Michigan Democratic U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, left, speaks at a press conference hosted by immigrant youth, allies and advocates outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — With a little over a week before the end of President Joe Biden’s term, his administration extended humanitarian protections for nationals from four countries Friday before President-elect Donald Trump, who has promised an immigration crackdown, returns to the White House.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security extended Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, for another 18 months for 103,000 Ukrainians, about 600,000 Venezuelans, and 1,900 Sudanese, which is until October 2026. DHS also extended TPS for 232,000 Salvadorians until September 2026.

Roughly 1 million people have TPS, which allows them to live and work in the U.S. because their home country is deemed too dangerous to return to for reasons including war, environmental disasters or violence. It’s up to an administration to determine whether or not to renew a status. TPS does not lead to a long-term path to citizenship.

Immigration advocates have pushed the Biden administration to extend TPS status before a second Trump administration. The former president has expressed his intent to not only enact mass deportations, but to scale back humanitarian programs.

During Trump’s first term, he tried to end TPS designation for migrants from Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Sudan, but the courts blocked those attempts in 2018.

Sarah Baus of Charleston, South Carolina, left, holds a sign that reads "Keep TikTok" as she and other content creators Sallye Miley of Jackson, Mississippi, middle, and Callie Goodwin of Columbia, South Carolina, stand outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building on Jan. 10, 2025, as the court hears oral arguments on whether to overturn or delay a law that could lead to a ban of TikTok in the United States. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

U.S. Supreme Court justices on Friday questioned why they should intervene to block a law forcing the sale of TikTok in nine days, saying the short-form video platform’s Chinese parent company does not enjoy First Amendment rights.

Lawyers for TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, and a group of the platform’s users faced sharp questions from justices on both sides of the court’s ideological split about how any party other than ByteDance would have its rights restricted.

Under the bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden, ByteDance must divest TikTok by Jan. 19 or the wildly popular platform will be banned from app stores in the United States.

ByteDance holds the intellectual property rights to the algorithm that powers what content TikTok users see. If severed from the parent company, as required by the law, TikTok would lose access to the proprietary algorithm, which the company argued was a form of speech.

But the justices suggested only ByteDance — which, as a foreign company, they said, does not have the presumption of First Amendment rights — would be the only party directly harmed by the law.

The law targets ownership and potential control of the platform, including access to user data, by the Chinese Communist Party, Chief Justice John Roberts said. The law designates the Chinese government a foreign adversary.

“Congress doesn’t care about what’s on TikTok, they don’t care about the expression,” Roberts, a member of the court’s conservative majority, said. “That’s shown by the remedy: They’re not saying, ‘TikTok has to stop.’ They’re saying, ‘The Chinese have to stop controlling TikTok,’ so it’s not a direct burden on the expression at all.”

Lawmakers when the law was debated said the platform was dangerous because ByteDance is subject to Chinese national security laws that can compel companies to hand over data at any time.

“Are we supposed to ignore the fact that the ultimate parent is, in fact, subject to doing intelligence work for the Chinese government?” Roberts said.

Justice Elena Kagan, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama, also noted the law would mainly affect ByteDance, not its U.S.-based subsidiary. Separated from its Chinese parent company, TikTok would be free to pursue its own algorithm to compete with Meta’s Instagram and other video-based social media, she said.

“The statute only says to this foreign company, ‘Divest or else,’ and leaves TikTok with the ability to do what every other actor in the United States can do, which is go find the best available algorithm,” Kagan said.

National security vs. free speech

Noel Francisco, who represented TikTok and ByteDance, argued that the law’s true aim was to stop “manipulation of content” by the Chinese government, which he said amounted to censorship in violation of the Constitution.

“The government’s real target, rather, is the speech itself, it’s fear that Americans, even if fully informed, could be persuaded by Chinese misinformation,” Francisco said. “That, however, is a decision that the First Amendment leaves to the people.”

The law burdens TikTok’s speech, Francisco said, “shutting down one of the largest speech platforms in America” that boasts about 170 million U.S. users.

He asked the court to analyze if that burden on speech was “content-based,” which he reasoned it was, noting the government’s national security argument speculated that TikTok could be used to misinform Americans.

The singling out of TikTok presents a particular problem, he said.

The law “says there’s one speaker we’re particularly concerned about, and we’re going to hammer home on that one speaker,” he said. “One of the reasons they’re targeting that speaker is because they’re worried about the future content on that platform  — that it could, in the future, somehow be critical of the United States or undermine democracy.”

Jeffrey Fisher, an attorney for TikTok creators, said a law to prevent content manipulation — the government’s argument that TikTok users were vulnerable to being force-fed content approved by China — was not permitted by the First Amendment.

“That argument is that our national security is implicated if the content on TikTok is anti-democracy, undermines trust in our leaders — they use various phrases like that in their brief,” Fisher said. “That is an impermissible government interest that taints the entire act. … Once you have an impermissible motive like that, the law is unconstitutional.”

TikTok lawyers react

Lawyers for TikTok and several creators expressed confidence in their case following the arguments.

“We thought that the argument went very well, the justices are extremely engaged. They fully understand the importance of this case, not only for the American citizens of this country, but for First Amendment law, generally, the rights of everybody,” Francisco said at the National Press Club Friday afternoon.

Francisco also defended the ownership makeup of ByteDance as a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands that “is not owned by China” — though 21% is owned by a Chinese national who lives in Singapore, he said. Francisco also said TikTok’s source code for the algorithm is stored on servers in Virginia.

Three TikTok users shared stories about the livelihoods they’ve built through their presence on the platform.

Chloe Joy Sexton of Memphis, Tennessee, said TikTok allowed her to jump-start her baking business after a job loss and difficult family circumstances.

“I have now shipped thousands of cookies all over the world and even published a cookbook. As a small business without a lot of capital, I rely almost entirely on TikTok to market my products. To say TikTok changed my life is an understatement,” Sexton said.

Cows at a Dunn County dairy farm. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

A Polk County judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit from Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state’s largest business lobby, challenging an ordinance enacted by the town of Eureka regulating how factory farms, known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), operate. 

Under the ordinance, CAFOs must establish plans for how they will deal with manure disposal, air pollution, road use and other effects of a large farm’s operations, before being allowed to open or expand within the town. Similar ordinances have been passed in eight towns and three counties — including the Pierce County town of Maiden Rock, which passed its ordinance last month. 

While many of the state’s largest factory farms operate on the eastern side of the state in and around Kewaunee County, communities across western Wisconsin have been fighting the expansion of farming operations in the Driftless Region because of the effect CAFOs can have on smaller farms in the community, water quality and the environment. 

“WMC’s lawsuit against Eureka is part of a three-prong strategy by this industry with one goal — no regulation,” Lisa Doerr, a Polk County farmer who helped develop Eureka’s ordinance, said in a statement. “They use lawsuits to intimidate local officials who pass legal ordinances. At the same time, they have a lawsuit challenging any state authority. Finally, their Madison lobbyists are pushing state legislators to ban all local control.”

WMC has filed a number of lawsuits in recent years challenging state authority to protect water quality. A lawsuit filed by the group in Calumet County challenged the state Department of Natural Resources’ authority to require CAFOs to obtain permits regulating their effect on local water supplies. A circuit court judge ruled against that effort last year; the ruling is pending in the state Court of Appeals. 

Next week, the state Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case from WMC challenging the DNR’s ability to use the state’s toxic spills law to force polluters to clean up PFAS contamination.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump appears remotely for a sentencing hearing in front of New York State Judge Juan Merchan at Manhattan Criminal Court on Jan. 10, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by Brendan McDermid-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump was sentenced Friday in his New York hush money case just days before his inauguration, making him the only past and future U.S. president with a criminal record.

Trump has faced four criminal prosecutions but the New York state case was the sole one that went to trial. A jury convicted him in May on 34 felonies for falsifying invoices, checks and ledger entries that amounted to a $130,000 reimbursement to his lawyer for paying off a porn star ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

New York Justice Juan Merchan sentenced the president-elect to an “unconditional discharge,” handing down no jail time or fines but cementing a mark on Trump’s record 10 days before he takes the oath of office to become the 47th president.

Speaking during the virtual proceeding from his Mar-a-Lago residence, Trump said he was “totally innocent” and defended the description of his payments to his lawyer in business records as “legal expenses.” As he has in the past, he accused the federal government of being involved in the New York state case.

“It’s been a political witch hunt that was done to damage my reputation so that I’d lose the election, and obviously that didn’t work. And the people of our country got to see first hand because they watched the case in your courtroom,” the president-elect said, according to audio published by C-SPAN. Cameras were not allowed in the courtroom during the trial or sentencing.

The courtroom contains limited space for the public and journalists.

Merchan called the case “extraordinary” but said “The same burden of proof was applied and a jury made up of ordinary citizens delivered a verdict.”

After Merchan explained the sentence, he told Trump, “Sir, I wish you Godspeed as you pursue your second term in office.”

Trump was represented Friday morning, and at trial, by his personal lawyer Todd Blanche, whom he’s chosen to be the nation’s next deputy attorney general, the No. 2 position at the U.S. Justice Department.

Trump last-minute attempt

Following months of delays, the sentencing went forth despite Trump’s eleventh-hour request that the U.S. Supreme Court halt the proceeding. The justices denied Trump’s application late Thursday, though the order noted that Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh would have granted it.

ABC News reported Thursday that Trump had spoken with Alito by phone just hours before submitting the application to the court’s emergency docket. Alito told the network that the two did not speak about the application.

The sentencing, lasting less than 30 minutes, was a brief disruption in Trump’s barreling preparations for his second presidency. The president-elect was set to host members of the House Freedom Caucus, a contingent of far-right House Republicans, at his Florida property later on Friday. Trump huddled with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill Wednesday and with Republican governors on Thursday.

Trump slammed his sentence on his Truth Social platform as a “scam,” “hoax” and “despicable charade” that he will appeal, a process that will likely drag on for years in New York.

“The real Jury, the American People, have spoken, by Re-Electing me with an overwhelming MANDATE in one of the most consequential Elections in History,” Trump wrote.

The 12 jurors in New York that convicted Trump were also U.S. citizens, or “American people,” as required by law.

Immunity argument

Trump had challenged his New York conviction on the grounds that last summer the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents enjoy criminal immunity for official acts while in office, and presumptive immunity for acts on the perimeter of their formal duties.

Merchan ultimately denied Trump’s immunity argument, saying that the trial and evidence “related entirely to unofficial conduct entitled to no immunity protection.”

Trump has also been occupied with another legal battle in recent days as he cheered a court order to block the release of Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith’s final report detailing federal criminal charges against Trump for mishandling and hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left office, and for scheming to subvert the 2020 presidential election results.

Smith ended both cases following Trump’s election victory, as the Justice Department has a long-standing protocol against prosecuting sitting presidents.

A federal appeals court Friday denied requests to block the report in full, leaving only protections for the portion of the report dealing with the classified documents case following an appeal by Trump’s two co-defendants in the case.

People gather in New Orleans for Transgender Day of Visibility on March 31, 2023. (Greg LaRose | Louisiana Illuminator)

A federal district court judge in Kentucky has struck down President Joe Biden’s effort to protect transgender students and make other changes to Title IX, ruling the U.S. Department of Education violated teachers’ rights by requiring them to use transgender students’ names and pronouns.

The ruling issued Thursday, which applies nationwide, came as a major blow to the Biden administration in its final days and to LGBTQ+ advocates. It comes less than two weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, when the rule was likely to face more scrutiny from a candidate who took aim at transgender people in a culture-war focused campaign.

The Biden administration rule was released last April and aimed to protect LGBTQ+ students in K-12 schools, colleges and universities. The rule also conferred protections for pregnant students. The update to Title IX, the federal law that forbids sex-based discrimination in education, was expanded to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

In his opinion, Chief Judge Danny Reeves of the Eastern District of Kentucky wrote that the education department could not expand Title IX to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Reeves was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.

Gender identity refers to the gender that an individual identifies as, regardless of their sex assigned at birth.

“The entire point of Title IX is to prevent discrimination based on sex — throwing gender identity into the mix eviscerates the statute and renders it largely meaningless,” Reeves wrote.

Louisiana was among the states that sued the Biden administration over the rule. Its case was pending in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals at the time of the ruling in Kentucky, which came in the case Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti brought.

“Louisiana is honored to have litigated this issue alongside Tennessee and our sister States,” Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement to the Illuminator. “This is a great day for America!”

Gov. Jeff Landry also praised the decision in a post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

“Biden’s attempt to rewrite Title IX is dead!,” Landry posted from his personal account. “It’s a shame this even had to go to court, but pleased to see this win for women and girls across our Nation.”

Prior to Thursday’s decision, the rule had been temporarily blocked in nearly half of U.S. states, including Louisiana and Tennessee, as litigation played out.

While Reeves’ opinion references a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that limits the regulatory authority of federal agencies, it also notably rejects the rule on First Amendment grounds.

“The First Amendment does not permit the government to chill speech or compel affirmance of a belief with which the speaker disagrees in this manner,” Reeves said, referring to sections of the law that could be interpreted as defining deadnaming and misgendering of students as harassment.

Deadnaming is when someone uses a transgender or nonbinary person’s birth name or “dead name” against their wishes. Misgendering occurs when someone refers to an individual by a gender they do not identify as.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com.

Donald Trump walks to speak to the media after being found guilty following his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court on May 30, 2024, in New York City.  Trump, the president-elect, is set to be sentenced on Friday, Jan. 10. (Seth Wenig-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court late Thursday denied President-elect Donald Trump’s eleventh-hour attempt to stop his sentencing in his New York hush money trial from going forward Friday morning.

Trump appealed to the court’s emergency docket late Tuesday to intervene in his forthcoming sentencing for 34 felony convictions, arguing that presidential immunity should protect him in the days before he takes the oath of office, and, as he has in the past, that evidence introduced at trial violated the immunity doctrine.

The court denied Trump’s request, in part, because his concerns over evidence introduced in state trial court can be dealt with on a state-level appeal, and because the burden the sentencing will place on him as a president-elect amounts to “a brief virtual hearing,” according to an unsigned order entered on the docket Thursday evening.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh “would grant the application,” according to the order.

Trump spoke by phone with Alito just hours before Trump submitted his request to the court, ABC News first reported early Thursday. Alito told the network the two spoke about a different topic.

New York Justice Juan Merchan scheduled Trump’s sentencing for 10 a.m. Friday, making clear that he would not seek jail time or fines for the president-elect. Rather, Trump will receive an “unconditional discharge,” meaning he’ll retain a criminal record in New York but face no other punishment. Merchan also agreed to give Trump the option for a virtual sentencing.

Immunity ruling

A jury convicted Trump in May after a weeks-long trial focusing on his bookkeeping maneuvers to hide a $130,000 payment made by his personal lawyer ahead of the 2016 presidential election to silence a porn star about a past sexual encounter. The conviction cemented Trump’s place in history as the first American president to become a convicted felon.

Trump fought the conviction after a Supreme Court ruling last summer that former presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for official duties, and presumptive immunity for duties on the outer limits of the office.

Merchan last month denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case based on presidential immunity, writing that the evidence introduced was  “related entirely to unofficial conduct entitled to no immunity protection.”

Manhattan DA slams Trump’s request

In his response to Trump’s request to the Supreme Court, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued the high court lacks jurisdiction because Trump has not exhausted his appeals at the state level. Jurisdiction aside, he argued, neither of Trump’s claims “comes close to justifying a stay of the forthcoming sentencing.”

In the application to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket, Trump’s lawyers argued that New York state committed a “grave error” in holding that a president-elect is not protected by immunity. 

Bragg called this argument “extraordinary” and “unsupported by any decision from any court.”

“It is axiomatic that there is only one President at a time. Non-employees of the government do not exercise any official function that would be impaired by the conclusion of a criminal case against a private citizen for private conduct,” Bragg wrote.

He also wrote that the trial court has taken “extraordinary steps to minimize any burdens” on Trump. Bragg wrote that Trump “has provided no record support for his claim that his duties as President-elect foreclose him from virtually attending a sentencing that will likely take no more than an hour.”

“The current schedule is also entirely a function of defendant’s repeated requests to adjourn a sentencing date that was originally set for July 11, 2024,” Bragg wrote.

Trump’s lawyers rebutted Bragg in a reply Thursday, saying that the Manhattan district attorney “downplays the importance of the Presidential transition and the need for an energetic executive.”

Trump reaction

In a post on his online platform Truth Social Thursday night, Trump criticized Merchan as “highly political and corrupt” and said he plans to continue to fight the conviction.

“For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL. The pathetic, dying remnants of the Witch Hunts against me will not distract us as we unite and, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!,” he wrote.

A Wisconsin barn in winter. | Photo by Gregory Conniff for Wisconsin Examiner

President-elect Donald Trump’s pledge to deport millions of undocumented immigrants shortly after he takes office on Jan. 20 has triggered a flood of calls to advocates and local officials in Wisconsin. 

“There is palpable fear and anxiety with our clients,” said Carmel Capati, managing immigration attorney for the Catholic Multicultural Center in Madison. Capati and another immigration attorney, Aissa Olivares of Dane County’s Community Immigration Law Center, gave a presentation during a Dec. 27 community forum on immigrant rights organized by former state Rep. Samba Baldeh (D-Madison).

“As we anticipate a change of national leadership, immigrant communities across our state are fearful of what may be coming,” Baldeh said.“It is essential that we as elected officials address that fear, stand up for the rule of law, and advocate for human rights-based policies that acknowledge the contributions of immigrants — who are our neighbors, co-workers, and friends.”

“There is still a lot of uncertainty,” Dane County Sheriff Kalvin Barrett said during the forum, which was held on Zoom. “No one knows what’s going to happen.” But, Barrett assured participants, “We will not be proactively involved in any sort of round-ups, any sort of immigration enforcement.”

During their presentation, the immigration attorneys addressed the concerns of university students, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, refugees and people from countries eligible for Temporary Protected Status during the administration of President Joe Biden — a status they said they expect Trump to revoke. Wisconsin’s immigrant residents should apply for benefits still available to them under the Biden administration, the lawyers said, to get their identity documents in order, and to make an emergency plan in case they are detained, including designating someone to pick up their children from school.

“It’s very important that we do avoid situations where we might be subject to arrest,” said Olivares. “And if unknown people are knocking on your door, don’t open the door.”

‘How in the hell will we continue to be the Dairy State?’

Nowhere would mass deportation have a bigger impact than on Wisconsin’s dairy farms, where an estimated 70% of the workforce is made up of immigrants, mostly from Mexico and Central America. Because Congress has never created a year-round visa for low-skilled farm workers, almost all of Wisconsin’s immigrant dairy workers are undocumented. Without them, experts say, the whole industry would collapse.

At a Jan. 3 press conference in the Capitol, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers called the threat of mass deportation “illogical,” and said “we will do everything in our power to prevent it.”

“The bottom line is, in Wisconsin, 70% of our farms … 70% of the people may be part of the federal government’s idea to move them elsewhere, out of our country,” Evers said. “Think about that. How in the hell will we continue to be the Dairy State with no one to milk the cows and do the other important work?”

Yet, despite the existential threat posed to dairy workers and Wisconsin’s marquee industry by Trump’s proposed roundups, during a recent reporting trip to rural Buffalo County — a heavy dairy producing area in Western Wisconsin — workers, farmers and local law enforcement officials told the Examiner they were not scrambling to prepare for raids.

“What are we going to do? We can’t do anything,” said a dairy worker from Mexico who goes by the nickname Junior and who works for Buffalo County dairy farmer John Rosenow. “We can’t hide. All we do is work, go home, go back to work, back home, back to work.”

“We all came here not for fun but out of necessity,” he added, speaking about the estimated 10,000 immigrant dairy workers in Wisconsin. 

Junior, 19, has been working on Rosenow’s farm for the last year and a half, sending home money to help support his 3-year-old daughter. Like many of his co-workers, he came north to milk cows because the average wage for dairy workers, at $11 per hour, is far more than he could earn in Mexico, where a factory job pays the U.S. equivalent of just $20 per week. For decades, Mexican workers on Rosenow’s farm and other farms in the area have saved enough money to build houses, start businesses, and put their children through school back in Mexico.

The risks these workers have taken to come here include walking across the desert at night, evading kidnappers, and nearly suffocating while being smuggled in the trunk of a car. It can take a full year of work, rising at 4 a.m. to milk cows and shovel out barns, just to pay off a typical $12,000 debt to smugglers for a border crossing. Compared to all of that, workers say anti-immigrant political rhetoric does not seem like the biggest threat many of them face — especially those from Mexico who came to Wisconsin to build a better life, not, like many asylum-seekers, to flee violent persecution in their home country.

“I haven’t heard any workers ask about what might happen in the new administration,” said translator Mercedes Falk, who travels among about 20 farms in the Buffalo County area, interpreting for farmers and workers. “Farmers and workers are continuing to work side by side because they know that they are the ones that will make sure the cows are taken care of and the farms run smoothly. I think they both have been doing the work for so long that they understand that no one else is going to step in to do the work if it’s not them.”

“In our area, which is typical of most any dairy farm area in the country, most all farms with over 100 cows have immigrants working for them,” Rosenow said.

Rosenow, an outspoken advocate for his workers, helped found the nonprofit Puentes/Bridges, which takes dairy farmers from Wisconsin and Minnesota on an annual trip to rural Mexico, to see the homes and businesses their workers are building with the money they earn in the U.S. Falk, the translator, leads these trips. 

“Trump says Mexico is not sending us their best,” Rosenow said during one such trip in 2019. “These Mexican towns are sending us their best when they send their young men up north.” His former workers, he said, have returned home to become leaders in their communities, local employers, and important supporters of two economies — in Wisconsin and in Mexico. 

Mexican workers sent home $51.6 billion from U.S. jobs to help the Mexican economy in 2021, accounting for 4% of Mexico’s GDP (oil and gas only accounts for 3.3% of GDP for this petroleum producing country).

But while former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador called those workers “living heroes,” Trump has called them criminals and rapists and promised to send them all home.

In rural Wisconsin, which voted heavily for Trump, some farmers who support Trump have told the Examiner they don’t believe he intends to deport their hardworking employees — that his real targets are criminals. But Trump made all undocumented immigrants a priority for deportation in his first term, unlike Biden, whose immigration policy has focused on deporting those who committed crimes or posed a threat to national security.

Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, whose district ecompasses a large swath of Western Wisconsin, including Buffalo County, sits on the House Agriculture Committee. Van Orden made cracking down on “criminal illegal aliens” a centerpiece of his 2024 reelection campaign. At a press conference in September, he highlighted a violent attack on a woman by a Venezuelan immigrant to denounce U.S. immigration policy. Van Orden acknowledged at that event that dairy farmers in his district rely on immigrant labor, but then went on to praise the H2A seasonal farmwork visa, which is not applicable to dairy farm work. 

“I’m 100% behind making sure that we get as many people into the country lawfully to help support our industries,” Van Orden said. “I’m absolutely, adamantly opposed to letting a single known criminal enter this country, because this is what happens.” 

Campaign rhetoric about crimes committed by immigrants runs counter to studies that show lower crime rates among immigrants in the U.S. than among U.S.-born residents.

During Evers’ press conference earlier this month, a reporter pressed the governor on whether he believed undocumented immigrants who commit crimes should be deported. 

“What crime, speeding?” Evers asked. “Violent crimes,” the reporter clarified.

“It shouldn’t be treated any differently,” Evers said. Both immigrants and U.S. citizens should be prosecuted and put in prison if they were guilty of crimes, he added. “Serving that time is equally important for someone that is documented and someone that is not.”

The view from Buffalo County

In Buffalo County, local law enforcement officers told the Examiner they have not seen more crime among the immigrant population than among U.S. born residents of the area. Instead, police say, they can often be the victims.

Recently, Buffalo County Deputy Sheriff Aarik Lackershire got a call from Rosenow’s dairy farm.  A worker there had asked Rosenow to lend him $1,500 to pay off a U.S. official who was demanding money and telling the worker he had to pay or be prosecuted for a crime.

Rosenow suspected his employee, Junior, was being scammed. Instead of loaning him the money, he called the sheriff. Lackershire arrived on the farm, Rosenow recalled, “with coke-bottle glasses, wearing full riot gear — leather, with a gun on his belt … I swear he was 18 at the most.”

Relations between local law enforcement and the immigrant workers on Wisconsin dairy farms have become strained in recent years because of workers’ fear of deportation. During the first Trump administration, high-profile raids and a hostile political climate caused some workers to return to their home countries while others simply stopped going out. Many live on the farms where they work and avoid contact with the police. Rosenow has fewer than a dozen employees and most of them, young men and a few women, came up from Mexico without their families and live in a barracks on the farm to save money and send more home.

Lackershire did not come to Rosenow’s farm to arrest Junior. Instead, the deputy spent a long time talking to him in Rosenow’s office, next to the milking parlor, listening carefully and explaining to Junior that he had been the victim of a scam. 

“He obviously wanted to help,” said Rosenow. “The next day I was in Alma, so I stopped at the sheriff’s office to thank them for doing such a great job.” 

Farmers and workers in rural Wisconsin say they hope the national anti-immigrant climate will blow over, and that they can’t afford to abandon an economic relationship both groups depend on for their livelihoods. Throughout rural Wisconsin, immigrant workers and the state’s U.S.-born residents continue to coexist and, in many cases, try to help each other, as Lackershire did for Junior.

‘They don’t know who they can trust’

At first, when Lackershire showed up at Rosenow’s farm, Junior was reluctant to talk. “It’s a person you don’t know, and you’re telling him things — you feel nervous,” he said in an interview later, in Spanish, recalling the scene. But Lackershire spent a lot of time listening patiently to Junior’s story, with the assistance of Falk, the interpreter, whom Rosenow called and put on speaker phone. Lackershire explained to Junior that the person who called him demanding payment could not have been a U.S. official, since the call came from outside the United States.

“After that he warmed up a little bit,” Lackershire recalled in an interview, sitting at the dining room table at his home in Durand. It was a convoluted extortion scam involving three different callers, one posing as a woman with a sick child who needed help, one as a law enforcement officer, and one as a friend of Junior’s from Mexico. Lackershire said he’s encountered many similar scams, but this was “probably the most layered one I’ve dealt with.”

“He’s telling me about three different people, three different stories, and none of it’s making sense,” Lackershire recalled. “Wow. So that was an obstacle. And obviously, doing all this through translators, some stuff gets lost in translation.”

Falk said she was impressed with Lackershire’s patience. “I never got a sense of any ounce of frustration from him even though it was a long interaction at 9 p.m.,” she said. The whole experience, she added, “gave me a newfound appreciation for humanity and how empowering it is to connect on a human level in spite of speaking different languages and being from different cultures.”

Scammers target people of all backgrounds, Lackershire said. But immigrants are particularly vulnerable and, in his experience, are more frequently shaken down for large sums of money.

“It seems like they take more advantage of immigrants because they don’t know the legal system of the U.S.,” Lackershire said. 

“This group of people obviously has a fear of being sent back to where they came from,” he added. “They don’t know who they can trust.”

That lack of trust makes it harder for law enforcement to do its job.

“We have to go to every 911 call, and we’ve had hang-ups at worker barracks at 4 in the morning,” Lackershire said. “And obviously going around knocking on doors as a police officer at 4 in the morning on a primarily illegal population stirs everybody up and they get nervous. The intention is to see if somebody needs help, and a lot of people aren’t even willing to talk.”

Over time, Lackershire feels he has gained the confidence of people who used to avoid him. Some will now translate for him on occasion. Lackershire himself grew up in the area and went to school with the children of immigrant farm workers. “They are just trying to support their families, which I respect,” he said.

‘We treat the immigrant workers and nonimmigrant workers the same’

When, in October 2023, Minnesota stopped requiring proof of legal residency to get a driver’s license, Lackershire began carrying around handouts from a Minnesota immigrant rights group to give to the unlicensed immigrant drivers he pulls over, encouraging them to get a Minnesota license. (The Wisconsin Legislature changed state law in 2007 to bar undocumented immigrants from obtaining driver’s licenses.)

Lackershire said he sees a lot of immigrant drivers in Wisconsin who have registered and insured their vehicles in Minnesota, “trying to do the best they can.” But he still hands out a lot of tickets in Wisconsin for driving without a license. “That’s not something we typically make an arrest for; that’s usually a traffic ticket,” he said. But after they get too many tickets, unlicensed drivers in Wisconsin are treated as though their licenses have been revoked, Lackershire explained, “and then it’s a driving after revocation. And that’s actually a criminal charge.” Criminal charges can trigger an immigration hold and deportation proceedings.

Having a lot of unlicensed drivers on the road creates a public safety hazard.

Lackershire’s boss, Buffalo County Sheriff Mike Osmond, said in a phone interview that he and his deputies often come upon abandoned cars that are registered to people with no driver’s license and left in a ditch after a crash. “If they are immigrant workers, they tend to not stick around,” he said. 

“We treat the immigrant workers and nonimmigrant workers the same,” Osmond added. “If you’re the victim of a crime, I want our deputies to spend time and educate you. We’re not out there looking for immigrant workers.”

As for the possibility that his department might be asked to help with mass deportations, Osmond said he’s not worried. “I guess I’ll figure it out when it happens, if it happens,” he said. He’s not prepared to say what his department policy will be on cooperating with federal immigration agents. 

“In my entire career I don’t know I’ve ever had a request from a federal agency to help with immigration, except once when there was an ICE hold on someone in the jail,” he said. That was during the first Trump administration.

“If President-elect Donald Trump was sitting in the passenger seat of my truck right now, I’d tell him to deport the people out of the jails and prisons — these are folks who’ve come here and committed a crime.”

‘I have a lot of goals, a lot of dreams’

Falk teaches a regular Monday night English class on Rosenow’s farm. 

On a recent December evening, she greeted Junior as he came out of Rosenow’s milking parlor, as three people in their early twenties — two young men and one young woman — arrived for class. The three students laughed and teased each other as they took turns translating the sentences Falk wrote on a white board.

Junior, standing off to the side, said he had taken Lackershire’s advice and blocked the people who scammed him. He was glad he’d only given them $600.

Junior’s father also clocked out of the milking parlor while the English class was going on. He had been on the farm for the last four years, he said, and was planning to go home to Mexico next year.

“It’s always next year,” one of Falk’s students said, laughing. His father, who also works on the farm and sends home money to the rest of the family, says the same thing every year, he added.

As for Junior, “I just have a couple of years left. That’s enough for me, then I’ll go back,” he said.

In that time, he hopes he’ll have enough money to build a house. “I have a lot of goals,” he said, “a lot of dreams.”

This is the first installment in an Examiner series on immigration in Wisconsin.

Technologists say the hazy definition of “artificial intelligence” leaves a wide opening for companies to over-promise or over-market the capabilities of their products – or even render “AI” more of a marketing gimmick than a real technology. (Photo illustration by tolgart/Getty Images) NOTE: The lowercase on “tolgart” in photo credit is CQ per Getty site.

In his college courses at Stanford University, Jehangir Amjad poses a curious question to his students: Was the 1969 moon landing a product of artificial intelligence?

It might sound like a work of science fiction, or time travel, he said, but understanding the history of AI answers the question for them.

“I would actually argue, yes, a lot of the algorithms that were part of what put us on the moon are precursors to a lot of what we are seeing today as well,” said Amjad, a Bay Area technology executive and a computer science lecturer at Stanford. “It’s essentially precursors to the same kind of similar sort of ‘next, next, next generation’ algorithms.”

Amjad poses the question to his students to underline how hard it is to actually define “artificial intelligence.” This has become even more difficult as the technology explodes in sophistication and public awareness.

“The beauty and the dilemma is, ‘what is AI?’ is actually very hard to define,” Amjad said.

That broad definition – and public understanding – of “artificial intelligence” can make it difficult for both consumers and the tech industry to parse out what is “real” AI and what is simply marketed as such.

Swapnil Shinde, the Los Altos, California-based CEO and cofounder of AI bookkeeping software Zeni, has seen it through his investment firm Twin Ventures. Over the last two years, Shinde has seen a huge uptick in companies seeking funding that describe themselves as “AI-powered” or “AI-driven.” The AI market is very saturated, and some “AI companies” in fact just use the technology in a very small part of their product, he said.

“It’s very easy to figure out after a few conversations if the startup is just building a wrap around ChatGPT and calling that a product,” Shinde said. “And if that’s the case, they are not going to survive for long, because it’s not really deep tech. It isn’t solving a very deep, painful problem that was driven by humans for a long period of time.”

The rush to build AI

Since early 2023, Theresa Fesinstine said she has observed a race in the corporate world to introduce AI technologies in order to stay competitive and relevant. It’s when she launched her AI education company, peoplepower.ai, in which she leads workshops, teaches organizations about how AI is built and consults them on which tools might be a good fit for their needs.

In a time where everyone wants to claim the most cutting edge tools, some basic education about AI can help both companies and their employees navigate the technology landscape, the Norwalk, Connecticut-based founder said.

In an effort to look more innovative, companies may tout basic automations or rule-based alerts as exciting new AI tools, Fesinstine said. While these tools do use some foundational technologies of AI, the companies could be overstating the tool’s abilities, she said, especially when they throw around the popular buzzword term “generative AI,” which uses complicated algorithms and deep learning techniques to learn, adapt and predict.

The pressure on companies to keep up with the latest and greatest may also lead some organizations to buy new AI software tools, even if they don’t have a strategy to implement and train their employees how to best use it.

“It’s predatory, I would say,” Fesinstine said. “For companies, especially those that are feeling unsure of what AI is going to look like, what it should be, people have a fear of being left behind.”

Some technologists argue that ambiguity around what is or isn’t AI allows for all kinds of tech products to be sold as such. Predictive analytics, for example, which uses data to forecast future outcomes, may be “borderline” AI, said Ed Watal, the Reston, Virginia-based founder of IT and AI strategy consultancy firm Intellibus.

True AI systems use algorithms to sort, analyze and review data, and make informed decisions on what to do with it, based on what humans prompt it to do. The “learning” aspects of these systems are how AI gets smarter over time through neural networks which take feedback and use history to get better at completing tasks over time.

“But the purists, the purists, will argue that AI is only machine learning and deep learning,” he said.

“AI washing”

Though there seems to be an AI-powered company promising to do pretty much any task for you, technologists warn that today’s “real” AI has its limitations. Watal said the industry has seen some “AI washing” or over-promising and over-marketing the uses of AI.

A company that promises that its AI tool can build a website from the ground up could be an example, he said. While you could get ChatGPT or another AI algorithm to generate the code, it can’t create a fully functioning website, he said.

“You wouldn’t be able to do things which require, let’s say, something as simple as sending an email, because sending an email requires a [simple mail transfer protocol] server,” Watal said. “Yeah, you could ask this AI tool to also write the code for a mail server, but you’d still have to host it and run it somewhere. So it’s not as simple as, oh, you click a button and you have an entire app.”

Amjad, who is also the head of AI Platform at generative AI company Ikigai, said companies sometimes over-promise and over-market the ability of AI to perform original, creative tasks.

While artificial intelligence tools are great at pattern recognition, data sorting and generating ideas based on existing content, humans remain the source of original, creative tasks and output, he said.

“People would argue that in the public imagination, AI is creating a lot of things, but really it’s regurgitating. It’s not creating, right?” Amjad said. “And we should doubt wherever we start seeing claims of originality coming from AI because originality is a very human trait.”

It’s definitely not the first time that a new technology has captured the public’s attention and led to a marketing frenzy, Watal said. About a decade ago, the concept of “Web3,” or a decentralized internet that relies on blockchain technology, quickly grew in popularity, he said.

Blockchain technology operates as sort of a public ledger, where transactions and records are kept in an accessible forum. It’s the basis of many cryptocurrencies, and while it has become more mainstream in recent years, it hasn’t taken over the internet as was predicted about a decade ago.

“The cloud” is another example of a technology marketing makeover, Watal said. The concept of remote servers storing information separately from your hardware goes back decades, but after Apple’s introduction of the Elastic Compute Cloud in 2006, every technology company competed to get their claim to the cloud.

Only time will tell if we are overusing or underusing the term artificial intelligence, Amjad said.

“I think it’s very clear that both the hype and the promise, and the promise of applications is actually pretty real,” Amjad said. “But that doesn’t mean that we may not be, in certain quarters, overdoing it.”

Amjad suspects the interest in AI will only continue to rise, but he feels Ikigai’s technology is one that will prove itself amid the hype cycle.

“Yes, it’s come and captured the public imagination. And I’m absolutely thrilled about that part, but it’s something that builds upon a very long tradition of these things,” Amjad said. “And I wish that would help temper some of the expectations … the hype cycle has actually existed in AI, at least a couple of times, in the last, maybe, 50 years itself.”

Gov. Tony Evers, pictured speaking with reporters in 2023, declared an energy emergency Thursday. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers signed an executive order Thursday, declaring an emergency in Wisconsin that is meant to allow for quick and efficient delivery of residential heating fuel, including heating oil and propane, throughout the state. 

Winter Storm Blair brought extreme icy, snowy and cold conditions to states in parts of the Midwest and the Mid-Atlantic over the last week, leading to multiple deaths as well as power outages, flight cancellations and road closures. Parts of southeast Wisconsin were under a winter weather advisory earlier this week. 

Evers said in a statement that Winter Storm Blair has “impacted residents and industries alike” across the country. 

“This has increased demand for heating fuel and caused strain on delivering essential products across our state, including fuel for home heating, which is critical for the health and safety of folks during the Wisconsin winter,” Evers said. “Getting residential heating fuel like propane and heating oil moving now to those who need it will help Wisconsinites remain safe as we continue to face cool and freezing temperatures in the coming months.”

The executive order states that demand for residential heating has been heightened due to winter weather and that residential heating fuel distribution terminals have reported limited supplies of product on hand, on allocation or loading off of the pipelines. According to the Public Service Commission’s Office of Energy Innovation, this has resulted in long wait times and drivers traveling longer distances to obtain fuel. The situation is making it difficult for transporters to meet demand while complying with state and federal hours-of-service requirements.

The emergency declaration will allow for a 30-day waiver of certain state and federal hours-of-service restrictions to allow suppliers to get caught up from weather-related delays.

Migrants wait throughout the night on May 10, 2023, in a dust storm at Gate 42, on land between the Rio Grande and the border wall, hoping they will be processed by immigration authorities before the expiration of Title 42. (Photo by Corrie Boudreaux for Source NM)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans gained more than enough Democratic support Thursday to advance a bill that would greatly expand immigration detention, following a presidential election in which border security was a main theme for President-elect Donald Trump.

In an 84-9 procedural vote, 32 Senate Democrats and one independent backed the bill, S. 5, sponsored by Alabama’s Katie Britt. With the 60-vote threshold met, the legislation now can advance for debate and a final vote.

The only Democrats who voted against the procedural motion were Sens. Tina Smith of Minnesota, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Andy Kim and Cory Booker of New Jersey, Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, also opposed it.

Hours before the vote, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that he planned to vote to allow the bill to proceed because Democrats want a debate on the measure and an amendment process.

“This is not a vote on the bill itself,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Thursday. “It’s a motion to proceed, a vote that says we should have a debate and should have amendments.”

Petty crimes targeted

The bill, named after 22-year-old Georgia nursing student Laken Riley, would expand mandatory detention requirements for immigrants — including some with legal status — charged with petty crimes like shoplifting.

María Teresa Kumar, the president and CEO of the civic engagement group Voto Latino, said in a statement that the bill “is a chilling first step toward widespread family separation while dismantling critical protections for due process.”

“The legislation’s broad detention requirements would impact even those legally permitted to enter the United States to seek asylum, subjecting them to immediate incarceration based on accusations of minor offenses such as theft, burglary, or shoplifting,” she said. “Such measures not only undermine due process but also disproportionately target migrants who are already fleeing violence and instability in search of safety.”

The legislation would also give broad legal standing for state attorneys general to challenge federal immigration law and bond decisions of immigration judges.

It would include not only immigrants in the country without documentation, but also those with a discretionary legal status such as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.

Georgia murder

Riley was out on a run when her roommates became concerned after she did not return home. Jose Antonio Ibarra, a 26-year-old migrant from Venezuela, was charged and convicted of her murder last month. According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Ibarra allegedly entered the country illegally in 2022.

Ibarra was previously arrested on a shoplifting charge and released, so the bill Republicans have pushed for would require the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to detain an immigrant charged or arrested with local theft, burglary or shoplifting.

“Her killer, who came to this country illegally, should have never been in the United States, and once he had been arrested for multiple crimes before committing the most heinous, unimaginable crime, he should have been detained by ICE immediately,” Britt said on the Senate floor.

Trump often spoke of Riley’s murder on the campaign trail and blamed the Biden administration’s immigration policies for her death.

GOP trifecta

The House passed its version of the bill, H.R. 29, on Tuesday, with 48 Democrats joining Republicans. The measure also passed the House on a bipartisan basis last Congress, with 37 Democrats voting with the GOP. It stalled in the Senate, where Democrats maintained a slim majority.

With a Republican-controlled trifecta in Washington after Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, and only seven Senate Democrats needed to break the 60-vote threshold, the bill has a decent chance of becoming law once it gets to a final vote, drawing concern from immigration advocates.

“With just days before Trump’s inauguration and what we know will be an onslaught of more attacks against immigrants, there is no excuse for complicity in the hateful demonization of immigrant communities and violent expansion of the detention and deportation apparatus,” Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, the deputy director of federal advocacy of the largest youth immigrant advocacy group United WeDream Action, said in a statement.

Democratic backers

Democrats, still reeling from the losses of the November election, have shifted toward the right on immigration.

The bill gained votes from senators from swing states that Trump carried, like Arizona freshman Ruben Gallego and Michigan freshman Elissa Slotkin.

“Michiganders have spoken loudly and clearly that they want action to secure our southern border,” Slotkin said in a statement.

She said that while the bill “isn’t perfect,” she’s hopeful for an amendment process.

Gallego and Slotkin both voted for the bill last Congress when they were members of the House.

Both Georgia Democratic Sens. Jon Ossoff — who is up for reelection next year — and Raphael Warnock voted for the procedural motion. 

“I’m voting to begin floor debate on the Laken Riley Act because I believe the people of Georgia want their lawmakers in Washington to address the issues in this legislation,” Warnock said in a statement before Thursday’s vote.

Michigan’s Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, who is also up for reelection next year, also voted for the procedural motion. 

The late President Jimmy Carter’s casket is pictured leaving the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 9, 2025, before it was transported to Washington National Cathedral. (Photo by U.S. Army Spc. David A. Carvajal/Department of Defense)

WASHINGTON — On a wintry Thursday morning, mourners and dignitaries gathered at Washington National Cathedral to honor the life of former President Jimmy Carter.

Speakers at Carter’s state funeral, including President Joe Biden and the sons of Carter’s political contemporaries delivering eulogies written by their fathers, described the Georgia native and U.S. Navy veteran as a man committed to civil and human rights who led a courageous life of faith and service.

In his eulogy, Biden said Carter, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, established “a model post-presidency,” depicting the Georgian as a man of “character” who held a “deep Christian faith in God.” 

“Jimmy Carter’s friendship taught me, and through his life, taught me, that strength of character is more than title or the power we hold — it’s the strength to understand that everyone should be treated with dignity, respect — that everyone, and I mean everyone, deserves an even shot,” he said.

Carter died at 100 in his hometown of Plains, Georgia, on Dec. 29. Thursday’s funeral marked his final memorial in Washington after his body arrived in the nation’s capital Jan. 7.

The former Peach State governor lived the longest of any U.S. president. Despite serving just one White House term from 1977 to 1981, his presidency featured key diplomatic deals and energy policy initiatives, among other achievements.

After leaving the White House, he established the Carter Center in Atlanta. He authored books and spent a great deal of time volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, a nonprofit that works to build affordable homes.

The many state funeral attendees also included the four living former U.S. presidents: Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

A life of service

Biden said his fellow Democratic president’s life was “the story of a man who never let the tides of politics divert him from his mission to serve and shape the world.”

Steven Ford delivered a eulogy written by his late father, former President Gerald Ford.

“Honesty and truth telling were synonymous with the name Jimmy Carter,”  Gerald Ford wrote. “Those traits were instilled in him by his loving parents, Lillian and Earl Carter, and the strength of his honesty was reinforced by his upbringing in the rural South poised on the brink of social transformation.”

Carter won the presidency against Gerald Ford, the Republican incumbent, in 1976. The two were dear friends, Steven Ford said. 

Andrew Young, who was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during the Carter administration, offered the homily.

“I don’t mean this with any disrespect, but it’s still hard for me to understand how you could get to be president from Plains, Georgia,” Young jokingly remarked as he paid tribute to Carter.

“I’ve known President Carter for more than half of my life, and I never ceased to be surprised, I never ceased to be enlightened, I never ceased to be inspired by the little deeds of love and mercy that he shared with us every day of his life,” said Young, who also served as mayor of Atlanta and represented Georgia in Congress.

“It was President James Earl Carter that, for me, symbolized the greatness of the United States of America.”

Ted Mondale, son of Carter’s vice president, Walter Mondale, read the eulogy written by his late father.

Though he and Carter only had four years in the Oval Office, Carter “achieved so much in that time —  it stood as a marker for Americans dedicated to justice and decency,” Walter Mondale wrote.

Three of Carter’s grandsons — Josh, James and Jason — honored their late grandfather during the service.

Josh Carter said his late grandfather spent the entire time he knew him helping people in need.

“He built houses for people who needed homes, he eliminated diseases in forgotten places, he waged peace anywhere in the world, wherever he saw a chance,” Josh Carter said.

“He loved people, and whenever he told these stories in Sunday school, he always said he did it for one simple reason: He worshiped the Prince of Peace, and he commanded it.”

Country stars Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood, who are among Habitat for Humanity’s most recognizable volunteers, sang John Lennon’s “Imagine.” 

Back to Plains

Carter, who was a peanut farmer, and his late wife, Rosalynn Carter, hailed from the small southwest Georgia town of Plains, where they returned after living in the White House.

Rosalynn Carter died in November 2023 at the age of 96. She and Jimmy Carter were married for 77 years.

The state funeral followed Carter’s body lying in state at the U.S. Capitol throughout this week. Mourners paid their respects to the former president in a public viewing that began Tuesday night and ended Thursday morning. Biden declared Jan. 9 a national day of mourning to honor the former president.

Carter’s body will make its way to Georgia on Thursday, where he will have a private funeral service and interment in Plains.

Rainbow LGBTQ heart on hands, Getty Images

Since 2018, Marc Herstand has been on the forefront of a campaign to ban mental health professionals in Wisconsin from counseling clients with the goal of changing their sexual orientation or gender identity.

“Conversion therapy” has been denounced by mainstream professional organizations for doctors, psychiatrists, social workers and counselors. “People likened it to child abuse and torture,” says Herstand, executive director of the National Association of Social Workers Wisconsin chapter. “LGBT kids who are not accepted have a much, much higher rate of suicidality and mental health issues.”

Twenty states — and several local communities in Wisconsin — have banned the practice. And since late April 2024, the state professional licensing board for therapists, counselors and social workers has labeled conversion therapy as unprofessional conduct.

“It has no place whatsoever in the mental health professions, frankly, in our society,” Herstand says.

The provision banning the practice is precarious, however. Twice it’s been blocked by one of the Wisconsin Legislature’s most powerful committees. And advocates for the LGBTQ community fear it could be blocked again.

“Undoing this rule would overturn the work of the state’s mental health experts and expose young people and their families to unnecessary and lasting harms,” says Casey Pick, director of law and policy at the national LGBTQ advocy group The Trevor Project.

Next week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear arguments in a lawsuit that could determine whether the conversion therapy ban survives — and whether that legislative body has been overstepping its bounds in overriding state regulations that address everything from environmental quality to public health.

The Legislature’s Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) has been a thorn in the side of  the administration of Democratic Gov. Tony Evers since he took office in January 2019. The committee’s power under Wisconsin law to stymie regulations enacted by the executive branch was one of three issues that Evers identified in a lawsuit the governor filed in October 2023 charging that Republican leaders of the Wisconsin Legislature were exercising an unconstitutional “legislative veto” to thwart his administration from carrying out its duties.

The lawsuit went straight to the Supreme Court. This past July the Court ruled 6-1 in Evers’ favor on the first of those three issues, throwing out state laws that had allowed the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee to block how the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources spends money budgeted for the Knowles-Nelson stewardship fund.

In October, the Court dismissed the lawsuit’s second issue, an objection to actions by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) that had held up raises for University of Wisconsin system employees to pressure the UW into eliminating its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. A deal between Vos and the UW Board of Regents ended the delay in December 2023.

The Court also said it would take up the third issue: the power that JCRAR has exercised to block regulations, sometimes repeatedly.  Over the last six years, the 10-member committee’s six Republican lawmakers have voted to block or rewrite rules drawn up by state agencies on matters including environmental regulations, vaccine requirements and public health protections.

Two rules blocked

The Evers lawsuit identifies two JCRAR actions. One was the committee’s vote in January 2023 blocking the conversion therapy ban. The second was a committee vote blocking a state building code update. Both measures were produced under the umbrella of the Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS).

The building code revision was developed over three years in a series of meetings and hearings following national and international model documents under the direction of a statewide professional building code body. Brian Flannery, a veteran building inspector who was part of the code revision process, told the Wisconsin Examiner in a 2023 interview that at two hearings, there were no objections to the code change brought to the group.  

In August 2023, however, a Senate committee voted along party lines against approving the new building code following a hearing in which objections were raised by business lobbyists. JCRAR held a vote Sept. 29, 2023, approving an “indefinite objection” — blocking DSPS from reintroducing the code update unless the Legislature passes a bill authorizing it.

The JCRAR vote was 6-4 on party lines, with only Republicans supporting the motion, and was conducted by paper ballot, without a hearing and without the committee meeting in person.

Therapists’ ethics rules

The rule opposing conversion therapy for LGBTQ persons was part of an ethics revision by the Wisconsin Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling, and Social Work Examining Board.

Herstand of the National Association of Social Workers said he first appealed to the examining board in 2018 to ban conversion therapy. Later that year the board began the process of revising the state professional code and added to the list of actions considered “unprofessional conduct” a provision that began, “Employing or promoting any intervention or method that has the purpose of attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity…”

“When I talk to survivors of conversion therapy, I hear their struggles with loss of trust — trust for family members, trust for licensed medical professionals and the entire health care system,” Abigail Swetz, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, an LGBTQ advocacy group, tells the Wisconsin Examiner. “Conversion therapy really erodes that ability to trust, and that makes interacting with the health care system in the future more difficult.”

A study from the Trevor Project also shows “a significant increase in suicide attempts, and not only that, but also a significant increase in multiple suicide attempts,” Swetz adds.

After hearings and the board’s unanimous vote to advance the rule change, however, JCRAR voted 6-4 to put the change on a temporary hold until the end of the 2021-22 legislative session.  

At the end of November 2022, the examining board republished the new ethics code, effective Dec. 1 of that year. Six weeks later, JCRAR convened again, holding a public hearing.

Mental health professionals and LGBTQ advocates urged the committee to allow the new code to stand. Herstand was among them, describing conversion therapy as “Child abuse. Torture. Major mental health and suicidal risk. Unprofessional conduct. Fake therapy.”

Testifying in favor of throwing out the rule, Julaine Appling, executive director of the conservative Wisconsin Family Council, said the ban violated professionals’  freedom of speech and religion.

JCRAR again voted 6-4 to suspend the rule for the rest of the 2023-24 legislative session. The committee co-chair, Rep. Adam Neylon (R-Pewaukee) said that “the merits of any conversion therapy or any other type of therapy” was “a question for the Legislature as it is public policy and deals with speech issues.”

Nine months later, Evers filed his lawsuit, calling both of the committee actions examples of an unconstitutional legislative veto that hampered the executive branch from doing its job.

In April, with the Legislature wrapped up for the rest of 2024, the examining board reinstated the code banning conversion therapy. 

Sending rules to limbo

Under Wisconsin law, JCRAR can object to a rule after it is promulgated, either temporarily — for the balance of a legislative session — or indefinitely. State law also holds that if lawmakers introduce legislation that codifies a rule objection, the rule stays blocked until the legislation is vetoed by the governor.

Instead, however, lawmakers have introduced such legislation and referred it to committee, where it has remained dormant for the rest of the legislative session in order to avoid a veto that would restore the blocked rule.

The Evers administration argues that by blocking regulations, JCRAR is taking over the power that the Wisconsin Constitution confers on the governor to carry out the laws.

“In other words, when JCRAR vetoes a proposed rule, it effectively amends the statute under which the executive agency proposed that rule,” a brief filed on behalf of Evers argues.

“By proposing the conversion therapy rule, the [therapy licensing board] exercised that statutory authority. By objecting to that rule, JCRAR effectively withdrew a share of the statutory authority the Legislature had granted to the Board” — in essence, the brief argues, unilaterally rewriting the state law that authorizes the licensing board to set the profession’s ethical standards.

“JCRAR does not have that power—only the full Legislature does,” the brief states.

The committee’s action — and the state laws that empower it — undercut the legal right of the profession to set its standards, Herstand tells the Wisconsin Examiner.

“It’s an issue of the ability of professions, which is delineated in the law, in statute, to set their own ethical standards, when some in the Legislature are trying to prevent that,” he says. “To me, that’s a violation of statute.”

A brief filed on behalf of the Legislature’s Republican leaders argues otherwise. A 1992 state Supreme Court ruling upheld the right of the committee and the Legislature to suspend rules as part of its oversight of the executive branch. While the Evers administration argues that the earlier decision was wrong and should be overturned, the legislators’ brief contends it should be honored as legal precedent.

In defense of JCRAR’s powers, the legislators’ brief describes regulations as the product of power “delegated” by the lawmakers — an argument that lawyers for the governor reject.

A friend of the court brief by a group of legal scholars, including Miriam Seifter and Bryna Godar of the University of Wisconsin Law School, sides with the administration. The power that Wisconsin law grants to JCRAR is unlike that found in other states and unconstitutional, the brief argues.

“Wisconsin’s anomalous statutory scheme allows a handful of legislators to determine whether administrative rules are lawful; to suspend otherwise final rules forever or rescind them once in force; and to act without deadlines or judicial review,” the brief states. “The Constitution readily permits other forms of agency oversight, but it precludes these committee overreaches into the domains of the executive branch, the judiciary, and the people.”

Senate lawmakers debated the voter ID constitutional amendment on the floor Wednesday. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Republican lawmakers continued their swift work Wednesday to enshrine voter photo identification laws in the Wisconsin Constitution with the Senate passing the proposal on the floor and the Assembly holding a public hearing on it. 

Wisconsin is one of nine states in the country with a strict photo ID requirement for voting, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Republican lawmakers cited worries  that future legal challenges could weaken the law as they sought to enshrine it in the state constitution.

The measure, if it passes the Assembly, will go before voters in April on the same ballot as a high-profile state Supreme Court race that will determine whether liberals maintain a majority on the court. The amendment would need a simple majority of voters to pass.

Senate passes proposal 

The Senate passed the measure 17 to 15 with Republicans voting for it and Democrats against. Sen. Rob Stafsholt (R-New Richmond) was absent and didn’t cast a vote. 

Democrats criticized the timing of the legislation during the floor debate, saying there are more urgent issues that lawmakers could be addressing, it is redundant given current state law and that voter ID laws create unnecessary obstacles for voters. Republicans defended the proposal as needed to ensure that the law isn’t changed anytime soon and argued that voter ID is needed to keep elections secure. 

“There’s no emergency. [The requirements are] already in the law,” Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) said. She argued that lawmakers could have decided to address any other number of issues, including gun violence after a recent school shooting in her district, state funding for public schools and local services and health care costs.

“The reason that we are rushing is because there is another important election and the right-wing candidate wants to make sure that this proposal is on the ballot,” Roys said. She suggested that Republicans favor voter ID to suppress the vote and “make it more likely for conservatives to win.”  Brad Schimel, the former Wisconsin attorney general who is running for a seat on the state’s highest Court, previously suggested that the state’s voter ID requirement may have helped President-elect Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson win Wisconsin in 2016, Roys noted. 

Republicans have moved quickly on the proposal. A public hearing, noticed on Monday evening following lawmakers’ inauguration, was held on Tuesday morning.  

Lawmakers are working to pass the measure so it can appear on the April ballot. There aren’t any statewide elections in the fall, so the next chance for it to come up would be in the spring of 2026.

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), who coauthored the proposal, said the measure was coming forward first because it was the only one that had been introduced and was ready for action.  

“We can do more than one piece of legislation at a time,” Wanggaard said. 

In explaining the measure, Wanggaard said he is “unwilling” to allow the Wisconsin Supreme Court to potentially overturn voter ID requirements. During the hearing Tuesday, he pointed out that since the state Supreme Court shifted from a conservative to a liberal majority in 2023, there have been challenges to the state’s 1849 law that banned abortion for a time following the overturning of Roe v. Wade and to Act 10. 

Wanggaard also rejected claims that voter ID stops people from voting. 

“This doesn’t deter people from voting,” Wanggaard said. “This actually helps to continue to support the importance of your votes.”

Republican lawmakers also argued that identification is needed to access many things in society including checking out library books and getting on an airplane. 

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) questioned why of all the election-related proposals, this was the first one that they were discussing. 

“If you want to lead off on elections, which, frankly, I’m surprised you’re doing because there’s no Senate Elections Committee this session, but if you want to lead off on elections, how about Monday processing?” Spreitzer asked. A bill failed last session that sought to allow election clerks to begin processing absentee ballots on the Monday before Election Day as a way of speeding up the process. 

The proposal now needs to pass the Assembly, which held a press conference and public hearing on the issue ahead of the Senate floor session.

Assembly begins consideration 

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said during a press conference that the Assembly intends to vote on the measure next week on Tuesday. He said the proposal is a way to allow voters to have the final say on voter ID requirements. 

“It’s become an accepted practice as something that prevents fraud and it certainly should never be overturned by anyone but the will of the people,” Vos said. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has found that voter fraud is a rare crime and most recently reported 30 instances of fraud in 2023-24 elections out of more than 4  million votes cast. 

Republican lawmakers have been using constitutional amendments in recent years to circumvent Gov. Tony Evers while addressing their legislative priorities. In 2024, Wisconsin voters saw five constitutional amendment questions on their ballots. Three passed and two were rejected. 

In reaction to the trend, Evers announced earlier this week that in his budget proposal he will include a requirement for the Legislature to allow Wisconsin voters to bring forth constitutional amendment proposals without the input of lawmakers. Vos rejected Evers’ proposal Wednesday, saying he doesn’t believe in that process. He said the current process is more rigorous, open and transparent since it requires committee hearings and the involvement of legislators. 

“D-O-A. Dead on arrival. It’s never going to happen,” Vos said.

Evers criticized Vos’ comments, insisting that Wisconsinites should have the ability to lead ballot initiatives. 

“Republican lawmakers in the next week are set to add yet another constitutional amendment to the ballot while telling Wisconsinites they can’t have that same power,” Evers said in a statement. “If Republicans are going to continue to legislate by constitutional amendment, then they should be willing to give Wisconsinites that same opportunity. Pretty simple stuff.” 

The latest constitutional amendment proposal would add language in the state constitution requiring that qualified electors present a photo ID issued by the state, by the federal government, by a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band, or by a college or university in Wisconsin when voting. 

The amendment would require acceptable forms of ID to be specified in law, authorize lawmakers to pass laws establishing exceptions to the photo ID requirement and require that a person unable to present valid ID before voting on Election Day must be given the opportunity to cast a provisional ballot and present a valid photo ID at a later time and place. 

During the public hearing in the Assembly Campaigns and Elections Committee, Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) said he coauthored the amendment to “ensure that the people of Wisconsin have full confidence in the security and integrity of Wisconsin’s elections.”

Snyder said the upcoming Supreme Court election is not the main reason he and his colleagues  proposed the measure, noting it passed the Legislature the first time in November 2023 and was introduced even earlier. 

However, control of the Court as a whole and recent challenges to Wisconsin laws — including to abortion laws and Act 10 — influenced the decision to move the measure forward. 

“When we have another Legislature making laws,” Snyder said, referring to the state Supreme Court, “We need to put this into our Constitution to secure it.” 

Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) said it was “offensive” to her that the proposal is one of the first to be considered. 

“I knocked a bunch of doors this summer… Not one person said to me, ‘I really want to make sure that we enshrine voter ID into the constitution,’” Snodgrass said.

The barriers that people could face in obtaining an ID came up again during the hearing. 

League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Executive Director Debra Cronmiller urged lawmakers to avoid measures that place undue burden on the voter or erect barriers to voter participation, and explained that while getting a state ID may not require paying  a fee at the DMV, the process of getting one isn’t necessarily free or easy for all voters.

“Accessing the DMV to secure state ID is not equally available to all eligible voters,” Cronmiller said. “Some voters face barriers such as a lack of public transportation, long distances, shortened hours, and ADA barriers that the DMV is aware of but has failed to correct in all the years since the law was passed.”

Cronmiller said that casting provisional ballots can be another obstacle as the information about them is not always readily available or updated online and some voters need to be walked through the process. A provisional ballot is one issued to a voter who is unable to provide the poll workers with documentation as required by Wisconsin or federal law. A provisional ballot can be marked at the time, but is set aside and not counted until the voter either returns to the polling place during polling hours to show a photo ID or present a valid voter ID at their clerk’s office before 4 pm on the Friday after the election.

Cronmiller said there are other solutions to election issues, including automatic voter registration and full funding of elections, that lawmakers could be looking at. 

Rep. Scot Krug (R-Nekoosa) questioned how the League of Women Voters could oppose voter ID when polling suggests that many support it. Krug and other Republicans repeatedly pointed to recent Pew Research Center polling that found that 81% of voters nationally support requiring voters to show a government-issued photo ID. 

“The League of Women Voters, as one of the biggest advocacy groups of women in the state of Wisconsin, is going to take an official position you’re anti-photo ID?” Krug asked. 

“It has been a part of our official positions for decades. Voting rights are voting rights,” Cronmiller said. “Anything that stands in the way of an eligible voter to execute their right is opposed by the League of Women Voters.” 

A coalition of faith-based organizations, social justice groups and citizens has launched a campaign to eliminate costs for calls to people incarcerated in Wisconsin prisons and jails. (Photo by Caspar Benson/Getty Images)

For Royalty Grace, contacting her 20-year-old incarcerated son is both precious and costly. Grace told a room full of people in Milwaukee, “Every phone call, every message, every video call, every fleeting moment of connection comes with a price, literally and emotionally.” On Wednesday morning Grace was joined by others who knew her pain. The group gathered for the launch of the new statewide Connecting Families Campaign by WISDOM, a coalition of faith-based organizations, social justice groups and citizens, to eliminate costs for calls to people incarcerated in Wisconsin prisons and jails. 

“When a loved one is incarcerated, families like mine are not just dealing with the emotional toll of separation,” said Grace. “We’re navigating a financial system that profits off of our desire to stay connected to our loved ones.” Providing calls for people incarcerated in prisons is a $1.4 billion industry nationally. In Wisconsin, families contend with a patchwork of vendors and services, depending on where their loved one is housed. The Department of Corrections (DOC) contracts with the company ICSolutions to provide state prisons with phone calls and video visits. Jails and other county-ran facilities use a variety of  different vendors and practices. 

Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee) began to learn about the issue shortly after getting elected to the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors. Clancy, speaking during the WISDOM campaign launch on Wednesday, recalled touring what was then called the House of Corrections (now the Community Reintegration Center) asking people housed there what they would change about the facility. “So many people at that institution said ‘make phone calls free,’” said Clancy. “I spoke to one gentleman who…who had to pretend to his wife and children that he didn’t want to talk to them because he knew that every phone call they made to talk to him took food off their table and medicine out of the mouths of his kids. That is a horrific, terrible choice that we as a county, and as a state, and as a society are asking families to make. And it has to end.” 

In the 2024 Milwaukee County adopted budget, funding increases were made to provide free phone and video calls for people housed at the Community Reintegration Center and the Milwaukee County Jail.

Joined by Rep. Darrin Madison (D-Milwaukee), Clancy advocated for state legislation to create uniform phone service policies across Wisconsin. By adopting the same plan, Clancy feels that municipalities could “leverage that purchasing power” to make communication more affordable and more consistent for incarcerated people and their families. States including Massachusetts, Minnesota and Colorado have moved towards making prison or jail calls free. WISDOM’s Connecting Families Campaign will also raise awareness of the quality of phone service for incarcerated people. Some families have reported unreliable service on phone calls and video visits, further compounding their frustrations. 

Not being able to reach friends or family can have a severe negative effect on incarcerated people. Rep. Madison shared his own story of visiting a high school friend imprisoned in Green Bay. Life hadn’t been easy for the friend, who’d been transferred to Green Bay Correctional from a youth facility. “I remember going to visit him, and seeing scars on his arm,” said Madison. “And I asked him what those scars were from, and he told me every time they sent him to the hole he felt so isolated, that he resorted to cutting himself to be sent to Mendota [mental health facility] so that he could get the chance to get a free phone call, so that he could all us, his friends — his family — because he spent most of his childhood in our foster care system.”

Being able to reach people who care about you is a lifeline when you’re incarcerated. Additionally, the more access to the outside incarcerated people have, the better their chances of successfully reintegrating into society upon their release. Jamone Hegwood, who spent 13 and a half years of his life in prison, has seen what happens when people lose contact with the outside. “I have come across hundreds and hundreds of guys that are institutionalized,” said Hegwood during the Wednesday campaign launch, referring to people who’d become more used to prison than being free. “Normally the institutionalized guys are the guys that does not have communication with their family. So the only thing that they know is prison.”

After living in a world limited to wardens, walls and gates, “when they come into the community, they are pretty much just like being dropped on an island,” said Hegwood. People who  maintaining contact with loved ones, can better separate themselves from prison and its internal politics. Sa ‘Aire Salton, a licensed mental health provider, said many incarcerated people are traumatized by their incarceration and locked in a cycle that often returns them to prison or jail. That cycle can only be broken with communication and love.

Frank Penigar Jr. told the group gathered for the WISDOM launch  that he was incarcerated for 26 years, during which time he met his biological mother. Penigar said that during the time he got to know her, while he was incarcerated, “we had 18 years where she was able to nurture me that she wasn’t able to do from her womb. And so, that’s how we learned about one another.” Gradually, Penigar found out about the family he’d never known, waiting for him when he got out. Penigar said that communication with loved ones is very important when you’re incarcerated. “And if it can be free, like we going to be pushing for it…it’s a real thing.”

“It’s real,” he added. “I went through it.” 

This story has been updated with new information regarding Milwaukee County budget funding to provide free phone and video calls at the Milwaukee County Jail and Community Reintegration Center. 

Michael Fanone, a former Metropolitan Police Department officer who defended the U.S. Capitol and suffered injuries on Jan. 6, 2021, is pictured at the attack’s second anniversary. Fanone on Wednesday denounced President-elect Donald Trump’s plans to pardon people charged in connection with the attack. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Tennessee Democratic U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen and two former police officers who protected the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, on Wednesday condemned President-elect Donald Trump’s pledge to pardon those charged in connection with the insurrection.

Cohen, former U.S. Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell and former D.C. police officer Michael Fanone said on a call organized by the Not Above the Law coalition, a collection of pro-democracy groups often critical of Trump, that pardons for those who took part in the 2021 attack would be a blow to the rule of law.

Trump has said he would issue pardons for those prosecuted for charges stemming from the deadly riot four years ago in which a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol in an effort to block Congress from certifying President Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory.

Cohen, a member of the House Judiciary Committee who has sought to limit the presidential pardon power, said Trump should be held accountable for the attack.

The Tennessee Democrat said that in pardoning those charged with crimes on Jan. 6, Trump would be “absolving himself” and argued that the president-elect bears the responsibility for the riot.

“If it weren’t for Donald Trump, this would not have occurred, and this is a way for him to absolve to some extent, I guess — assuming he has a conscience — to absolve his conscience by pardoning these people that are in jail because of him and, of course, he should be there as well, in my opinion,” Cohen said.

Gonell, who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, said it was “devastating” to listen to what Trump has said about pardons. Gonell also testified in 2021 in front of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.

“History is going to remember those officers who died as a result of the insurrection — not the ‘victims’ or ‘warriors,’ as (Trump) claimed to be saying about the insurrectionists,” he said Wednesday.

He invoked the names of the five police officers who died in connection with the attack.

“Officers like Brian Sicknick, Howard Liebengood, Jeffrey Smith, Gunther Hashida and Kyle DeFreytag — those are the names that people need to remember and not allow Donald Trump and his acolytes to erase history, to rewrite it, because at the end of the day, some of these officers who defended the Capitol against the mob on Jan. 6, 2021, are also going to be there for his swearing in in a couple of weeks.”

Fanone was also one of the police officers who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6 and testified in front of the House committee.

“I was beaten and repeatedly tased, I suffered a heart attack and was left with a severe concussion,” Fanone said, noting that he “came face-to-face with the hatred and violence that MAGA extremism represents.”

Trump on pardons

More than 1,500 people were charged in connection with the 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Trump, who has described the Capitol rioters as “political prisoners” and “hostages,” did not specify during a Tuesday press conference whether he would pardon those charged with violent offenses, including attacking a police officer, but did say he would issue at least some pardons.

“We’ll be looking at the whole thing, but I’ll be making major pardons,” Trump said at Mar-a-Lago when asked about the violent offenses. Questioned about pardoning those who were charged with assaulting a police officer, Trump went into a rant filled with falsehoods, including saying Ashli Babbitt was the only person killed in the riot.

Three other people part of the crowd at the Capitol also died. 

Gov. Doug Burgum, at the time the governor of North Dakota and now President-elect Donald Trump's pick for secretary of the Interior, presents his budget recommendations before a joint session of the Legislature on Dec. 4, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)  

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats raised concerns Wednesday that Republicans have scheduled a hearing for one of President-elect Donald Trump’s nominees before he completed the necessary paperwork and an FBI background check.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member Martin Heinrich separately criticized the decision, saying it sets a troubling precedent.

“Yesterday, the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources noticed a hearing for Governor Doug Burgum to serve as the next secretary of the Interior, without minority consent, as has long been standard practice,” Schumer said during a floor speech. “Senate Democrats on the committee expressed reasonable objections to proceeding to this hearing, because the committee has not yet received basic information on Governor Burgum’s background.”

Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat, released a written statement that he was extremely disappointed Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, chairman of the committee, scheduled the hearing for Burgum, the former governor of North Dakota.

“The Senate has a constitutional duty to advise and, if it determines, consent to the President’s nominees. This requires careful consideration of each nominee,” Heinrich wrote. “To achieve this, for decades, nominees that have come before the ENR Committee have submitted responses to a standard questionnaire and a completed financial disclosure form, approval from the Department’s ethics office, and completion of an FBI background check. Until these steps have been completed, I will not consent to notice of nomination hearings.

“Every nominee, every party, every administration should be subject to the same standards. I would urge Chairman Lee to reconsider his decision.”

A committee spokesperson said Heinrich has not yet received confirmation the FBI completed Burgum’s background check.

Heinrich also hasn’t received Burgum’s financial disclosure report, called Form 278e, or paperwork from the Office of Government Ethics saying their personnel have reviewed his financial disclosures and ethics agreements, and they believe he is in compliance with ethics laws, as required by the Ethics in Government Act, according to the spokesperson.

Lee in his own statement wrote that it was “disappointing to see Ranking Member Heinrich seeking to delay issuance of a hearing notice instead of focusing on delivering what voters demanded in November’s election: restoring American energy dominance after years of high energy prices and policy failures.”

“Governor Burgum submitted his paperwork to the Office of Government Ethics last week, and the committee has the same amount of paperwork that Energy and Natural Resources Committee Democrats had in 2009 when they noticed confirmation hearings,” Lee wrote. “I, as chairman, have made every effort to work with our Democratic colleagues, but we won’t give in to delays that undermine the American people’s mandate. It’s time to move forward and focus on solutions that will unleash America’s full energy potential, and I hope Democrats will work with us to deliver results for the American people.”

Burgum hearing anticipated next week

Burgum’s hearing is scheduled for Tuesday at 10 a.m., making it one of the first hearings for any of Trump’s nominees. Trump announced in November that he wanted Burgum, who ended his second term as North Dakota’s governor in December, to lead the Interior Department.

Burgum, 68, graduated from North Dakota State University in 1978 before going on to attend Stanford University Graduate School of Business, where he received a master’s of business administration in 1980.

He worked at Great Plains Software, becoming CEO before Microsoft bought the company in 2001. Burgum then worked as senior vice president for that company until 2007. A year later, he co-founded venture capital firm Arthur Ventures.

Yahoo Finance estimated in 2002 that Burgum’s net worth was approximately $1.1 billion.

Burgum was first elected as governor of North Dakota in 2016 with 76.5% of the vote and then reelected in 2020 with 65.8%.

Other confirmation hearings scheduled for Tuesday include a Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing for former U.S. Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, whom Trump plans to nominate for VA secretary, and an Armed Services Committee hearing for Pete Hegseth, whom Trump wants to lead the Department of Defense.

The confirmation process is expected to continue Wednesday with hearings for Trump’s pick for Homeland Security secretary, Kristi Noem of South Dakota, in the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee; his selection for secretary of State, Marco Rubio of Florida, in the Foreign Relations Committee; and the pick for Office of Management and Budget director, Russ Vought, in the Homeland Security committee.

Others are likely to be scheduled in the days and weeks ahead, but the Senate cannot take floor votes on the nominees until after Trump takes the oath of office on Jan. 20.

No hearing yet for RFK Jr.

Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Bill Cassidy said during a brief interview earlier this week he didn’t know when he would begin committee hearings with Trump’s nominees for public health agencies, like the National Institutes of Health or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, since they hadn’t yet completed their paperwork and background checks.

The Louisiana Republican said he hoped to begin those hearings before the end of January, but wasn’t sure if that would be possible.

“The only reason I hesitate is because, obviously, we have other hearings and I’m not sure if everything … that we need to receive, we have received. So partly, this is outside my hands,” Cassidy said.

Other committees, he said, were also waiting on paperwork and background checks from some of Trump’s nominees before scheduling hearings.

“I know other committees have had issues that they’ve not yet received everything they need to receive, in which case I don’t control that process,” Cassidy said.

The ongoing outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza, also known as bird flu, or H5N1, is one reason Cassidy gave for why he wants to quickly confirm public health nominees.

“Well, H5N1 is serious, absolutely. And, of course, you want to get people in there, you want it to be the right person, on and on and on,” Cassidy said. “So I think we proceed with all due haste.”

Louisiana reported the country’s first human death related to the ongoing bird flu outbreak on Monday, shortly after Cassidy gave his comments about the confirmation process.

Cassidy met on Wednesday with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s nominee for Health and Human Services secretary, in the senator’s Capitol Hill office, a typical part of the nomination process.

Cassidy, a physician who earned his medical degree from Louisiana State University Medical School in 1983, wrote on social media afterward that he had “a frank conversation” with Kennedy.

“We spoke about vaccines at length,” Cassidy wrote. “Looking forward to the hearings in HELP and Finance.”

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

President-elect Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause his sentencing in a New York hush money case. Shown is the court on Oct. 9, 2024. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON – President-elect Donald Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court late Tuesday to pause his sentencing in a New York hush money case, arguing it cannot go forward in light of the high court’s presidential immunity ruling last summer.

Trump, who is days away from his second inauguration, is scheduled to be sentenced Friday in Manhattan on 34 felony convictions for falsifying business records. He is asking for a stay to prevent future proceedings in the case.

New York Justice Juan Merchan wrote in the sentencing order that he is not seeking jail time for Trump, but rather an “unconditional discharge” that would leave the president-elect with a criminal record in New York but avoids any serious penalties.

A jury convicted Trump in May after a weeks-long trial focusing on his bookkeeping maneuvers to cover up a $130,000 payment made by his personal lawyer ahead of the 2016 presidential election to silence a porn star about a past sexual encounter.

Trump’s request to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket asks the justices to expediently take up the questions of whether immunity extends to presidents-elect, whether the evidence admitted in the New York case violated his immunity, and whether he’s entitled to a delay in his sentencing.

“President Trump is currently engaged in the most crucial and sensitive tasks of preparing to assume the Executive Power in less than two weeks, all of which are essential to the United States’ national security and vital interests,” read a brief signed by Trump’s attorney D. John Sauer, whom Trump has nominated to be the next U.S. solicitor general.

“Forcing President Trump to prepare for a criminal sentencing in a felony case while he is preparing to lead the free world as President of the United States in less than two weeks imposes an intolerable, unconstitutional burden on him that undermines these vital national interests,” Sauer wrote.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche’s name also appeared on the request. The president-elect has chosen Blanche to be the nation’s next deputy attorney general.

Merchan has given Trump the option to appear virtually for the sentencing.

Supreme Court ruling forced delays

Merchan on Monday denied Trump’s request to that state court to cancel the sentencing hearing, saying the request recycled earlier requests from Trump’s legal team to toss the case.

“This Court has considered Defendant’s arguments in support of his motion and finds that they are for the most part, a repetition of the arguments he has raised numerous times in the past,” Merchan wrote.

A state appeals court affirmed Merchan’s decision Tuesday.

In December, Merchan rejected another Trump attempt to throw out the hush money case based on an argument that evidence had been impermissibly admitted.

The Supreme Court’s immunity ruling restricted prosecutors’ ability to investigate presidents and Trump’s team argued the evidence gathered in the case violated that restriction.

Merchan had delayed Trump’s initial sentencing date following the Supreme Court’s July decision that former presidents enjoy criminal immunity for official acts and presumptive immunity for some actions on the office’s perimeter.

The Supreme Court took up Trump’s question of presidential immunity as he fought against Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith’s case alleging interference in the 2020 election.

The court ruled, 6-3, in Trump’s favor, in a July 1 decision. Three justices appointed by Trump are part of the court’s conservative majority.

Trump is set to take the oath of office on Jan. 20.

Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives file past the flag-draped casket of the late President Jimmy Carter in the Capitol Rotunda on Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2025. (Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers, military officials and other dignitaries celebrated the late President Jimmy Carter’s life and achievements before, during and after his White House term at a service in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda Tuesday where he will lie in state until Thursday.

James Earl Carter Jr., who served as the nation’s 39th president from 1977 to 1981, died at the age of 100 on Dec. 29 at his home in Plains, Georgia.

The cavernous rotunda filled with dozens of Carter’s relatives and former members of his Cabinet who sat not too far from the current U.S. Supreme Court justices, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Biden administration officials and congressional leaders.

The voices of the U.S. Naval Academy Glee Club filled the dome with the Navy hymn and “My Country ‘Tis of Thee.” In a nod to Carter’s love for his home state, the U.S. Army Band Brass Quintet performed a rendition of “Georgia On My Mind” as senators, including that state’s Democratic Sens. Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, filed past the late president’s casket.

The flag-draped casket laid on the same pine catafalque that supported President Abraham Lincoln’s casket in 1865.

Camp David and Habitat for Humanity

Vice President Kamala Harris delivered a eulogy remarking on Carter’s career in office and humanitarian work in the decades that followed.

“Jimmy Carter established a new model for what it means to be a former president,” Harris said, highlighting his work with Habitat for Humanity and leadership in eradicating Guinea worm disease.

Harris, a California Democrat, praised the former president’s environmental work during his time in the White House, including signing a 1978 bill that significantly expanded the protection of redwood trees.

She also highlighted Carter as a “forward-looking president with a vision for the future” for his establishment of the Department of Energy, Department of Education and Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as his legacy of appointing a record number of women and Black judges to the federal bench.

Harris said Carter deserves to be remembered on the international stage for his role in leading the Camp David Accords, a peace treaty signed in September 1978 by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.

“Jimmy Carter was that all-too-rare example of a gifted man who also walks with humility, modesty and grace,” she said.

Harris continued, “Throughout his life and career, Jimmy Carter retained a fundamental decency and humility. James Earl Carter Jr. loved our country. He lived his faith, he served the people, and he left the world better than he found it.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson also delivered eulogies.

Johnson recalled that he was just 4 years old when Carter was inaugurated.

“He’s the first president that I remember. Looking back it’s obvious now to me as an adult why he captured everyone’s attention,” the Louisiana Republican said. “Jimmy Carter was a member of the greatest generation.”

Johnson recounted Carter’s upbringing in rural Georgia during the Great Depression and his decision to join the Naval Academy during World War II. Shortly after the war, Carter served on one of the first nuclear submarines.

“It’s telling that today the USS Jimmy Carter, a top-secret attack submarine, now roams the oceans bearing the name of the only president who served in such close quarters,” Johnson said.

Carter will be honored Thursday at a memorial service at the Washington National Cathedral. President Joe Biden has declared Thursday a national day of mourning, closing all federal offices in the nation’s capital.

Ceremonial arrival

U.S. service members carried Carter’s flag-draped casket Tuesday morning from The Carter Presidential Center in Atlanta where the late 39th president had been lying in repose. The 282nd Army Band from Fort Jackson, South Carolina, played “Amazing Grace” as Carter’s four surviving children and their families followed the procession.

Carter’s remains traveled from Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia, and arrived at Joint Base Andrews in Prince George’s County, Maryland, just after 2 p.m. Eastern Tuesday. 

The funeral procession stopped for a brief ceremony at the U.S. Navy Memorial where Midshipmen stood in formation and the U.S. Navy band performed “Four Ruffles and Flourishes” and “Hail to the Chief.” Carter, a Navy veteran, attended the U.S. Naval Academy from 1943 to 1946.

Carter’s casket was placed on a horse-drawn caisson, or carriage, and a military procession mirroring Carter’s inauguration parade in 1977 led the late president’s remains to the east side of the Capitol.

Honorary pallbearers included Carter’s 11 surviving grandchildren.

Carter’s late wife Rosalynn died in November 2023.

Carter will lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda until Thursday morning. The public can pay their respects on Jan. 7 from 8:30 p.m. to midnight Eastern, and from 7 a.m. on Jan. 8 through 7 a.m. on Jan 9. 

Sen. Van Wanggaard and Rep. Patrick Snyder testified about the voter ID constitutional amendment proposal Tuesday. (Screenshot via WisEye)

Wisconsin Senate Republicans — worried about potential future actions that could weaken current laws — pushed forward a proposal Tuesday to amend the state constitution to require that voters provide photo identification when casting their ballots.

The state implemented voter ID laws fully for the first time in 2016, requiring voters to show a valid photo ID when casting their ballots. Republican lawmakers said they want to add it to the state constitution to make it harder to repeal the requirement and harder for the state Supreme Court to overrule the law. With the measure added to the constitution, it would take another constitutional amendment to remove it.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee passed the measure Tuesday, despite Democrats complaining that it was being rushed through, is redundant given current state law and that voter ID laws are harmful. 

The Senate plans to consider the measure as a whole Wednesday morning, so it can then be sent to the Assembly in time for it to be placed on the April ballot, coinciding with the election to fill a consequential open Supreme Court seat from which Justice Ann Walsh Bradley is retiring. 

“It is no secret that liberal activists and Democrats are filing court cases left and right, trying to overturn laws that have been previously found constitutional by the Wisconsin Supreme Court and/or the federal courts,” said Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), who co-authored the proposal, during the hearing. 

Wanggaard noted that since 2023, when the state Supreme Court shifted from a conservative to a liberal majority, there have been challenges to the state’s 1849 law that banned abortion for a time following the overturning of Roe v. Wade and a challenge to Act 10. He said that some have suggested online that voter ID should be challenged also. 

“We can be sure that a new lawsuit challenging its constitutionality is coming to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. I cannot say for certain how the Wisconsin Supreme Court would rule on voter ID laws, but I’m also not willing to risk Wisconsin’s Supreme Court unburdened by precedent,” Wanggaard said. “The only way to ensure that… our future Supreme Courts will not overturn voter ID is to enshrine this basic election integrity law in Wisconsin’s Constitution.”

Wanggaard also mentioned past comments made by the Judge Susan Crawford, who is running for a seat on the state Supreme Court and has drawn backing from Democratic and liberal interest groups. She has opposed the state’s voter ID law in the past and called such measures “draconian.” 

Crawford faces Brad Schimmel, a former Wisconsin attorney general in the race, who has supported voter ID and suggested that the state’s requirement may have helped President-elect Donald Trump and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson win Wisconsin in 2016. 

To protect voter ID requirements, Republicans’ proposal would add language in the state constitution requiring that to vote, a qualified elector in any election must first present a photo ID issued by the state, by the federal government, by a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band, or by a college or university in Wisconsin. The amendment would require acceptable forms of ID to be specified in law, authorize lawmakers to pass laws establishing exceptions to the photo ID requirement and require that a person unable to present valid ID before voting on Election Day must be given the opportunity to cast a provisional ballot and present a valid photo ID at a later time and place. 

To enact a constitutional amendment, lawmakers must pass identically worded proposals in two consecutive legislative sessions before sending it to voters, who decide whether to ratify the change. Republicans passed the proposal the first time in November 2023. 

Tuesday’s hearing in the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee was the first of the new legislative session, and Democratic lawmakers criticized both the measure and the last-minute scheduling of the hearing, which was noticed late Monday afternoon following lawmakers’ swearing-in ceremony.

Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) said she was disappointed that Republicans were rushing to impose their “policy choices on the state of Wisconsin in perpetuity,” but have been hesitant to act after other rights, including reproductive rights and the right to privacy, have been threatened. 

“When those rights are stripped away by the federal Supreme Court, this body refuses to act,” Roys said. “But when we want to hurt people and make it harder for them to exercise one of the most fundamental rights in our democracy, the right to vote, we’re very, very eager to do that.” 

Wanggaard said that lawmakers have “tripped over” themselves trying to make it easy to get an ID. He noted that free ID cards for voting are accessible through the Wisconsin Department of Motor Vehicles. 

“I can’t think of any other reason why they shouldn’t be able to get that identification unless they’re not lawfully eligible to begin with,” Wanggaard said. 

Roys said that there can be barriers to fulfilling voter ID requirements, even if an ID itself is ostensibly free. She said those include the cost of obtaining necessary documents to get a voting ID, such as a birth certificate or proof of residence, as well as accessibility of and transportation to the DMV for an ID.

A report by UW-Madison political scientists about the laws impact during the 2016 election found that in Dane and Milwaukee counties between 8,000 and 17,000 registered nonvoters were deterred from voting, and between 4,000 and 11,000 were prevented from voting due to the state’s voter ID law. 

“It doesn’t really matter how many people voted or what percentage of people voted. When it comes to people’s rights, one eligible voter who is not able to exercise their right is too many,” Roys said. She pointed to the study, saying that “there is a lot of evidence that we have just in Dane and Milwaukee counties that… voters were turned away not able to vote or deterred from voting because of our restrictive voter ID laws.” 

“Because they were required to have an identification card?” Wanggaard retorted. “Come on, that’s ridiculous. Go get an ID if you want to vote and that’s so important.” 

Roys said she was concerned that the lawmakers were overlooking the problems that people could be facing. 

“When you gloss over the actual problems that real people have, just because you didn’t experience it, I think that’s evidence of very lazy policymaking,” Roys said. “We’re not here to decide what’s the best policy… for anyone who has the privilege of sitting at this table, we are here to make policy for for a single mom who’s got a disabled kid and has limited access to transportation and lives in a rural county that doesn’t even have a DMV that’s open three days a week.” 

Apart from the authors, no one at the hearing testified in favor of the proposal. Representatives from the League of Women Voters Wisconsin, Disability Rights Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and All Voting is Local testified in opposition to the resolution, with many bringing up similar concerns about accessibility for certain people, including those with disabilities, students, low-income voters

Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) noted that a voter who doesn’t have ID at the polling place can still cast a provisional ballot. 

A provisional ballot is one issued to a voter who is unable to provide the poll workers with documentation as required by Wisconsin or federal law. A provision ballot can be marked at the time, but is set aside and not counted until the voter either returns to the polling place during polling hours to show a photo ID or present a valid voter ID at their clerk’s office before 4 pm on the Friday after the election.

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) said provisional ballots can pose another barrier for voters. Returning to the polls can be difficult if someone doesn’t have reliable transportation or needs to take time off from work, she said 

Johnson also said she was frustrated lawmakers decided that the measure was Republicans’ first priority for the session. 

“If we want to ensure that everybody has the right to vote, we could make automatic registration at the time people turn 18, which would give everybody in this state equal opportunity to vote. We can make it automatic, and we can make voter IDs free automatically… But we’re not,” Johnson said. 

“This is our No. 1 priority — on top of our kids, on top of mental health, on top of lack of need and so many other issues. Voter ID is our priority,” Johnson continued. “I think it sets a precedent in this committee about the people that we send here and what we think our constituents care about.” 

The Assembly Campaigns and Elections plans to meet Wednesday morning to consider the proposal.

President-elect Donald Trump speaks to members of the media during a press conference at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Jan. 7, 2025. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump said during a wide-ranging press conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday he wanted to see the country’s debt limit addressed while cutting spending and would not rule out military force to expand U.S. territory. 

Trump, who will take office Jan. 20 after lawmakers breezily certified the election results Monday, continued to place blame on outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden for what he will be left with in his second term as he dives into an ambitious GOP agenda.

“We are inheriting a difficult situation from the outgoing administration, and they’re trying everything they can to make it more difficult,” Trump said. “Inflation is continuing to rage and interest rates are far too high, and I’ve been disappointed to see the Biden administration’s attempt to block the reforms of the American people and that they voted for.”

Reconciliation

As Republicans look to use a complicated legislative process known as budget reconciliation to pass significant immigration, border security and tax policy changes, as well as address the country’s debt limit, Trump said Tuesday that he wanted to avoid defaulting on the nation’s debt.

“I just don’t want to see a default. That’s all I want,” he said. “Nobody knows what would happen if there was a default — it could be 1929, and it could be nothing.”

He added that raising or suspending the debt limit had no effect on his goal to lower federal spending.

Though Trump said he is OK if Republicans pass their policy goals through one reconciliation package, he noted that “if two is more certain, it does go a little bit quicker because you can do the immigration stuff early.”

Jan. 6 pardons

Meanwhile, the day after the fourth anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol, Trump echoed his campaign pledge that he would pardon those charged in connection with the Jan. 6 riot.

However, he did not specify whether he would pardon those who were charged with violent offenses, saying: “We’ll be looking at the whole thing, but I’ll be making major pardons.”

Foreign affairs

Trump also did not rule out using military force to take control of the Panama Canal and Greenland — two locations with critical implications for the transport of global commerce.

The Panamanian government was given full control of the canal in 1999. Denmark has sovereignty over Greenland, an autonomous territory. Greenland’s access to natural resources and implications to national security are increasingly important for the long-term interests of the United States. 

“No, I can’t assure you on either of those two,” Trump said when asked if he could assure the world that he would not use military or economic coercion to take over both locations.

“But I can say this: We need them for economic security,” Trump said. “I’m not going to commit to that — it might be that you’ll have to do something.” 

He also said “all hell will break out in the Middle East” if the hostages taken by Hamas are not released by the time he is back in the Oval Office.

Trump also announced that a Dubai-based company, DAMAC Properties, would be investing at least $20 billion in the United States to support “massive new data centers across the Midwest, the Sun Belt area and also to keep America on the cutting edge of technology and artificial intelligence.”

The president-elect said the first phase of the investment would be in Arizona, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas.

He added that the Gulf of Mexico should be renamed the Gulf of America.

Offshore drilling

Trump slammed Biden’s decision earlier this week to prohibit future oil and gas drilling off the entire East and West coasts, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the remaining portions of Alaska’s Northern Bering Sea, saying he would “reverse it immediately.”

It appears unlikely Trump can unilaterally reverse the protections. In the early months of his first term, he tried to undo protections placed by then-President Barack Obama, but a federal judge ruled that was beyond his authority.

“We will drill, baby, drill,” Trump said. “We’re going to be drilling in a lot of other locations, and the energy costs are going to come way down — they’ll be brought down to a very low level, and that’s going to bring everything else down.”

Trump also said he would end a “mandate” for electric vehicles. There is no federal electric vehicle mandate, but Trump has said he wants to end the $7,500 consumer tax incentive, and Republicans have sometimes characterized the Biden administration’s regulations tightening automotive emissions as an EV mandate.

Trump added that he wanted to move away from wind energy.

“We’re going to try and have a policy where no windmills are being built,” he said.