Wisconsin's congressional delegation split along party lines with a combination of support and outrage after Saturday's U.S. - Israeli attack in Iran that reportedly killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Here's what they had to say.
The post Wisconsin congressional delegation reacts to attack on Iran appeared first on WPR.
Demonstrators took to the streets in cities around the world after the United States and Israel launched a major strike on Iran. Many rallies voiced strong support for the military action, […]
The post Photos show global reaction to US and Israeli strikes appeared first on WPR.
President Donald Trump dances as he departs after speaking at the Port of Corpus Christi on Feb. 27, 2026 in Corpus Christi, Texas. Trump visited Texas to deliver remarks on affordability and economic issues days before the state's midterm primary elections on March 3. (Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)
President Donald Trump promoted his second-term record in a wide-ranging speech at the Port of Corpus Christi in Texas on Friday, building on themes from his State of the Union address earlier in the week.
But he did not issue a highly anticipated endorsement just days before a heated U.S. Senate primary that’s pitted incumbent John Cornyn against two challengers, state Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt.
Before the event, Trump told reporters he had “pretty much” decided on who he would endorse in the midterm election contest, but wouldn’t do so Friday, according to a White House pool report.
While leaving the White House en route to Texas earlier in the day, Trump also suggested he might direct a “friendly takeover” of Cuba, saying the Cuban American community would appreciate such action.
“We could very well end up having a friendly takeover of Cuba after many, many years,” he told reporters. “They’re in big trouble, and we could very well (do) something good, I think, very positive for the people that were expelled or worse, from Cuba that live here.”
Tensions are high between the United States and Cuba. The Cuban government said Thursday its border patrol killed four Cuban expatriates living in the United States who sought to infiltrate the country in a speedboat.
The Texas speech was advertised as an address on energy, and Trump spoke in front of signs reading “American Energy Dominance” and against a backdrop of oil tankers.
But he hardly mentioned the issue apart from short sections at the start and end of his remarks in which he claimed credit for lowering gas prices.
Instead, the president jumped from topic to topic, defending his administration’s controversial record on immigration enforcement and a military operation in Venezuela while attacking Democrats as out of touch and ramping up calls for election administration changes he said would keep the party from winning future elections.
Among them are the House-passed SAVE America Act, which would require the public to produce a passport or birth certificate in most cases to register to vote. While it has little chance of Senate passage, Trump has continued to advocate for it.
He claimed, without evidence, that Democrats can only win elections by cheating. If Congress makes changes to national elections laws, the party would be shut out, he said.
“They will never win because their policy is no good,” he said. “They want men playing in women’s sports. They want transgender for everyone. They want open borders so that the world’s criminals can pour into our country, which we’ve done a good job. I’ll tell you what: ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) has done such a great job.”
Trump joked early in the appearance that he was advised to not make political statements.
But several of his digressions were focused on elections this year and beyond.
After exulting, in sometimes exaggerated language, his record through one year of unified GOP control, he said it was crucial for Republicans to maintain their majorities in the U.S. House and Senate.
Noting that Democratic members did not stand and applaud at several points of his State of the Union address, a point that Republicans have seized upon repeatedly as a campaign issue in the days since the speech, Trump said the Democrats were “crazy.”
“They’re crazy,” he said. “We got to win midterms. We brought this country back. We don’t want to lose the midterms. We got to win the midterms.”
Election forecasters project the most likely outcome of November’s midterms is for Democrats to gain control of the House while Republicans keep the Senate. Very few seats are seen as toss-ups.
Trump also teased a potential third presidential term, which would violate the Constitution’s prohibition of more than two terms. He said he was entitled to another term because an election was “stolen” from him, a reference to the 2020 election that he lost to Joe Biden and ever since has claimed, without evidence, wrongly decided.
“Maybe we do one more term. Should we do one more?” he asked the crowd. “Well, we’re entitled to it because they cheated like hell in the second.”
In the Senate contest, Trump shouted out Cornyn, Paxton and Hunt, without indicating which he might favor.
Election Day is Tuesday, though with three major candidates, it is likely headed for a May runoff between Cornyn and Paxton.
Trump wore a version of his signature red hat with the phrase “Gulf of America” across the front instead of the usual “Make America Great Again” campaign slogan.
Trump signed an executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico early in his second term. Corpus Christi’s port is on the gulf.
At the open and close of the roughly hourlong speech, Trump promoted his energy policy and criticized Biden for regulations that Trump said slowed energy production.
By boosting production and bringing in oil from Venezuela after deposing leftist President Nicolás Maduro in January, Trump said he has brought down the price of gas and consumer products across the board.
Biden and congressional Democrats “waged a radical-left war on American oil and natural gas like you’ve never seen before,” he said. “They were killing our country…. All of that changed my first day back in office.”
The latest government statistics, though, show that energy costs in January were about the same as they were when Trump took office, dropping only .1%, while inflation in the economy as a whole stubbornly continues at about 2.4%.
U.S. involvement in Venezuela, following Maduro’s capture, would also help spur the energy sector, Trump said.
The new government, led by Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, has been receptive to selling crude oil to the United States, where it will be refined, Trump said Friday. The arrangement would benefit both countries, he said.
People walk past blooming trees on the Harvard University campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in April 2025. (Photo by Scott Eisen/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — American colleges and universities received gifts and contracts worth more than $5.2 billion from foreign entities in 2025, according to the U.S. Department of Education, which also recently published summaries of foreign investment in U.S. higher education dating back to 1986.
Qatar, the United Kingdom, China, Switzerland, Japan, Germany and Saudi Arabia marked the largest sources of reportable gifts and contracts to U.S. institutions in 2025, according to the agency, which released the latest funding disclosures this month.
The department also made public roughly 40 years of data on a transparency dashboard that offers a snapshot of the foreign funding disclosures submitted by colleges and universities. The administration described the move as a transparency effort, but critics say it lacks key context.
The dashboard shows cumulative data since 1986, when Congress amended the Higher Education Act of 1965 to mandate colleges and universities receiving federal financial assistance disclose any foreign gifts or contracts valued at or above $250,000 annually.
The provision, known as Section 117, “came about due to concerns about malign actors trying to either use educational platforms to promote agendas that were not in the national interest or about getting access to American youth or about exerting influence on institutions,” said Rick Hess, senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank.
And while the Education Department this month heralded the dashboard as a major step toward transparency in foreign influence in U.S. education, the tool does not separate gifts and contracts by year, limiting its use to help the public spot trends or identify major gifts.
Details about the gifts and contracts, such as what was given or what work was contracted, are not displayed on the dashboard.
President Donald Trump and his administration have sought to increase transparency requirements when it comes to foreign funds entering U.S. colleges and universities.
Part of the administration’s effort includes an April 2025 executive order that sought to “end the secrecy surrounding foreign funds in American educational institutions” and to “safeguard America’s students and research from foreign exploitation.”
The public transparency dashboard is housed on a portal, launched in January, where colleges and universities are responsible for disclosing foreign gifts and contracts.
The Education Department announced Feb. 23 that it would partner with the State Department on foreign gift and contract reporting under Section 117.
The move — one of several interagency agreements announced so far by the administration — is part of the administration’s ongoing efforts to dismantle the 46-year-old agency.
State will help the Education Department manage its foreign funding reporting portal and “use its national security and foreign national academic admissions expertise to review and assess the industry’s compliance with the law, share data with the public and federal stakeholders, and identify potential threats,” the Education Department said.
At least 555 institutions have disclosed $67.6 billion in foreign gifts and contracts between 1986 and mid-December 2025, according to the dashboard.
The institutions that have received the most funding in foreign gifts and contracts since Section 117 was enacted are Harvard University in Massachusetts, at $4.2 billion; Carnegie Mellon University, in Pennsylvania, at $3.9 billion; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, at $3.5 billion; Cornell University in New York, at $3.1 billion and the University of Pennsylvania, at $2.8 billion.
The dashboard also includes a separate section on the total value of transactions in foreign gifts and contracts with “counterparties located in countries of concern,” such as China, Russia and Venezuela.
The universities that received the most money from counterparties in these “countries of concern” are Harvard, at $610.8 million; MIT, at $490.1 million; New York University, at $462.5 million; Stanford University in California, at $418.5 million; and Yale University in Connecticut, at $400.2 million.
Some higher education groups expressed concerns over the dashboard, including limitations they see with how the data is portrayed.
The cumulative nature of the dashboard does not allow the public to see how the amount of money in foreign gifts and contracts received by schools fluctuated throughout the years.
“There’s no way to kind of break out what the funding is by the year, or perhaps by the funding cycle, so you can’t really see any funding trends,” Sarah Spreitzer, vice president and chief of staff for government relations at the American Council on Education, told States Newsroom.
The association serves as the major coordinating body for the country’s colleges and universities, representing roughly 1,600 institutions.
Spreitzer emphasized a lack of context throughout the dashboard, including on the list of foreign entities of concern and whether such funding is active or reflects past funding.
For instance, the U.S. Department of Commerce designated the Chinese tech company Huawei as an entity of concern in 2019.
Huawei has provided roughly $22.7 million in funding to American universities, overall, according to the dashboard. But the dashboard doesn’t show the gifts and contracts all came prior to the entity-of-concern designation, Spreitzer said.
“None of our institutions have taken funding from Huawei since 2019, if not earlier, when we were informed of the concerns around Huawei,” Spreitzer said. “However, the way that the information is presented, it seems to imply that our institutions are still taking funding from Huawei.”
Spreitzer said that the dashboard “demonstrates that our schools are complying with Section 117 and they are meeting their reporting obligations.”
“I hope that people are not making broad assumptions based on how the data is presented right now,” added Spreitzer, who hopes the administration will continue making improvements to the dashboard, such as separating the disclosures by year and adding additional context.
President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House Feb. 20, 2026, in Washington, D.C., after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against his use of emergency powers to implement international trade tariffs. Also pictured on stage, left to right, are Solicitor General John Sauer and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Friday demanding the administration refund businesses that paid tariffs to import goods into the United States under authority the Supreme Court has ruled the president never held.
“The American people — small business owners, importers, manufacturers, and the consumers who ultimately bore the cost of these illegal taxes — deserve better than this stonewalling,” the group wrote. “This money does not belong to the federal government. It belongs to the businesses and individuals you illegally taxed.”
The Supreme Court ruled on Feb. 20 that President Donald Trump wrongly instituted tariffs under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, writing “that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”
Trump held a press conference later that day declaring he would institute tariffs under other authorities that he and members of his administration believe Congress has granted the president. But he didn’t give a clear answer about whether the federal government would refund the businesses that paid IEEPA tariffs.
“They take months and months to write an opinion, and they don’t even discuss that point,” Trump said at the time. “I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years.”
Senate Democrats’ letter says the Trump administration “collected over $130 billion in illegal taxes and then refused — with a smile and a shrug — to give it back.”
Democrats wrote in the letter the administration must tell U.S. Customs and Border Protection “to begin processing automatic refunds for all tariffs and customs duties unlawfully collected under IEEPA since January 20, 2025.”
The Trump administration, they wrote, should release a timeline within 90 days for when it would begin those refunds.
The letter was signed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Whip Dick Durbin, Maryland Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Delaware Sens. Chris Coons and Lisa Blunt Rochester, Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Colorado Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, Virginia Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, New Jersey Sen. Andy Kim, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, New Mexico Sen. Ben Ray Luján, Oregon Sens. Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden, Rhode Island Sens. Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse, Nevada Sen. Jacky Rosen, California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla and Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock.
The Treasury Department did not respond to a request for comment.
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The U.S. and Israel launched a major attack on Iran on Saturday, with President Donald Trump calling on the Iranian public to “seize control of your destiny” and rise up against the Islamic leadership that has ruled the nation since 1979.
The post Trump says Iran’s supreme leader is dead appeared first on WPR.
The city of Madison on Monday appealed a ruling that allows it to be sued for monetary damages for disenfranchising nearly 200 voters in the 2024 election, arguing the decision would unrealistically require “error-free elections” and expose municipalities across the state to liability for mistakes.
The appeal comes after Dane County Circuit Court Judge David Conway’s Feb. 9 ruling that Madison could face potential financial liability for disenfranchising 193 voters whose absentee ballots were unintentionally left uncounted. Notably, the city did not specifically contest the judge’s rejection in that ruling of its earlier argument that absentee voting is merely a “privilege” under state law — a claim that would have shielded it from damages.
Instead, the appeal centers on who has the authority to enforce election laws and whether voters can sue for negligence. The city argues that such complaints must go first to the Wisconsin Elections Commission and asks higher courts to revisit a landmark 1866 case that allowed damages against election officials who deprive citizens of the right to vote.
“It is not difficult to imagine how the circuit court’s ruling may be perceived as an opportunity by partisan actors to influence the election,” attorneys for the city, former Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl and Deputy Clerk Jim Verbick wrote in the filing.
A permanent path to sue for damages over accidental election errors without going first through the commission could “chill the willingness of individuals to volunteer to assist with elections, and the willingness of voters to participate in the political process,” they wrote.
Much of Madison’s appeal asks the court to revisit a key finding in the landmark 1866 case that secured the extension of the franchise to Black Wisconsinites, Gillespie v. Palmer. In that case, the court held that state law allows plaintiffs to sue election officials for damages if they “negligently deprive citizens of the right to vote.”
The case arose after Ezekiel Gillespie, a Black man, was turned away from the polls in 1865. While voters had ratified a measure extending the franchise to Black residents 16 years earlier, it went largely unenforced, as state officials still disputed whether the change was valid. Gillespie sued, and courts ultimately ruled in his favor, concluding in 1866 that Black Wisconsinites had been wrongfully disenfranchised for 17 years.
Although Gillespie was intentionally barred from voting, the court’s ruling established negligence — not just intentional misconduct — as a basis for disenfranchised voters to seek damages. The Dane County Circuit Court relied on that broader standard in allowing the Madison lawsuit to proceed.
Madison officials in their latest appeal argue the lower court misapplied the precedent. In their view, Gillespie was about protecting the right to cast a ballot — a right that they say isn’t disputed in this case. No election official in Madison denied that the 193 Madison voters had a right to vote, they wrote. Rather, they contend, the voters’ ballots were unintentionally left uncounted after being cast.
If Gillespie is extended under these circumstances, the defendants argue, Wisconsin would be the first state to allow “any voter whose ballot is accidentally uncounted a right to sue for monetary damages,” a premise that they say requires immediate review by higher courts given the impending 2026 midterms.
They also contend the 1866 ruling predates Wisconsin’s modern election system, and relying on “such an archaic interpretation of Constitutional rights in Wisconsin is grossly in error and requires intervention before the case proceeds further.”
Madison’s filing “seeks to erode the protections” guaranteed in Gillespie, said Scott Thompson, staff attorney for Law Forward, which filed the case. “This argument follows the city’s failed attempt to throw out this case by arguing that the right to vote does not protect absentee voters from disenfranchisement. The right to vote has value, and the voters the city of Madison disenfranchised look forward to having their day in court.”
Bryna Godar, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative, clarified that a court wouldn’t need to overturn the historic Black voting rights case entirely to rule that it doesn’t apply in the lawsuit against Madison.
“You could potentially read that case in a more narrow way, as applying only to intentional deprivation of the right to vote, as opposed to negligence and deprivation,” she said, adding that it’s likely that only a higher court could reinterpret Gillespie in such a way.
Law Forward’s response to Madison’s appeal is due on March 9. Then the Madison-based District 4 Court of Appeals is expected to determine whether the appeal may move forward.
Alexander Shur is a reporter for Votebeat based in Wisconsin. Contact Alexander at ashur@votebeat.org.
This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Wisconsin’s free newsletter here.
Madison appeals ruling allowing lawsuits in 2024 ballot-counting case 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.
Wisconsin Watch partners with Gigafact to produce Fact Briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. Read our methodology to learn how we check claims.
In Wisconsin, unlike in nearly every other state, first-offense drunken driving is not a crime.
Wisconsin treats a standard first-offense operating while intoxicated as a civil violation.
Punishment includes a fine of $150-$300 and driver’s license revocation for six to nine months.
Subsequent OWI offenses generally are crimes, but there is an exception.
If a second offense occurs more than 10 years after the first, first-offense penalties apply.
Otherwise, second and third offenses are misdemeanors. Jail time is five days to six months for a second offense and 45 days to one year for a third offense.
Fourth and subsequent offenses are felonies punishable by jail or prison time.
New Jersey treats first-offense OWI as a traffic violation, but up to 30 days in jail can be imposed.
In New Hampshire, first-offense is a misdemeanor, but no jail time can be imposed.
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.
Is first-offense drunken driving a crime in 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.
A federal lawsuit filed Feb. 23 by the legal nonprofit group Protect Democracy alleges the Department of Homeland Security used facial recognition technology unlawfully to track legal observers and label them domestic terrorists.
In Milwaukee County, law enforcement representatives are addressing facial recognition technology-related fears from residents. They’re concerned about a potential collaboration with a company called Biometrica, which provides access to facial recognition search results.
In August, Milwaukee County Sheriff Denita Ball signed an “agreement of intent” to enter into a contract with Biometrica, said James Burnett, director of public affairs and community engagement and acting chief of staff at the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office.
“But the contract is still considered to be in draft form – not fully signed, executed or valid – and has to proceed, like any other proposed contract, through the county’s statutory signing process,” Burnett said.
There currently are no services or technology being provided by Biometrica, and Biometrica does not have access to any sheriff’s office data, Burnett said.
County Supervisor Sky Capriolo, member of the county’s Judiciary, Law Enforcement and General Services Committee, said she and residents have serious concerns.
“It warrants more consideration, education and discussion,” Capriolo said. “I certainly am not ready to green-light a contract.”
Capriolo said she’s waiting to hear whether the contract will go to her committee again.
Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman took a different step and banned the use of facial technology by his department in early February.
On Feb. 24, Norman announced the suspension of MPD officer Josue Ayala for the improper use of a different tracking tool, the Flock camera system, to track a dating partner and a former partner.
“I am extremely disappointed to learn about the incident and expect all members, sworn and civilian, to demonstrate the highest ethical standards in the performance of their duties,” said Norman in a statement.
Ayala was charged by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office with one count of attempted misconduct in public office. Norman said he immediately directed MPD to create additional auditing mechanisms.
Social justice and civil rights advocates have expressed grave concerns about the use of the technology by both agencies, citing evidence of inaccuracies, racial bias and privacy violations.
Facial recognition technology uses artificial intelligence to identify someone by comparing a photo of an unknown face to some database of images of known faces, said Katie Kinsey at the Feb. 5 Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting during a presentation by the NYU Policing Project.
The image databases can include mug shot collections, driver’s license records or images found on the internet, Kinsey said.
In spring, MPD acknowledged it used outside agencies’ licenses for facial recognition search results for two to three years without a written department policy.
The department also announced it was considering an agreement with Biometrica – an agreement that would have provided access to facial recognition technology to the department in exchange for approximately 2.5 million Milwaukee County Jail booking photos.
This proposal prompted months of public pushback before the announcement by Norman in February that the department would no longer pursue the technology.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin welcomed Norman’s announcement but also expressed concerns about MPD’s past decision making.
It is “extremely concerning that MPD secretly used FRT (facial recognition technology) searches for years without any standard operating procedure – or any written guidelines – in place,” an ACLU spokesperson said in an email to NNS.
The organization is urging Milwaukee residents to remain vigilant.
“Countless Milwaukee residents and community leaders have engaged in thoughtful community education, spent hours upon hours in public meetings and contacted their local elected officials to voice their unequivocal opposition to the use of (facial recognition technology), and they will still be watching,” the spokesperson said.
The MPD spokesperson told NNS the department could revisit the issue in the future when a policy is in place that aligns with both public safety benefit and public concerns.
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 law enforcement faces growing scrutiny around facial recognition technology use 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.
The PSC required Alliant file a revised version of its application by 4 p.m. Friday. The agency is now reviewing the new version to analyze the redactions and justifications from the utility before moving forward.
The post PSC requires Alliant Energy file new application with fewer redactions for data center rates appeared first on WPR.
The ordinance would temporarily waive all permitting and inspection fees for the installation of sprinkler systems in older buildings that are exempt from having them.
The post Milwaukee ordinance to encourage landlords to install fire sprinkler systems in older buildings appeared first on WPR.
Ten Wisconsin-based companies — including Kohl’s, Milwaukee Tool and Ashley Furniture — are seeking refunds for the tariff duties.
The post Kohl’s and Milwaukee Tool, other Wisconsin companies sue Trump for tariff refunds appeared first on WPR.
Waukesha-based Generac Power Systems is settling a lawsuit related to a 2023 explosion of one of its portable generators at a Pennsylvania construction site.
The post Generac settles $200M lawsuit over 2023 generator explosion appeared first on WPR.
Charles Franklin on an Early 2026 Poll of Wisconsin Voters Charles Franklin on polling on 2026 candidates for Wisconsin Supreme Court and governor.
The post Charles Franklin on an early 2026 poll of Wisconsin voters appeared first on WPR.
This week, WPR’s Lori Skelton and PBS’s Deb Piper sat down to talk about their experiences working on the Final Forte, an event in which young performers from around the state compete in Madison’s Overture Center.
The post The Final Forte: A conversation with Lori Skelton and Deb Piper appeared first on WPR.
The state and local tax burden in Wisconsin reached a record low in the 2023 fiscal year, but a decades-long trend of declining tax burden may soon be coming to an end.
The post Wisconsin’s state, local tax burden hits record lows, but decades of declines could soon end appeared first on WPR.
On the heels of the Assembly Speaker’s retirement announcement, Vos told WPR about negotiations to spend down Wisconsin’s $2.5 billion budget surplus.
The post Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says ‘the money is there’ for tax rebates, special education funding appeared first on WPR.
A masked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent knocks on a car window in Minnesota on Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
Three new county sheriff’s offices have signed agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement that allow deputies to enforce federal immigration law.
The sheriffs of Dunn, Green Lake and Walworth counties have signed the agreements under ICE’s 287(g) program. ICE records show the Dunn County agreement was signed Feb. 10 while the other two are still pending. All three counties have signed on to the program under the warrant service officer model, which allows county sheriff’s deputies to arrest people targeted by ICE with administrative warrants.
With the three new agreements, 19 of Wisconsin’s 72 counties have joined the 287(g) program. Most of the counties have joined the program under the warrant service model while Kenosha and Marathon counties have joined under the jail enforcement model — which allows departments to notify ICE of undocumented immigrants detained in county jails. Kewaunee, Sauk and Waukesha counties have signed up under both models.
Dodge County does not have a 287(g) agreement with ICE but for years has had a contract to hold federal detainees in its county jail, which includes people arrested by ICE.
Immigrants’ rights and civil rights groups have criticized the 287(g) agreements, arguing that law enforcement openly stating its support for ICE and its often aggressive tactics discourages immigrants of all legal statuses from reporting crimes as victims or coming forward as witnesses.
“287(g) agreements do not make anyone safer — they stoke fear and erode trust, deter residents from reporting crime, and divert local resources away from addressing real public safety concerns and the needs of the community,” the ACLU of Wisconsin said in a statement in January after the Kenosha and Sauk county sheriffs signed their agreements.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Login