hands through the program. “We’re good in that department,” she said. 

National agricultural groups also tempered their praise of the new rule change with acknowledgement of the H-2A program’s capacity problems. 

“For this expansion to succeed and the H-2A program to work as intended, our federal agencies must have the resources and regulatory structures necessary to handle the increased volume efficiently,” Hollay wrote. 

Wisconsin Farmers Union President Darin Von Ruden noted that the policy shift may not benefit all Wisconsin farmers equally.

“I don’t think it’s going to help the small to medium-sized farmers very much,” he told Wisconsin Watch. The visa program can be cost-prohibitive for smaller farms that have survived decades of consolidation in the dairy industry, he said, but the new rules do give farms that can afford H-2A workers more room to maneuver.

Republican U.S Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who represents western Wisconsin, introduced legislation last fall to create an alternative to the H-2A program by allowing some undocumented agricultural workers to self-deport, pay a fine and return to the U.S. through a legal port of entry to resume working in agriculture. “The H-2A program is broken and it sucks,” he quipped during a presentation on immigrant labor at the World Dairy Expo in Madison last fall. Van Orden’s bill did not advance out of committee.

The Trump administration suspended Biden-era rules intended to crack down on abuses of H-2A workers last June. Wisconsin’s migrant labor law preserves some protections the Department of Labor no longer guarantees, including workers’ rights to invite legal aid providers and clergy into their employer-provided housing. 

Editor’s note: This story was updated June 19 to add comment from Wisconsin Farmers Union President Darin Von Ruden.

Wisconsin dairy farms could gain new hiring option under visa changes 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.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

We Energies this week asked Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission to revisit its recent ruling on electrical rates for the utility’s data center customers, arguing new credit rating requirements create an undue burden for data center operators. 

The PSC approved We Energies’ “very large customer” rate structure in April, requiring the utility to exclusively bill data center customers for new energy generation infrastructure needed to serve them, among other protections for existing ratepayers. The agreement also requires data center developers with credit ratings below A- to post financial guarantees, either in cash or lines of credit, to reduce the risk of shifting costs to other customers if a developer runs into financial trouble. 

That requirement poses a problem for Oracle, which is partnering with OpenAI and Vantage to develop a vast data center campus in Port Washington.

The cloud computing giant currently holds a BBB credit rating — a tier below the A- bar set by the PSC, but still considered investment-grade by ratings agencies — largely due to aggressive borrowing to finance new artificial intelligence infrastructure. Under the current rate structure, the Oracle subsidiary involved in the Port Washington project would need to provide cash deposits or letters of credit exceeding $100 million per year to receive We Energies service.

“If the Commission does not reopen its decision on this issue, the implications for Wisconsin would be significant and limit the ability of numerous investment-grade companies to invest in Wisconsin,” the utility’s attorneys wrote in a June 10 filing. 

Several other major technology companies — including Intel, Tesla and Micron — hold BBB credit ratings, the attorneys noted. 

Ratepayer advocates backed credit limits for data center developers during the PSC’s deliberations on the case. In written testimony to the PSC in January, Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board chief economist Steve Kihm pointed to energy trading giant Enron, which held a BBB credit rating just a year before its 2001 bankruptcy, as a reason to be cautious with financial commitments from high-dollar investors. 

In its request to reopen the case, We Energies argued that the risks of Oracle or other tech giants defaulting on obligations are extremely low. 

“Tens of billions of dollars in Oracle’s value would need to be destroyed before creditors and counterparties, such as Wisconsin Electric and its other customers, could experience losses,” the utility’s attorneys wrote. Even in a bankruptcy, they added, generators built to serve data centers “will still have value and will be able to provide electricity to other customers” — as opposed to a scenario in which the generators sit idle while solvent ratepayers cover the debts We Energies incurred to build them.

We Energies and Oracle asked the PSC to consider a stepped approach to security requirements that eases the burden on companies with “investment-grade” credit ratings, including BBB ratings, and to waive the Oracle subsidiary’s financial backing obligations. The utility argued that its proposed waiver would still offer greater protections than those required from Meta in its recent agreement with Wisconsin Power and Light, a subsidiary of Alliant Energy.

But Union of Concerned Scientists energy analyst Maria Chavez pointed out that We Energies’ arrangements with new hyperscale data center customers differ from Meta’s one-off service agreement with Alliant. Meta isn’t “specifically asking for extra generation capacity assets to be added,” she said, whereas the Port Washington data center campus — and Microsoft’s data center in Mount Pleasant — will require new, dedicated energy sources. 

“The greater risk to ratepayers,” she added, “the more reason to have a high standard for financial security requirements.”

We Energies and Oracle urged the commission to “move quickly” on the issue to “provide certainty for generational investments that are currently moving forward in this state.”

Meanwhile, Oracle’s share value tumbled this week amid uncertainty about its data center investments. The company’s debt-to-equity ratio exceeded 400% as of May, whereas other hyperscale data operators maintain ratios of 80% or lower.

We Energies asks Wisconsin regulators to ease data center credit standards 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.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

New federal dollars could extend the life of one of Wisconsin’s remaining coal power plants.

The Trump administration plans to spend $425 million to support operations at 13 coal plants in 10 states, arguing the move will help meet rising electricity demand and preserve thousands of jobs tied to the ailing coal industry. The White House will do so by invoking the Defense Production Act, a Cold War-era law that gives the president broad authority to accelerate American industrial output at times of crisis.

Some of that funding could go to Madison-based utility Alliant Energy, which told Wisconsin Watch that it applied for a $19 million grant to extend the life of coal-powered units it owns at the Columbia Energy Center near Portage in central Wisconsin. The utility previously planned to retire the plant’s coal units before the end of the decade. 

President Donald Trump announced the action from the Oval Office Thursday, highlighting  that the coal plants set to benefit are all in states he won during the 2024 election.

 “Wisconsin put you over the edge,” U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis., interjected, standing among the gaggle of Republican lawmakers and Cabinet officials behind the president. 

“Our action will allow these facilities to invest in upgrades that will extend their operational lives for decades into the future, reinforce the reliability of our electrical grid … and keep electricity prices low for the American people,” Trump said, adding that the move may also bolster the nation’s artificial intelligence boom.  

The administration will also distribute $200 million in Department of Energy grants to reopen a coal plant in Maryland and build the first new coal plants in the U.S. in over a decade: one in Alaska and another in West Virginia.

The Trump administration has already intervened to block the retirement of coal plants in Michigan, Indiana and elsewhere. But the White House did not pair those earlier orders with funding to support ongoing operations, so ratepayers across most of the Midwest — including in Wisconsin — will pick up the bill for those extensions.

Wisconsin’s Citizens Utility Board (CUB) and other Midwestern ratepayer advocacy groups have since filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit challenging federal orders blocking the closure of the Michigan and Indiana plants. The costs of extending aging coal plants’ operations “are adding to an affordability challenge customers are already experiencing in Wisconsin and nearby states,” said CUB Wisconsin Executive Director Tom Content.

Alliant has already pushed back the retirement dates for its coal-powered generators at the Columbia Energy Center and Edgewater Energy Center in Sheboygan. The company initially pledged to shut down the last coal generator at the Columbia plant by 2024; Alliant did not clarify the new expected life span of the plant. 

The Edgewater plant is slated to transition to natural gas generation by 2029.

Coal generation accounts for a declining share of Wisconsin’s and the Midwest’s overall energy mix. Natural gas surpassed coal as the state’s primary fuel for generating electricity in 2022.

Wisconsin ratepayers owe at least $1 billion to pay off debts tied to retired coal plants, including We Energies’ now-shuttered Pleasant Prairie Power Plant in Kenosha County.

Extending operations at Alliant’s remaining coal plants could reduce the amount ratepayers will still owe when those facilities eventually close. 

Wisconsin clean energy advocates reacted with alarm to the White House’s doubling down on coal generation. 

“Burning coal in Wisconsin releases a long list of toxic chemicals and heavy metals, both into the air and water,” said Clean Wisconsin spokesperson Amy Barrilleaux. “No one in Wisconsin is asking for more mercury, arsenic, lead or soot. But we will be getting all of it, especially as the Trump administration dismantles pollution safeguards at coal plants, insisting more power is needed for the ‘AI data center revolution.’”

“It’s also important to note that burning coal is one of the most expensive ways to produce energy in Wisconsin — far more expensive than wind and solar farms, which are the cheapest,” she added. “So Wisconsinites will have higher energy costs and will be paying for the health costs, the longer we burn coal in this state.”

Alliant has scaled up investments in renewable energy generation in recent years, buoyed in part by clean energy tax credits extended by the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. The U.S. Department of Energy also agreed to back $3 billion in loans supporting Alliant’s wind generation and battery storage buildouts in the final days of the Biden administration.

The Trump administration has since largely reversed Biden-era tax incentives for renewable energy development. In its 2025 annual report to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Alliant noted that the termination of clean energy tax credits could “adversely impact” the company’s finances. 

The company did not immediately respond to an inquiry about the status of Department of Energy financing for its wind and battery storage projects.

U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum argued Thursday that clean energy tax incentives created a false impression of the viability of renewable energy sources. Wind energy developers, he said, “weren’t trying to generate electricity. They’re just trying to generate tax credits.”

“Energy shouldn’t need subsidy,” Trump responded.

Editor’s note: This story was updated on June 5, 2026 to include information from Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin

Wisconsin power plant could benefit from Trump’s $425 million coal push 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.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

A dozen Wisconsin state lawmakers are urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reject a utility coalition’s request to pause competition for major electrical transmission projects in the Midwest.

The lawmakers — eight Assembly Republicans and four Senate Republicans — argued in a letter to the commission that competition for electrical transmission is a net positive for ratepayers, who stand to benefit from lower costs and increased innovation. That outcome, lawmakers wrote, “is even more urgent today given the rising issue of customer affordability.”

The utilities requesting a pause dispute whether competition truly lowers final costs for customers, but that argument is secondary to their primary concern: Powering the Midwest’s data center boom will require vast electrical transmission upgrades, and major regional utilities argue that competition only slows down projects needed to bring data centers online before international competitors overtake the U.S. in the artificial intelligence race.

Among the utilities behind the request are Xcel Energy, owner of Northern States Power Company-Wisconsin, and American Transmission Company (ATC), Wisconsin’s largest electrical transmission operator. 

The state lawmakers cast the utilities’ request as the latest stage of a long-standing fight over transmission market competition — one that has unfolded in the Assembly over the last five years.

Data center boom intensifies transmission competition

Ratepayer advocacy groups successfully lobbied FERC, which oversees utilities nationwide, to introduce competitive bidding for regional transmission projects in 2011, arguing that the previous model — allowing local monopolies to build all projects planned within their territories — all but guaranteed inflated costs. 

The shift triggered a nationwide gold rush for transmission projects. Regulators pre-approve developers’ “return on equity,” or profit on each dollar invested, for transmission construction, so winning a project means picking up a reliable revenue stream. 

Dozens of developers have since bid on transmission projects planned by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the nonprofit that manages the wholesale electricity market for much of the Midwest. MISO has approved more than $32 billion in new transmission projects since 2022 — projects largely planned before the region’s data center boom reached full swing.

The rush to win projects has placed well-established local utilities like ATC in competition with powerful national utilities venturing outside of their traditional territory, international developers venturing into the U.S. market, and startups backed by private equity firms. 

As data center developers rapidly scale up Midwest operations, the pace of transmission upgrades could become a choke point.

In March, MISO reversed its decision to award substations in Fond du Lac, Ozaukee and Sheboygan counties to private-equity-backed startup Viridon, instead handing the projects to ATC. 

ATC’s initial bid was more expensive than Viridon’s, but the company successfully argued it alone could build the substations in time to serve the nearby Vantage data center campus in Port Washington. Viridon had not yet secured Public Service Commission permission to  operate in Wisconsin — a hurdle ATC does not face.

MISO initially aimed to complete the substations by 2033; the Port Washington data center plans to come online in early 2028. Though ATC emerged victorious, it told FERC that the 15-month delay between MISO’s initial approval of the substations and the reversal was “completely unnecessary.”

Utilities say competition slows projects needed for AI growth

In the utility coalition’s initial request to FERC, it cast competition-related delays as a national security threat. 

“These projects — expressways for power — are as critical to meeting today’s challenges as the Eisenhower interstate highway system was to prevailing in the Cold War,” the utilities argued in their initial filing. “China has devoted itself to overtaking America as the world’s AI leader and is just months behind.”

The utility coalition proposed two options: Allow MISO, along with the grid operator for parts of the Great Plains and Southwest, to exempt transmission projects from competitive bidding on a case-by-case basis or suspend competition entirely for the next five years — “when our country must begin building the infrastructure that will decide which nation wins the AI race,” the utilities wrote.

Ratepayer advocacy groups immediately pushed back. Paul Cicio, chair of the nationwide Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition, called the request “tone deaf.”

“Suspending competition for five years,” he wrote in a press release, “would expose consumers in these regions to unchecked cost escalation for years, guaranteeing higher utility bills.” 

In a protest filed with FERC in late May, Wisconsin’s Citizens Utility Board pointed to the Cardinal-Hickory Creek transmission line in southern Wisconsin as an example: The 102-mile project was not subject to competitive bidding, and construction costs came in roughly 40% over budget by the time ATC, Dairyland Power Cooperative and ITC Midwest completed the line in fall 2024. 

Opponents of the utilities’ request recognize that the data center boom complicates the playing field for transmission competition. 

“Timelines are looking different than the industry is used to,” said Caitlin Marquis, managing director of Advanced Energy United, a trade group representing an array of clean energy and energy efficiency industries. “Transmission competition has been facing curveballs and challenges since it was introduced,” she added. Many challenges result from lobbying by incumbent utilities, and data centers’ speedy construction cycles are only the latest addition.

Her organization opposes the utilities’ request, arguing that incumbent utilities have a long track record of delaying non-competitive transmission projects — and that regulators should streamline the bidding process rather than forego competition entirely. 

But utilities argue competitive bidding has yet to prove its worth. While MISO generally favors lower-cost bids, an ATC spokesperson wrote in an email to Wisconsin Watch, “evidence of a low bid is not evidence of cost savings.” 

Bid prices often do not match the final project cost, they added, and substantial overruns are common, even on projects with competitive bidding.

Federal fight echoes years of debate in Wisconsin

As regional grid operators introduced competitive bidding for transmission projects a decade ago, utilities turned to state legislatures for right-of-first-refusal, or ROFR, laws.

Those laws give local utilities first dibs on transmission projects within their territories, including those planned by regional grid operators like MISO. 

Michigan and Minnesota adopted such policies; Iowa’s Supreme Court struck down a ROFR law in 2023.

Utilities have backed similar proposals in Wisconsin each year since 2021, including a 2025 bill introduced by outgoing Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester.

Those proposals would have “insulat(ed) incumbents from market discipline” and left ratepayers holding the bag, the Wisconsin lawmakers argued to FERC. 

“Having failed repeatedly to persuade the Wisconsin Legislature,” they continued, “the same incumbent entities are now pursuing an end-run at FERC.”

ATC maintains that options before FERC would “not operate as a substitute” for a ROFR law, “even temporarily.”

The utilities don’t stand alone before FERC. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, a union representing the tradespeople who build and maintain transmission lines, also backs the request to pause competition.

Editor’s note: This story was updated June 4, 2026 to include comments from Caitlin Marquis, managing director of Advanced Energy United.

Wisconsin lawmakers oppose utility push to pause competition for power line projects 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.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Elvira Benitez Suarez stepped out of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) office in downtown Milwaukee on Monday to cheers from a crowd of supporters — her first time leaving the building without handcuffs.

The 51-year-old Sheboygan Falls woman left U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody last week on bond; her daughter picked her up outside the northern Kentucky detention facility where she had spent the previous two months. 

“I didn’t see daylight for 17 days, so I was very, very heartened and excited that I saw my family,” she said. 

The Monday morning check-in in Milwaukee was her first interaction with immigration authorities since returning to Wisconsin. She arrived with her family, attorney and two members of the Milwaukee Common Council in tow. 

Nearly a dozen other immigrants wove through the crowd to line up behind Benitez for their own check-ins; some picked up contact information from her attorney while they waited to enter the building. 

Benitez’s time in Kentucky was her second stint in ICE custody in the past year. Benitez, who emigrated from Mexico as a teenager and lived without legal status for over three decades, first landed in detention after a wrong turn on a family road trip took her across the Canadian border in July 2025. U.S. immigration authorities arrested her when she reentered the country. Benitez had no prior interactions with law enforcement or the federal immigration court system. 

In her absence, Benitez’s two adult daughters, both U.S.-born, took in their school-age siblings and helped manage their parents’ painting and cleaning business. 

A federal district court judge in Ohio ruled last fall that Benitez is eligible for a green card, citing — among other factors — the hardships her children experienced in her absence. After waiting a month for immigration authorities to complete her background check, Benitez returned to Wisconsin in December, only to be arrested again during a check-in at the Milwaukee DHS office in March while the agency appealed the judge’s ruling. 

“We checked in, everything went fine, and we were actually walking out the door when they stopped us,” recalled her attorney, Marc Christopher. 

After stops in Chicago and Indianapolis, Benitez landed in a cell at the Campbell County Detention Center, a northern Kentucky jail that contracts with ICE to hold immigrants facing deportation proceedings. Benitez recounted finding fellow Wisconsinites in her unit; nearly two dozen other immigrants detained in Wisconsin have passed through Campbell County within the last year.

But a recent decision by an Ohio-based federal appeals court opened a door for Benitez to again return to Wisconsin. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month that a year-old Trump administration policy requiring detention for most immigrants in deportation proceedings amounts to a violation of due process rights, joining federal appellate courts in New York and Georgia. Appellate courts in Louisiana and Missouri have sided with the Trump administration, and the appellate court based in Chicago remains divided on the issue.

The 6th Circuit holds jurisdiction over Kentucky, and its ruling allowed Benitez to file a bond motion in immigration court — an option once available to most immigrant detainees that largely vanished after the Trump administration introduced its mandatory detention policy last year. An immigration court judge in Memphis granted her bond motion on May 21, setting her bond amount at the minimum allowed under court rules: $1,500.

As a condition of her bond, Benitez will continue checking in at the Milwaukee DHS office.

Benitez’s Monday morning check-in was brief and straightforward. Like other immigrants granted bond, she was directed by immigration officers to download a tracking app that will prompt her to take a photograph of her face once a week to compare against booking photos.

DHS is still appealing last year’s ruling that set Benitez on track to secure legal permanent residency. That appeal, currently in the hands of the federal Board of Immigration Appeals, is still pending. 

“I would never put anything past the Board of Immigration Appeals,” Christopher said during a press conference on Monday, alluding to the board’s recent tendency to side with the Trump administration on immigration court rule changes. Nevertheless, Christopher added that he believes Benitez’s case is strong enough to defy the odds.

Benitez herself is still recovering. “I can’t sleep,” she said, recounting the grim details of her latest stint in custody — fellow detainees whose pregnancies ended in miscarriages, late-night bus trips with erratic drivers and no seat belts, and harassment from nonimmigrant inmates with whom she shared a cell in Kentucky. Benitez noted that she is in contact with the families of several fellow detainees who remain in Kentucky.

Her eldest daughter, Crystal Aguilar, also needs time to bounce back. In her mother’s absence, “my life was on hold,” she said. A return to normality still seems far away, she added.

Freed on bond, Sheboygan Falls woman returns to Milwaukee immigration office amid legal limbo 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.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Track Wisconsin’s prison population 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.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Wisconsin’s women’s prisons are 78% over capacity compared to its men’s facilities, which are 30% over capacity. 
• The issue isn’t new, but despite decades of overcrowding, the system is approaching a record number of prisoners. 
• Wisconsin Watch created a tracker that shows how the population of each prison has changed over time and how far it is above that facility’s design capacity.

As Wisconsin’s prison population nears a record high, the state’s already-full prisons are getting even more crowded — especially for women. The state’s three women’s prisons collectively house 18 women for every 10 they were designed for, making them the most crowded of all state facilities.

One reason: While growth in the women’s prison population has far outpaced growth in the men’s system, Wisconsin prison officials shrank the facilities that housed them — to make more space for men.

Now, to make room for women, prison officials have set up beds in gyms and offices.

“They just cram us in wherever they can, it’s sad,” wrote Sarah Buckingham, who is currently incarcerated at Robert E. Ellsworth Correctional Center, a minimum-security facility in Racine County that now houses more than twice as many people as it was designed for.

Across the system, the rising number of prisoners and a shortage of staff have strained resources. Prisoners often wait months or years for limited spots in treatment, education and work programs, the very programs designed to prepare them for release. That, advocates say, could mean people wait longer to get out, or even end up returning to prison — making facilities even more crowded.

A new data tool from Wisconsin Watch allows anyone to track the population of the system and of each facility for free. The dashboard, which shows weekly population and capacity counts going back to 2006, updates automatically when prison officials post the latest figures. 

The data makes it clear: Overcrowding is not new. Wisconsin’s prisons have held thousands more people than intended for at least the last 20 years. The population dipped during the COVID-19 pandemic but is now heading toward an all-time high. More than 23,600 people are in state custody, according to the latest figures available from the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. That’s about 200 shy of the record 23,826 set in 2019.

The dashboard can’t show how the trends could soon change. In April, Gov. Tony Evers announced the state would soon commute prison sentences for the first time in 25 years, though it’s not yet clear how many people may be eligible or how long the process will take.

Women’s prisons are the most crowded

Female prisoners bear the brunt of the state’s overcrowding predicament. While the state’s male facilities are about 30% over capacity in total, its female facilities are 78% over capacity. That’s according to the department’s latest data, which shows population and capacity as of May 22. 

Taycheedah Correctional Institution, the state’s only maximum-security women’s prison, is designed to house 653. On May 22, it housed 1,039. 

Prison officials have raised alarms about conditions at Taycheedah for at least a decade. 

“The increased population at TCI has detrimental effects on the prison,” they wrote in a 2016 budget request, when the population was 873. Crowded conditions could cause security problems, they wrote, as each correctional officer must supervise more prisoners. They also noted the steep competition for access to programs for treatment or training. 

“There is also decreased programming availability to inmates, and programming has been shown to help reduce recidivism,” the authors wrote.

Since then, the facility has added nearly 170 women. 

“(Taycheedah) has already undergone conversions to turn spaces into living areas that were not originally meant to be used as living areas due to a problem with overcrowding,” said Daniel Cromwell, an administrator for the state’s corrections department, in an April court filing.

Wisconsin Watch heard from six currently incarcerated women who watched the women’s prison population balloon. They described sharing already overcrowded bathrooms with more women and competing for treatment and employment resources. 

Department of Corrections spokesperson Beth Hardtke confirmed that beds have previously been set up in the gym at Taycheedah but said no one is living in the gym now. Taycheedah staff are currently converting a “former property room” into a dormitory to house 20 women, Hardtke said.

The issue isn’t isolated to Taycheedah. The Milwaukee Women’s Center is at 255% capacity. Robert E. Ellsworth Correctional is now at 219% of its capacity.

Fifteen years ago, the state’s women’s prisons had nearly enough space, not just because there were fewer prisoners, but because there was a fourth women’s minimum-security prison. John C. Burke Correctional Center in Waupun, designed for 186 prisoners, housed women from 2000 to 2011, when it was converted into a men’s minimum-security prison. 

The move dropped the capacity of the women’s system — just as the number of female prisoners spiked. In the 15 years since, the women’s prison population has grown nearly 29%, more than four times as fast as the men’s population.  

Now, state officials are making plans to turn Burke back into a women’s prison, part of a $500 million prison reorganization Gov. Tony Evers proposed last year.

Overcrowding limits education, training 

Overcrowding doesn’t just mean getting an extra roommate or waiting longer for a shower. It also means prisons need extra staff — staff they often struggle to find. In 2023, prison officials locked down Waupun — canceling programs and confining prisoners to their cells for the better part of several months — because they didn’t have enough officers to conduct normal operations, Wisconsin Watch reporting revealed.

While the staffing shortage has eased since, the system is still short about 620 full-time correctional officers and sergeants, the latest DOC figures show. 

Those shortages can mean prison programs get cut or canceled, said Shannon Ross, founder and executive director of the Milwaukee-based nonprofit The Community, which helps incarcerated people pursue education and develop as leaders.

“If you have too many people to watch per staff member, now, ‘Oh, we can’t have classes tonight because we need to have more people over here watching more people that are incarcerated,’” Ross said. 

Ross, who earned a bachelor’s degree while serving a 17-year sentence in Wisconsin prisons, said when prisons are packed and money is tight, prison officials scale back vocational training and higher education to focus on the basics: food, housing, security, court-ordered programming and services prisons are legally required to provide.

“Anything beyond that is going to become superfluous,” he said. That’s a problem, he said, because more than 90% of Wisconsin’s prisoners will one day be released. “Who do we want them to be?”

How we got here

Wisconsin isn’t the only state struggling to find room for all its prisoners. Across the country, prison populations spiked in the 1980s and 1990s as states adopted harsher punishments and “truth-in-sentencing” legislation. The latter requires most prisoners to spend their full sentence behind bars, without the possibility of parole. 

Suddenly the flow of people out of prison slowed, while as many as ever flowed in. Lots also flowed back, returning to prison for allegedly violating the terms of their release.

In Wisconsin, the prison population peaked in August 2019 at 23,826, then dropped sharply beginning in March 2020 as courts shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In just over a year, the number of people in prison fell by nearly 20% to 19,381, the lowest figure in the last two decades. 

As the state’s courts reopened, they began working through a backlog of cases — and sending more people to prison. In a 2023 report, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau said that if the prison population continued growing as fast as it was, it would set a record of 24,800 by July 2025. 

The authors predicted that wouldn’t happen, and they were right. 

“While recent growth patterns have been sizable, it is likely that the updated growth rate is too high to continue for the duration of the 2023-25 biennium, and that the recent rapid growth is likely temporary,” the authors wrote, noting that “at some point, the courts will catch up and prison populations will level out and grow at a slower rate.”

Still, the numbers have kept rising, and the growth has gotten faster, not slower. In the last year, that growth has been fueled entirely by a surge in women prisoners: While the male population fell slightly between May 2025 and May 2026, the female population rose by more than 4%.

What’s the solution?

Policymakers and prisoner advocates disagree about the answer to Wisconsin’s crowded prisons. 

In the major revamp he proposed last year, Gov. Evers called for, among other things:

• Closing the nearly 130-year-old Green Bay Correctional Institution.
• Transforming Waupun Correctional Institution into a “vocational village.” 
• Converting the troubled Lincoln Hills School from a juvenile prison to an adult prison.
• Converting Burke into a women’s prison.
• Expanding a program that allows some people incarcerated for nonviolent crimes to qualify for early release by completing treatment for substance use. 

Together the changes would reduce the state’s prison capacity by 700. The plan drew criticism from Republican lawmakers, who pointed to the state’s crowded prisons as a sign that the state needs more space in its prisons, not less.

State Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, said the answer is “right-sizing” the number of prisoners by “adding additional beds, reducing overcrowding and making facilities safer for not only our inmates, but for our staff,” Wisconsin Public Radio reported. 

In October, the State of Wisconsin Building Commission released $15 million to plan for Evers’ proposed changes. 

Ross of The Community calls that proposal a “marginal improvement.”

“It’s not getting us the level of change that everybody would need to see and want to see … You’ve got to get past marginal improvements at some point to really have something different,” Ross said. “Otherwise, it’s just a different version of the exact same problem every year we’re facing.”

One way to do that, he said, is to repeal truth-in-sentencing laws to reduce the number of people behind bars.

“Stop having a system in which people cannot get back out if they’re ready,” Ross said.

That, like other major prison changes, would require legislative action. But lawmakers in the Republican majority have stymied reform for years, Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback said. 

“Gov. Evers has repeatedly worked to comprehensively reform our state’s justice system and corrections statutes to save taxpayers and reduce overcrowding, invest in evidence-based alternatives to incarceration, and improve public safety in our communities while reducing the likelihood that someone may reoffend once they have completed their sentence,” Cudaback said in an email. 

But Evers can’t make those changes unilaterally, Cudaback said, and lawmakers in the Republican majority have “refused nearly every effort to address these challenges over the last nearly eight years.”

In April, with nine months left in office, Evers announced he would use one of the few tools available for single-handedly easing overcrowding: commutations. It’s the first time in 25 years that incarcerated people in Wisconsin can request to have their sentence shortened. 

Advocates across the state are still trying to determine how many of Wisconsin’s nearly 24,000 prisoners may be eligible, and they’re working to help as many eligible people as possible apply. 

The first meeting of the Commutation Advisory Board will take place in June, and the first commutations will be issued some time after that. With Gov. Evers leaving office in January, it will be up to the next governor to decide whether the process continues.

Wisconsin Watch reporter Addie Costello contributed to this report.

Wisconsin’s prison population is heading toward a record high. Track the trend here. 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.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Milwaukee’s homelessness crisis is growing more visible, but advocates say there are still signs of progress. 

A few years ago, Milwaukee leaders said the city was on track to end family homelessness. Since then, the number of people who are homeless has grown. Organizations on the front lines and others working on the issue still say Milwaukee has quietly become an example of how coordinated prevention efforts can work during a larger national crisis. 

“When we talk about ending family homelessness, it doesn’t mean no family will ever experience homelessness,” said Krystina Kohler, impact manager at United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County. “It means we’ve built a system that can respond quickly, prevent homelessness when possible, and rapidly connect families back to stable housing.”

Rising homelessness

Data collected through the Milwaukee Coalition on Housing and Homelessness shows more people are entering Milwaukee’s homeless service programs than exit it.

The 765 people who entered homeless service programs in 2025  had been without stable housing for an average of 88 days; 77% were homeless for the first time.

Ten percent became homeless again within a year.

According to David Nelson, chair of the Milwaukee Coalition on Housing and Homelessness, the totals include people living in shelters and those sleeping in cars, abandoned buildings or other places not meant for habitation. 

“On any given day, we have 750 shelter beds in our city,” Nelson said. “Beginning in November through the end of March, we have an additional approximate 250 shelter beds, which (are) our winter warming rooms.”

Even with the extra capacity, he said beds are almost always full. 

Nelson said official homelessness figures fail to capture the full scope of housing instability because many people who temporarily stay with friends or relatives are not counted until those arrangements end.

“What we don’t count (are) people who are doubling up,” he explained. “If you let me stay on your couch through the winter, it’s not counted as homelessness. But the minute you say, ‘You gotta go,’ suddenly I become homeless.”

Sister MacCanon Brown is president and CEO of MacCanon Brown Homeless Sanctuary. She said her organization’s welcome center at 2461 W. Center St., which distributes clothing, food and household necessities and offers showers to people in need, saw 4,600 people in 2025.

Why homelessness is increasing

Most people leaving homeless service programs have no documented housing destination, making it difficult to know whether they are securing stable housing or eventually returning to homelessness, Nelson said. The percentage of people transitioning into permanent or temporary housing remains mostly unchanged.

Nelson said the end of pandemic-era federal housing assistance contributed to the rise in homelessness.

“During the Biden-Harris administration, we were sheltering people in hotels, and that was paid for by the federal government,” he said. “That funding is no longer there, and so you can see this gradual increase and then the spike in the number of people having to go back to homelessness.”

Other economic pressures are pushing more residents toward instability, especially low-income renters already struggling with rising housing costs.

“The people who are most squeezed are the people who are most vulnerable,” Nelson said. “Those at the lower ends of the economic spectrum are sometimes paying 50% and 60% of their income just to keep an apartment.”

People over 65 are now the fastest-growing age group entering Milwaukee’s homeless services system.

“It’s the fastest growing population in the country,” Nelson said. “If they go on Social Security, they are suddenly on a fixed income. The numbers don’t meet.”

Kohler said senior homelessness is becoming a major concern for local providers.

“Older adults experiencing homelessness for the first time in their lives is something that should never happen in our community,” she said. “They’re often widowed, on fixed incomes and one emergency away from losing housing.”

NNS has reported on housing crises among younger adults and families and seniors recently. 

Kohler said she hopes homelessness initiatives expand beyond families to include seniors, single adults and people exiting facilities.

Nelson added that eviction records can trap people in long-term instability.

“The eviction stays on their record for a long time,” Nelson said. “Landlords can use CCAP and see there was a legal proceeding against them. Suddenly they’re charged first, last and middle month’s rent.”

Brown said that many of the housing unstable people she sees were renters. 

“The lack of landlord regulation, the evictions and the prices have a lot to do with increased homelessness,” she said. “Some type of landlord regulation is crucial in keeping people housed.”

There have been assumptions by some that homelessness may be tied to migration from outside the city. But nearly everyone enrolled in Milwaukee’s homeless services programs during 2024 and 2025 was from Milwaukee County, according to local data.

Prevention efforts have worked

Kohler said Milwaukee’s prevention efforts increasingly focus on helping families before they lose housing entirely.

“We’re trying to get ahead of the trauma of homelessness,” she said. “Sometimes a family just needs help with a car repair, utility bill or mediation with a landlord before a housing crisis begins.”

She pointed to partnerships with schools and even animal welfare organizations as part of Milwaukee’s early intervention strategy.

“If a family is surrendering a pet because of housing instability, we can now connect them to services immediately,” Kohler said. “That’s a unique approach here.”

Though homelessness overall has risen, Kohler said Milwaukee has seen family homelessness remain relatively stable, or even decline, compared with many similar cities nationwide.

“Nationwide, family homelessness has increased dramatically, but Milwaukee is one of the only peer cities that has stayed relatively flat or even slightly decreased,” she said. “That’s because of intentional investments in prevention services and rapid rehousing.”

Working together to address homelessness

Organizations across the city continue working together through the Milwaukee Coalition on Housing and Homelessness, which includes nonprofits, universities, faith organizations, outreach teams and local government agencies coordinating resources and services.

“We have a really rich and robust system in our city,” Nelson said. “Homelessness is not a choice. It’s not something people choose to be in.”

Kohler said Milwaukee’s coordinated response system has become a model for other communities.

“Right now, there are no families on the literal homelessness list searching for shelter,” she said. “If a family is identified as needing emergency shelter, they should have immediate access to beds.”

She said Milwaukee’s collaborative approach deserves more recognition.

“The providers here are doing amazing work,” Kohler said. “Other communities are reaching out to Milwaukee to model what we’re doing.”

Kohler said Milwaukee’s response shows progress is possible even during a growing national housing crisis.

“Milwaukee is actually an example of success inside a larger crisis,” she said. “There’s still tremendous need, but we’ve shown that prevention and rapid response can work.”

She encouraged residents facing housing instability to seek help early by calling 211 and connecting with local support services before a crisis escalates.

“Keep calling and keep advocating for yourself,” Kohler said. “Sometimes resources open up quickly, and that early connection can prevent homelessness entirely.”

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

Milwaukee homelessness rises despite some prevention successes 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.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Los Angeles International Airport customs officers took Everlee Wihongi aside for questioning in April. Her family hasn’t seen her since.

Wihongi, a longtime resident of Hortonville, Wisconsin, was passing through Los Angeles during a return trip from her native New Zealand. The 37-year-old green card holder had made the same trip at least a half-dozen times, even after pleading no contest to a felony marijuana possession charge in Fond du Lac County in her mid-20s. 

But with the White House’s nationwide immigration enforcement crackdown in full swing, customs officers took a new approach to the felony on her record. After a few uneasy hours in a secluded screening room, Wihongi left the airport in shackles en route to an immigration detention center in a desert valley northeast of Los Angeles.

Wihongi is one of hundreds of legal permanent residents federal immigration authorities have detained since President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025, often while they passed through airports and other ports of entry. Most — like Wihongi — had prior criminal convictions.

Those convictions generally make immigrants “inadmissible,” meaning they cannot freely re-enter the U.S.

Customs officers have “a lot of discretion at the port of entry” when deciding whether to allow green card holders with convictions like Wihongi’s to re-enter the country, Madison-based immigration attorney Aissa Olivarez said. “They have given none lately.”

“Possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right,” a U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson wrote in an email to Wisconsin Watch. “Our government has the authority to revoke a green card if our laws are broken and abused,” the spokesperson added, and to detain legal permanent residents while they await a decision in their removal case. 

The sharp increase in arrests of green card holders doesn’t stem from a policy change, but immigration attorneys say cases like Wihongi’s are yet another sign that federal immigration authorities are reshuffling their priorities.

Old conviction is grounds for detention

Wihongi has held a green card since childhood, when her father’s career as a locomotive engineer brought the family to northeast Wisconsin. “As the years went by, it was just cheaper to renew (her) green card,” her mother, Betty Wihongi, recalled.

Her 2014 conviction was not grounds for deportation, said Marc Christopher, a Milwaukee immigration attorney representing Wihongi. “She can remain here and become a U.S. citizen,” he said, “but once she crosses the border, she’s governed by the rules of admissibility.”

But family vacations to New Zealand passed without incident over the decade following Wihongi’s conviction. “Normally, they will just look at, look at your passport, look at your green card, you know, ask you, where you’ve been?” her mother said. “And usually it’s like two, three minutes, not even that.” 

“I just don’t think they made an issue of it” in the past, Christopher added. “They weren’t going to detain her for two to three months,” he said, in part because detaining and prosecuting a green card holder is an expensive undertaking. As of May 2025, DHS reported that the average cost to arrest, detain and deport an immigrant was roughly $17,000, though costs vary widely from case to case.

DHS detention records point to a sudden shift in practice after the Trump administration resumed control of immigration enforcement operations last year. Immigration authorities detained an average of at least 100 legal permanent residents each month between January 2025 and February 2026 — five times the monthly average in the final two years of the Biden administration, the only portion of his term for which data is available. 

At least 75% of legal permanent residents detained during the latter half of the Biden administration had prior criminal convictions, compared with at least 66% of those detained since Trump returned to office. 

Only a tiny fraction of detainees’ records from either period list marijuana possession as their most serious criminal charge, though immigration enforcement officers arrested more legal permanent residents with prior marijuana possession convictions in the first year of the Trump administration than in the previous two years combined. 

Wihongi is the second Wisconsin green card holder in ICE custody to join Christopher’s caseload since January 2025. His previous client, also blocked from re-entering the country because of a prior marijuana possession conviction, spent five months in detention before Christopher secured his release. 

Olivarez, the Madison-based immigration attorney, offered another recent example from her own caseload: a legal permanent resident and longtime Milwaukeean detained while returning from his wife’s funeral in Egypt because of a prior felony. That client eventually accepted a deportation order to avoid a lengthy stint in custody.

A stricter standard

The growing cohort of green card holders in ICE custody is still vastly outnumbered by the tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants detained alongside them. 

Federal immigration authorities have arrested more than 400,000 people since January 2025, including roughly 1,700 in Wisconsin. 

Just over half of all immigrants arrested by ICE in Wisconsin during the second Trump administration had prior criminal convictions, as was the case in the latter years of the Biden administration. But the criminal histories of more recent arrestees suggest that the stricter standards that landed Wihongi in custody are reshaping other corners of the immigration enforcement apparatus.

ICE officers in Wisconsin arrested 82 immigrants with prior traffic offense convictions in the first full year after Trump returned to office, up from 19 in the last full year of the Biden administration.

In years past, Christopher said, federal immigration authorities were less inclined to begin removal proceedings solely based on traffic offenses like driving without a license, instead prioritizing immigrants convicted of more serious offenses. 

Immigrants who come into contact with Wisconsin courts after a traffic offense now face a far higher risk of landing in federal custody, Christopher added. 

He attributes the shift in part to dramatic additions to DHS’ budget in the past year and a half. Those funding boosts, including a $170 billion increase last year, lowered the financial barriers that previously made federal immigration prosecutors wary of spending resources on immigrants with lower-priority criminal histories, Christopher argued. 

The U.S. Senate is currently considering an additional $72 billion in new funding for DHS.

Transferred without warning 

Wihongi was the only legal permanent resident in the 46-person cell in Adelanto, California, where she spent her first month in detention, her mother told Wisconsin Watch.

Her visa doesn’t spare her from the unpredictability of the federal immigration detention system. When money disappeared without notice from her commissary account on a Friday in early May, Wihongi called her mother in a panic. “Inmates all know that if that happens to your commissary,” her mother explained, “that means they’re getting ready to transfer you.” 

She resurfaced that Sunday in a detention camp outside El Paso, Texas, reaching her family by phone that evening to recount two mostly sleepless days of travel, including hours spent in shackles. 

Wihongi has since transferred again to a federal contract facility in Eloy, Arizona. An internet outage Thursday pushed her first scheduled court appearance back a week. Meanwhile, Christopher has filed a motion in Fond du Lac County to vacate her 2014 conviction.

Decade-old marijuana conviction prompts ICE detention of Wisconsin green card holder after family trip 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.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Update, May 21, 2026:

An immigration court judge in Tennessee granted a $1,500 bond for Elvira Benitez Suarez on Thursday morning. Benitez will remain in custody at the Campbell County Detention Center during the 30-day window in which the U.S. Department of Homeland Security attorneys can file an appeal.

Thursday’s bond hearing came just over a week after the Ohio-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Trump administration’s year-old policy requiring mandatory detention for most immigrants facing removal. Benitez’s attorney, Milwaukee-based Marc Christopher, told Wisconsin Watch that the short turnaround reflected agreement among Benitez’s legal team, a federal district court judge and DHS itself that her case merited speedy consideration.

Original story, May 12, 2026:

A Sheboygan Falls woman is poised to test a new federal ruling reopening the door for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees to seek release on bond. 

An Ohio-based federal appeals court ruled Monday against the Trump administration policy requiring mandatory detention for most ICE detainees, the latest blow to a rule adopted last summer amid an escalating nationwide immigration enforcement crackdown.  

Detainees “should have a forum to explain that their backgrounds and connections to their communities justify release on bond while they undergo their removal proceedings,” 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Eric Clay wrote in the panel’s majority decision. Denying bond hearings, he added, amounts to a violation of their due process rights. 

The court’s ruling sent Wisconsin immigration attorneys scrambling to file bond motions for their clients detained in Ohio, Michigan and Kentucky — all under the 6th Circuit. Among those now able to seek bond: Elvira Benitez Suarez, currently detained at the Campbell County Detention Center in northern Kentucky.

Benitez, 51, has now spent two stints in ICE detention, as Wisconsin Watch has reported. 

She fled an abusive household in Mexico at 15, crossing the border with a younger sibling and settling in the Midwest. Though she remained undocumented for decades, she had no run-ins with law enforcement or immigration authorities until a GPS error on a family road trip through Michigan in July 2025 led her across the Canadian border.

The incident landed her in an Ohio immigration detention facility for six months. In her absence, her two adult daughters — both U.S. citizens — took in their school-age siblings.

A major shift in federal immigration court policy last year left Benitez unable to post bond.

Since 1996, federal law has required immigration authorities to detain — without bond — anyone found crossing the U.S. border without authorization. Prior administrations applied that rule relatively narrowly, meaning immigrants arrested in the interior of the U.S. could often seek a bond hearing in immigration court.

The Trump administration cast that precedent aside in July 2025, when ICE Director Todd Lyons issued a new interpretation subjecting anyone in deportation proceedings to mandatory detention without the possibility of bond. The Board of Immigration Appeals, a panel of judges who set the rules for the federal immigration court system, signed off on the interpretation in September. 

The board has more frequently sided with the Department of Homeland Security than immigrants facing deportation for at least a decade, but the distribution of decisions is more lopsided than ever: The body has favored DHS’s position in more than 90% of decisions issued since President Trump returned to office last year, a recent NPR analysis found.

The rule change triggered an ongoing legal battle over the validity of the Trump administration’s interpretation; more than 400 federal district court judges have ruled against the White House’s position, while roughly 50 have backed the new policy. Judges in Wisconsin’s Western District Court have uniformly ruled against the mandatory detention rule, while those in Wisconsin’s Eastern District are divided.

Federal appellate courts are also split: Aside from the 6th Circuit’s Monday decision, the New York-based 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and the Georgia-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled against the mandatory detention policy, whereas the Louisiana-based 5th Circuit and the Missouri-based 8th Circuit have sided with the Trump administration. 

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Illinois and with jurisdiction over Wisconsin, remains divided.

With bond off the table, thousands of immigrants in ICE custody have turned to a backup option: habeas corpus petitions, filed in federal district courts — administered separately from the federal immigration court system — to challenge their detention.

Federal district courts have received tens of thousands of habeas petitions in the past year, including more than 70 in Wisconsin’s Western and Eastern District Courts combined. 

When a federal district court approves a habeas petition, the court generally orders an immigration court judge to hold a bond hearing.

Benitez’s first habeas petition produced a more unusual victory: Judge Richard Drucker of the Cleveland immigration court, citing the emotional toll on her younger children, canceled her deportation and set her on the path to legal residency, though a delayed background check added more than a month to Benitez’s initial stay in a detention facility.

Released in late December, Benitez reunited with her family in Wisconsin while DHS appealed Drucker’s order. She continued attending mandatory check-ins at the agency’s field office in downtown Milwaukee, where ICE agents re-arrested her on March 10. After a stop at an ICE detention facility outside Chicago, the agency transferred Benitez to Campbell County, where nearly two dozen immigrants detained in Wisconsin have spent time within the last year.

Marc Christopher, a Milwaukee immigration attorney who represented Benitez during her first detention, told Wisconsin Watch in March that no statute required DHS to detain her while awaiting the outcome of its appeal. Her arrest, Christopher wrote, served “no legitimate public safety purpose.”

“It separates a mother from her vulnerable U.S. citizen children despite a federal immigration judge already recognizing the extreme hardship her removal would cause them,” he added.

Following the March arrest, an ICE spokesperson told Wisconsin Watch that “being in detention is a choice,” arguing that Benitez could leave custody by agreeing to self-deport.

Benitez’s new Ohio-based attorney filed a habeas petition on her behalf with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky in March. Judge Chad Meredith, a Trump appointee, joined the court’s bench last fall. He has received more than 80 habeas cases involving immigrants in ICE custody since his confirmation, most of which are still active; he has yet to side with an immigrant detainee, but he has denied a half-dozen habeas petitions outright. 

The 6th Circuit’s latest ruling could give Benitez a shorter route out of custody. Christopher filed a bond motion for Benitez “the minute (the ruling) came out,” he told Wisconsin Watch. “Given the unusual circumstances of her case,” Christopher added, he plans to ask Meredith to order a bond hearing on a short turnaround, rather than waiting more than a week. DHS can appeal bond decisions.

Christopher isn’t alone in his haste. Aissa Olivarez, an attorney with the Madison-based Community Immigration Law Center, filed a bond motion for another client held at the Campbell County Detention Center just after the news broke — a first since the Board of Immigration Appeals approved the mandatory detention rule last September. 

“We are now working to identify other people who have reached out in the past,” she added, “to see who might be eligible for bond now.”

Olivarez and other immigration attorneys are still awaiting a decision from the 7th Circuit; the U.S. Department of Justice filed a motion requesting expedited oral argument  on Monday. 

The issue may reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

“It’s up to the justices whether they want to take the case,” Christopher said, “but traditionally on cases involving immigration, cases where there’s been a clear circuit split, and where it affects literally tens of thousands of people, I think it’s going to be near the top of the issues they want to resolve.”

Sheboygan Falls mother granted bond in challenge to ICE detention rule 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.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Wisconsin regulators on Thursday approved a one-off contract between Alliant Energy and the Meta subsidiary building a data center campus in Beaver Dam, but with a major caveat: Alliant must return with a standardized plan to power future data centers — and shield other customers from resulting costs.

The agreement bears little resemblance to the model We Energies proposed for its hyperscale data center customers in Mount Pleasant and Port Washington. That model covers all future We Energies data center customers and was approved last month with major modifications by the three-member Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC).

Both the PSC and ratepayer advocates expressed reservations about allowing Alliant to proceed without a standardized payment structure for data center customers. Negotiating contracts one-by-one, Commission Chair Summer Strand argued, would undermine the public’s interest in transparency and consistency.

Strand and fellow commissioners Kristy Nieto and Marcus Hawkins approved a modified version of the agreement, acknowledging that the Beaver Dam campus will open in 2027 with or without a tailored contract with Alliant. Sending the utility back to the drawing board for another year, they reasoned, could expose other customers to greater financial risk. The commissioners directed Alliant to propose a standardized payment structure for large data center customers similar to the We Energies arrangement approved last month.

Wisconsin Power and Light, an Alliant subsidiary, filed its case with the PSC last spring, months before Meta joined state and local officials in announcig its Beaver Dam data center campus.

The Beaver Dam facility, the first of its kind in Alliant’s Wisconsin service territory, is smaller than the soon-to-open Microsoft and Vantage data centers. Meta projects the facility will use 220 megawatts at peak, less than half the projected use of the Mount Pleasant and Port Washington campuses. But even that comparatively modest demand would be six to eight times the current peak for all of Beaver Dam.

In testimony to the PSC in November, Rebecca Valcq, Alliant’s assistant vice president for regulatory affairs and data center services, said the Beaver Dam campus would benefit other customers by “making more efficient use of existing infrastructure” and “spreading fixed costs” across a larger base. She also urged commissioners to consider the data center’s projected $2.1 million in annual local, state and federal tax revenue, among other economic benefits.

Alliant is a founding member of the Wisconsin Data Center Coalition, which promotes the state as a destination for data center developers.

Unlike We Energies, Alliant says it does not expect to immediately build new power plants to serve the Beaver Dam campus. Instead, Meta would purchase electricity from the same generators as the rest of Alliant’s customers. Hawkins noted on Thursday that even if the new data center doesn’t immediately require new generators, it might change the retirement timelines for Alliant’s existing power plants.

Contract negotiated in secret

The utility negotiated its contract with Meta behind closed doors. When it approached the PSC, it asked for approval without changes and requested extensive redactions, hiding many contract terms from the public. Alliant argued that the contract’s specific terms, and the surrounding secrecy, were needed to “attract and accommodate” Meta — and to compete with other states or utility territories courting data center development.

The redactions spurred pushback from ratepayer advocates and the PSC itself, which made more details of the contract available as the case progressed. In Thursday’s hearing, Strand drew parallels with the nondisclosure agreements some data center developers seek from local governments in Wisconsin, including Meta in Beaver Dam, which Wisconsin Watch first reported on in January.

“For some of these new private sector, big tech data center customers that are used to operating confidentially, coming into our state or coming into this process might be a shock to the system,” Strand said. “There is still this black-box approach that includes nondisclosure agreements, heavily redacted filings, corporate pseudonyms and negotiations shrouded in secrecy… This lack of transparency is hurting, not helping.”

The nonprofit law center Midwest Environmental Advocates in December sued the PSC to obtain unredacted documents from the Alliant case. That lawsuit is ongoing.

PSC adds protections, warns of gaps

Alliant proposed some protections for itself and non-data center customers. It set a floor for Alliant’s revenues from Meta, protecting the utility in a scenario in which the data center uses less electricity than initially anticipated.

That minimum covers the cost of building transmission lines to serve the data center. The American Transmission Company, the largest transmission operator in Wisconsin, is currently building a $200 million line to plug in the Beaver Dam campus.

Alliant also proposed requiring Meta to reimburse the utility for the costs of transmission infrastructure if the tech giant backs out of the Beaver Dam project before the new line is complete — and requiring Meta to put up collateral in case its credit rating falls.

The PSC agreed with those terms and added further protections, including requiring Alliant to regularly report on the costs of serving the Beaver Dam campus and leaving the door open for the commission to adjust the cost-sharing to shield other customers from unanticipated expenses.

Commissioners identified some ratepayer protections beyond what it has authority to require. The transmission buildout needed to serve data centers is largely outside of PSC jurisdiction. Much of that authority instead rests with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which oversees transmission utilities nationwide, and the Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator (MISO), a nonprofit that manages much of the Midwest’s electrical grid.

MISO awarded the transmission line project that will serve the Beaver Dam data center to ATC, which spreads construction costs across all its Wisconsin customers, most of whom are outside Alliant’s territory. While Alliant’s new contract requires Meta to pay a minimum transmission fee to shield other Alliant customers from unexpected costs, those protections don’t extend to customers of other utilities using ATC’s transmission lines.

Alliant’s customers will also pick up “tens of millions of dollars” in transmission costs tied to data centers in other Wisconsin electrical utility territories, Hawkins said. “Whether or not that is appropriate — or something that we are being open-eyed about — is a concern of mine,” he added.

Commissioners on Thursday urged Alliant to begin discussions with ATC on a fairer method for distributing costs — one of the few options within commission authority.

The commission directed Alliant to produce a standardized plan before making agreements with new data center customers.

The PSC is aware that more data centers could come to Alliant’s turf.

“Evidence indicates there are 12 other potential data centers in this utility’s territory that are potentially in the works,” Nieto said. Given that future, she added, Alliant must “establish clear rates, terms and protections and provide transparency, regulatory clarity and public accountability as required when serving loads capable of reshaping a utility’s entire system.”

Ratepayer groups say PSC sent clear message

Ratepayer advocates welcomed Thursday’s decision while emphasizing the importance of the directive to outline a standardized payment structure for future data centers.

“While the PSC approved Alliant’s contract, with modifications, for Meta’s Beaver Dam data
center, the Commissioners recognized that continued one-off, bilateral contract
negotiations are not sufficiently protective of Wisconsin families and small businesses,” Brett Korte, a staff attorney with Clean Wisconsin, said in a press release.

“Today’s PSC decision requiring Alliant to develop a tariff for future data centers will result in a consistent, transparent framework that helps protect the public interest.”

Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board Executive Director Tom Content echoed commissioners’ hopes that Alliant and other electrical utilities will reach an agreement with ATC to protect non-data center customers from transmission-related cost shifts.

“We’re calling on ATC to protect customers across Wisconsin and Michigan to make sure people who aren’t even (customers of) these utilities aren’t on the hook,” he told Wisconsin Watch.

Alliant raised no immediate objections to the PSC’s changes.

“Protecting our customers while allowing communities to grow is central to our commitment at Alliant Energy, and that’s exactly what this contract is designed to do,” a spokesperson wrote in a statement on Thursday afternoon. “It maintains reliability, supports meaningful local economic benefits, and delivers benefits that help keep rates stable for all customers.”

In a quarterly earnings call last week, the company announced plans for a 370-megawatt electric service agreement with a data center customer in Iowa. Unlike Wisconsin’s PSC, Iowa’s utility regulator has been more open to one-off contracts between utilities and data centers.

By removing that option for Alliant’s future arrangements with data center customers, Content said, the PSC’s latest ruling could set a new standard for other utilities in the state.

“They’re sending a message,” he added. “None of this individual contract stuff.”

PSC approves Alliant-Meta data center power deal while criticizing ‘black box’ approach 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.

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Large data centers served by We Energies will pick up the entire tab for new power plants, solar farms and other generators needed to power the massive structures in eastern Wisconsin. 

But the full picture of a payment structure the Wisconsin Public Service Commission unanimously approved Friday is more complex. 

The new agreement, among the first of its kind in the Midwest,“has the potential to fundamentally reshape the utility system,” Commissioner Kristy Nieto said. It will set a  precedent for how the utility will divide the costs and benefits of the vast generation buildout needed to support new data centers, including campuses set to open in Port Washington and Mount Pleasant.

The payment structure diverged from We Energies’ initial proposal in several key ways. Most notably, it requires data center operators to cover the full cost of generators and fuel needed to power their facilities. 

Under the utility’s original proposal, data centers could have paid for just three-quarters of the cost of new generators. Other customers would have covered the remaining quarter — along with fuel costs — in exchange for revenue from selling excess power during periods of high electricity demand. 

“Existing Wisconsin customers should not pay a single cent to subsidize the service of data centers,” Nieto said during Friday’s marathon hearing. 

Vast data center energy needs

The scale of data centers’ energy needs leaves utilities and regulators in uncharted territory. 

The soon-to-open Vantage data center in Port Washington and Microsoft data center in Mount Pleasant will likely require a volume of electricity “comparable to a mid-sized metro area,” PSC Chair Summer Strand said.

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), which oversees most of the Midwest’s grid, anticipates the region may need to add new generation capacity at twice the current rate to avoid shortfalls within the next five years, largely to accommodate rising electricity demands from new data centers.

We Energies’ new arrangement with data center customers follows a year of negotiation with ratepayer advocates, data center developers and the PSC, which regulates the state’s utilities.  

From the outset, We Energies said it aimed to shield current customers from worst-case rate hikes. 

Data centers “can and will” operate in Wisconsin with or without a payment model tailored for their needs, Strand said Friday. Over the past year, We Energies argued that without a new rate structure, data centers would pay for electricity as if they were ordinary large industrial customers. 

That status quo, We Energies Vice President for Regulatory Affairs Richard Stasik testified in January, would leave other customers paying too much for generators needed to power data centers. 

Even under the utility’s original proposal, Stasik argued, customers would have saved $1.5 billion compared with a scenario in which data centers paid under the same structure as smaller industrial customers. 

But ratepayer advocates, clean energy groups and some elected officials said We Energies’ proposal would have saddled existing customers with unfair costs and risk.

Critics said customers should not pay at all for power plants needed to serve data centers, even if that means giving up potential revenue. 

“Requiring the large customers to own both the costs and the benefits,” wrote Cassie Steiner, a senior campaign coordinator with the Sierra Club of Wisconsin, is the “safest” option for the rest of We Energies’ ratepayers. 

The We Energies proposal covered only the largest tier of data centers, critics noted. That would have left Wisconsinites to shoulder costs arising from future facilities that, while smaller than those in Port Washington and Mount Pleasant, would still rank among the state’s largest energy users. 

“Smaller data centers pose the same level of risk,” Steiner wrote in an email to Wisconsin Watch. 

The PSC echoed such concerns on Friday. Commissioners said the structure they approved offered stronger ratepayer protections without tossing aside much of what We Energies  negotiated with Vantage and Microsoft.

“I disagree with those that suggested we should simply reject the proposal and send the applicants back to the drawing board,” Commissioner Marcus Hawkins said. He acknowledged  the utility’s willingness from the outset to protect non-data center customers, including supporting a requirement that data center operators pay the full cost of generators built to serve them even if they withdraw early from their service contracts.

The three commissioners unanimously agreed that the new payment structure also applied to  data centers far smaller than those in Port Washington and Mount Pleasant. Under the new structure, any customer using more than 100 megawatts at peak demand must “subscribe” to enough generators, either existing or newly built, to meet that peak.

The PSC retained We Energies’ plan to give data center operators leeway to overshoot their “subscribed” supply before paying a premium for extra electricity. 

Ratepayers will still bear transmission costs

Some forms of cost-sharing are mostly outside the PSC’s jurisdiction. The new data centers also require a vast buildout of transmission infrastructure. That undertaking is largely the responsibility of American Transmission Company (ATC), in which Wisconsin’s largest utilities own a majority stake. Because Friday’s case did not directly involve ATC and federal regulators have substantial say in the company’s billing practices, the PSC could only partially address its concerns about the amount non-data center customers will pay to plug in data centers.

By 2027, We Energies’ existing customers will likely pay $63 million for transmission infrastructure needed to serve data centers, Hawkins said. That figure will approach $100 million by 2028. 

ATC has not yet reached an agreement with data center operators to limit rate hikes for other customers, but the company is in talks with We Energies on the subject. In what Nieto called a “temporary stopgap measure,” the PSC voted to require a minimum payment for transmission costs based on data centers’ projected energy needs.

If data centers use less electricity than anticipated, Hawkins said, other customers could be left paying more than expected for overbuilt transmission infrastructure — a “huge stranded asset.” The minimum payment requirement could partially shield existing customers in that scenario, but Hawkins added, the issue remains far from resolved.

Despite the loose ends, ratepayer and clean energy advocates welcomed the PSC’s decision as a victory. 

“This decision signals that the PSC commissioners heard loud and clear that Wisconsinites have significant concerns about energy affordability and AI data centers,” said Tom Content, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin. “How this gets implemented in future rate cases remains to be seen, but customers’ interests are in a better place.”

We Energies also raised no public objections to the outcome. The ruling “underscores the importance of our plan to ensure data centers pay their full share for the power they use in our state,” spokesperson Brendan Conway said in a press release. “That is important to us and to the data center companies we are working with.”

The decision could reshape We Energies’ separate rate case before the PSC. That case, filed earlier this month, includes a projected 9.2% increase in customers’ electricity rates over the next two years, in part to accommodate the construction of new generation capacity to support data centers. 

The PSC and ratepayer advocates alike said Friday that the new payment structure may set a precedent within Wisconsin and beyond. The decision will not go into effect until the PSC issues a final written order.

Wisconsin regulators: Data centers must cover full cost of their energy needs 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.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Wisconsin Watch has launched a new, searchable dashboard to track layoffs across the state — the latest release in a broader rollout of news applications, which began this week with a national immigration court data tracker.

The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) maintains a public dataset of layoff notices submitted by employers; our tool aims to make that information more accessible and to highlight statewide or county-level patterns. The tool draws from data dating to 2018 and allows for searches by employer, industry, county and year.

These tools can always be improved, and we welcome questions, suggestions or feedback. If you or your organization find a way to use these tools, please tell us about it.

We’ll release a few more new tools in the coming months, so keep an eye out.

New Wisconsin Watch tool makes statewide layoffs easier to track 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.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Track statewide layoffs across Wisconsin 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.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Wisconsin Watch is testing a new approach to data storytelling: news applications. As a first step, we’re launching a tool to track activities in federal immigration courts nationwide, designed with local and state-level interests in mind. 

Nearly 5 million people entered the federal immigration court system between 2020 and 2025. 

Many were new arrivals handed notices to appear in court shortly after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. Others spent years in the U.S. before landing in deportation proceedings. Nearly 40,000 listed addresses in Wisconsin.

Federal immigration courts are a function of the U.S. Department of Justice, not the federal judiciary. The roughly 550 immigration judges in courts scattered across the U.S. are appointees; since President Trump returned to office in January 2025, their numbers have fallen by about a quarter, including nearly 100 judges whom the administration fired over the past year.

The courts primarily hear deportation cases, though immigrants can also seek asylum and other forms of relief through the court system, albeit only as a defense against deportation.

Wisconsin Watch frequently relies on federal immigration court data to shape our reporting, but navigating the data is no small task. The DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review updates a vast public dataset of immigration court records monthly — the result of repeated public records requests from the nonprofit data analytics organization Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

While other tools to explore that data exist, we have learned through trial and error that extracting local- or state-level insights is easiest when we do it ourselves.

We want to make those insights accessible to you.

Our immigration court tracker provides national, state, county and court-level summary details about the millions of immigrants placed in deportation proceedings over the past five years. It tracks the nationalities of immigrants with cases before the courts, the volume of new and active cases and the share of immigrants with legal representation, among other metrics, all summarized in brief “explainers” available through the dashboard.

The underlying data is an important counterpart to our recent reporting on the past year’s worth of ICE activity in Wisconsin. Wisconsin-level data often parallels our past coverage, and it will continue to inform our approach to covering immigration.

This is a living project, and we welcome your suggestions. If you find a way to use the dashboard — as a reporter, student or otherwise — please tell us how. The records offer far more detail than this dashboard currently provides, but we can update and upgrade our offerings in response to feedback.

It won’t be our last news application. We want to make public data as accessible as we can, so we will roll out more tools for you to explore.

Wisconsin Watch launches immigration court data tracker 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.