U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., talks with reporters during a press conference on Wednesday, Dec. 10, 2025. Also pictured are, from left, Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain of Michigan, Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota and Majority Leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans released a health care bill Friday evening they hope will help curb rising costs, though the measure doesn’t have the level of Democratic support needed to get through the Senate. 

The 111-page bill will likely move to the House floor next week, where Speaker Mike Johnson will need nearly every one of his members to vote to pass the legislation, an uphill battle given the vastly different views among centrists and far-right members of the party on health care issues. 

The Louisiana Republican said in a statement the bill offers “clear, responsible alternatives that will lower premium costs and increase access and health care options for all Americans.”

Democrats have been pressing for a three-year extension of the enhanced tax credits for people who purchase their insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. 

So far, House and Senate Republican leadership hasn’t gotten on board with any extension of those subsidies, arguing they have led to a sharp rise in the cost of health insurance. 

GOP lawmakers have instead pursued their own legislation, but without at least some backing from Democrats, no bill will make it through the Senate’s 60-vote procedural hurdles. 

Senate Republicans tried to advance a bill earlier this week from Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo but fell short of the votes needed. 

Democrats were also unsuccessful trying to move their bill to extend the ACA marketplace tax credits for three years. 

The House Republican bill, sponsored by Iowa Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, is unlikely to break the logjam in Congress over the rising cost of health insurance and health care, potentially leaving the issue as one the parties can debate leading up to next year’s midterm elections. 

Targeting ‘real drivers’ of cost increases

Johnson rebuked Democrats in his statement for enacting the Affordable Care Act during President Barack Obama’s first term, saying the law hasn’t made health care cost less. 

House Republicans’ new legislation, Johnson said, will address “the real drivers of health care costs to provide affordable care, increase access and choice, and restore integrity to our nation’s health care system for all Americans.”

The bill would require Pharmacy Benefit Managers “to provide employers with detailed data on prescription drug spending, rebates, spread pricing, and formulary decisions—empowering plans and workers with the transparency they deserve,” according to a summary in Johnson’s release. 

Starting in 2027, the legislation would appropriate funding for cost sharing reduction payments that the summary said would reduce health insurance premiums and stabilize the individual market. 

The House Rules Committee is scheduled to prepare the bill for floor debate on Tuesday by considering whether to allow any amendments to be considered on the floor. 

The full House will then debate the legislation later in the week before departing for the two-week holiday break. 

Trump wants direct payments

President Donald Trump, speaking from the Oval Office shortly after the bill was released, reiterated his preference that the federal government send payments directly to Americans.

“We want to give the money to the people and let the people buy their own great health care, and they’ll save a lot of money, and it’ll be great,” he said.

But Trump also appeared to signal he is going to stay out of negotiations in Congress, saying, “I leave it to them and hopefully they’re going to put great legislation on this desk right here.”

Kilmar Abrego Garcia speaks before dozens of supporters Friday outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Baltimore. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)

Kilmar Abrego Garcia is a free man, at least temporarily.

Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran immigrant and Maryland resident, appeared early Friday for a check-in at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office in Baltimore, less than day after a federal district judge ordered him released from ICE detention in Pennsylvania.

At his last ICE check-in, in August, Abrego Garcia walked in but didn’t walk out: Authorities detained him and held him until Thursday. But Friday, Abrego Garcia walked out of the building to cheers and chants, led by members of the immigrant rights group CASA to a black car that took him to rejoin his family in Prince George’s County.

Before Abrego-Garcia walked inside the building Friday, he thanked his supporters who rallied there, talked about spending the holidays with his family and offered advice for others suffering similar legal battles against the Trump administration.

“I stand before you as a free man, and I want you to remember me this way with my head held up high,” Abrego Garica said in Spanish, through a CASA translator.

“I stand here today with my head held up high, and I will continue to fight and stand firm against all of the injustices this government has done upon me,” Abrego Garcia said. “Regardless of this administration, I believe this is a country of laws, and I believe that this injustice will come to its end. Keep fighting. Do not give up. I wish all of you love and justice. Keep going.”

One of his attorneys, Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg, told reporters and a few dozen protesters outside the field office that the federal judge who ordered Abrego Garcia freed Thursday said Friday that he could not be detained by ICE at his latest check-in.

Based on a temporary restraining order filed by his attorneys, Sandoval-Moshenberg said the judge will schedule a hearing at U.S. District Court in Greenbelt that Abrego Garcia will be able to attend.

“The legal fight is far from over,” Sandoval-Moshenberg said. “I wish I could say that with this, the government is going to leave well enough alone. This man has suffered enough.”

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called the judge’s decision to let Abrego Garcia free “naked judicial activism.”

“This order lacks any valid legal basis and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts,” McLaughlin said in an email Friday morning that repeated her statement from the day before.

Abrego Garcia’s return to the Baltimore ICE office came one day after U.S. District Court of Maryland Judge Paul Xinis ordered the Trump administration to release him from the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Pennsylvania, where he had been held since September. He was released Thursday evening and spent the night at his home in Beltsville.

Since he was first detained by immigration officials in March and wrongly deported to his home county of El Salvador, Abrego Garcia’s case has shone a spotlight on the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration crackdown.

Abrego Garcia was originally deported to a brutal prison in El Salvador, despite a previous court ruling that prohibited his transfer there because of fear of violence by Salvadoran gangs.

Months later — and months after the U.S. Supreme Court’s April order that the Trump administration “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return –he was brought back to the U.S. on June 6, only to face charges of human smuggling in Tennessee. The judge in that case eventually ordered Abrego Garcia released to home detention while his claim of vindictive prosecution in the Tennessee case proceeded.

Xinis, who got involved in the case when Abrego Garcia was first deported, issued a ruling Thurday that was highly critical of the administration’s actions in the case. She found that Abrego Garcia’s latest detention, since his August ICE check-in, was “again without lawful authority,” because the Trump administration has been holding him for deportation but has not made an effort to remove him to a third country.

The government’s “conduct over the past months belie that his detention has been for the basic purpose of effectuating removal, lending further support that Abrego Garcia should be held no longer,” Xinis wrote in her opinion.

Costa Rica has agreed to accept Abrego Garcia as a refugee, but Justice Department lawyers could not give Xinis a clear explanation of why the Trump administration would not send him there. Instead, the administration has proposed deporting Abrego Garcia to several countries in Africa.

Back in Baltimore on Friday morning, dozens of supporters braved the cold to hold up signs, chant and then clap and cheer when Abrego Garcia walked back outside the ICE building a free man, chanting “todos somos Kilmar,” or “we are all Kilmar.”

“It’s definitely a good day, but it is a good day to know that he’ll be able to spend the holidays with his family, “said Baltimore City Councilmember Odette Ramos, who attended the rally.

“He and his family have been so brave to go through all of this and to have their story really symbolize, frankly, what so many others are going through,” she said. “The fight’s not over.”

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: editor@marylandmatters.org.

Wisconsin's health department is sticking with a recommendation that children receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Wisconsin’s health department is reaffirming longstanding recommendations that all newborns get a vaccination for hepatitis B.

The Department of Health Services announced Thursday it has sent a memo to Wisconsin vaccination providers about the vaccine.

“DHS continues to recommend that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth, and then go on to complete the standard three-dose series within the first 18 months of life,” said Dr. Ryan Westergaard, chief medical officer in the DHS bureau of communicable diseases, at a media briefing Thursday.

Hepatitis B, a viral infection, can lead to lifelong liver disease, Westergaard said, including cirrhosis and liver cancer.

“Infants and young children are particularly at high risk,” he said. A baby infected with the virus has up to a 90% chance of developing chronic liver disease, he said.

Infants can be exposed during birth or through close contact with adults and caregivers “who may not even know that they carry the virus,” Westergaard added. “That’s why vaccination early in life is so important.”

DHS issued the announcement following a federal shift in vaccine policy, eliminating a recommendation in place since 1991 for newborns to receive the hepatitis B shot. The recommendation was eliminated Dec. 5 in a vote by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In June, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replaced all 17 members of the advisory committee with a new group of appointees, many of whom are seen as vaccine skeptics.

CDC vaccine committee overturns decades-old hepatitis B recommendation for newborns

The decision to end the recommendation for all newborns to get the hepatitis B shot dismayed the leaders of  medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.

“For more than 30 years, the hepatitis B vaccine has been used safely and effectively in newborns,” Westergaard said Thursday. Since the 1991 recommendation was put in place, hepatitis B infections in children have declined by 99%, he said.

“This recommendation is grounded in decades of research showing that the vaccine is safe and effective, and it aligns with guidance of the American Academy of Pediatrics and other leading medical groups,” Westergaard said. “So, our message today is straightforward, hepatitis B and its long-term health consequences are preventable. And routine childhood vaccination remains one of our most effective tools we have to protect children’s health and prevent lifelong disease.”

Westergaard said there has been no change in insurance coverage for the vaccine and that the hepatitis B shot remains among the vaccines available through the Vaccine for Children’s program for patients without health insurance.

ACIP also recommended blood testing for antibodies before giving the rest of the hepatitis B series shots for infants and young children, but Westergaard said that recommendation is not supported by scientific evidence.

The presence of hepatitis B antibodies in adults is a good indicator that they are protected against an infection, he said. “There’s no science suggesting that that same strategy works for newborns and children,” he added.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Voters at the Wilmar Neighborhood Center on Madison's East Side cast their ballots. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Elections Commission on Thursday denied a demand from the U.S. Department of Justice for the state’s full voter registration list, including personally identifiable information such as dates of birth, driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers. 

At a special meeting Thursday afternoon and in a letter sent in response to the DOJ demand, WEC stated that Wisconsin law explicitly prevents the commission from sharing the personal information of voters. 

“The U.S. DOJ is simply asking the commission to do something the commission is explicitly forbidden by Wisconsin law to do,” commissioner Don Millis said. 

This is the second time this year the DOJ has requested Wisconsin’s voter database. Both times, the department has been informed that Wisconsin state law requires that the commission charge a fee to obtain the list. 

Since the summer, the DOJ has requested the voter databases of several states — raising concerns over why the department is seeking massive amounts of voter data, especially as President Donald Trump has remained fixated on conspiracy theories that his 2020 election loss was rigged. 

In its demand for the data, sent Dec. 2 as a “confidential memorandum of understanding” the department said it was seeking the data to check if Wisconsin is properly complying with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act.

VRLData Sharing Agreement DOJ-WI

“The Justice Department is requesting your state’s [Voter Registration List] to test, analyze, and assess states’ VRLs for proper list maintenance and compliance with federal law,” the memo states. 

However the WEC response questions the authority with which DOJ is asserting its right to the records. For one, Wisconsin is exempt from the NVRA because it offers same-day voter registration at polling places. Also, WEC wrote in its response letter that HAVA does not grant the DOJ access to confidential voter data. 

Compliance with HAVA and the thoroughness of states’ compliance with voter list maintenance requirements have become regular talking points among Republicans who say they’re concerned that there are thousands of people who have active voter registrations when they should be ineligible to vote because they’ve moved, died or otherwise are unable to cast a ballot. 

The sources of those complaints include the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a right-wing law firm that in October sent a letter to the DOJ asking for the department to assess Wisconsin’s compliance with HAVA. 

WEC has said repeatedly that the commission and Wisconsin’s municipal election clerks are properly maintaining the voter rolls. They’ve also noted that the concerns are often overstated because even if a voter is ineligible and their file is deactivated in the database, their name will still appear in the system.

WEC Letter – Resp to 12.2.25 DOJ Correspondence

“The joint effort between state and local election officials enhances the integrity of the system by ensuring responsibilities are distributed across thousands of officials in every city, village, and town, rather than concentrated among a small handful of state employees in the Capitol,” the WEC response letter states. “The vast majority of list maintenance work consists of routine updates, and the processes also serve to identify attempts at wrongdoing. Each year, Wisconsin election officials at all levels of government identify and refer to criminal prosecution: felons attempting to vote, double voters, non-citizens, and others trying to circumvent election law.” 

In the WEC decision to deny DOJ’s request as well as to release the DOJ memo and the response letter, Republican commissioner Bob Spindell was the lone vote against. Spindell pointed to a provision of state law that allows WEC to share restricted information in the voter database with law enforcement agencies. Spindell has often used his role on the commission to indulge conspiracy theories and cast doubt on the security of the election system. 

“This is a highly, highly controversial issue throughout the country at this point in time, and my point of view is that this information can be released,” Spindell said. “I believe that through the HAVA Act, the federal government has the appropriate ability to see if we’re doing everything that’s correct and OK. I’ve talked forever about we need to have, in the state of Wisconsin, an independent audit, or whatever, of the registration list to satisfy the many individuals and groups and so forth that question it. And all HAVA is doing here, the federal government is asking for a chance to take a look at us.” 

But commissioner Mark Thomsen said there is no way that a provision meant to help law enforcement find information about suspects in criminal investigations could be interpreted to mean WEC can give the personal information of every Wisconsin voter to the federal government. 

“Our rights as commissioners are limited by the Fourth Amendment, by state law itself,” Thomsen said. “Mr. Spindel is just flat out wrong that this one provision that he relies on would allow us to legally give Wisconsin citizens’ private information off to someone for some unknown reason. It’s not just a person that’s suspected of a crime, it’s everybody, and Wisconsin has never stood for the proposition that any government is entitled to all this data anytime someone asked. So I think Bob, you’re just making up the law there.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Child care provider Heather Murray, right, gives Mandela Barnes, left, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for Wisconsin governor, a tour of her facility, Art House Preschool in Waunakee. Joining them were, second from left, Paula Drew and Kayla Gardner, both from the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin should make child care universally available, just as public education is, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes said Thursday during a child care center visit that was part of the rollout for his campaign for governor.

“I support having full, comprehensive, universal childcare,” Barnes told the Wisconsin Examiner in an interview that followed a round table session with providers, parents and child care policy analysts. “I, for sure, hope others understand the urgency of this issue, understand the complexity of it as well, and we’ll be ready to fight tooth and nail to do everything we can to improve the system for our providers, for our parents and most importantly, for the young people, for the students, for our children.”

The round table took place at the Art House Preschool, a Waunakee child care center.

Barnes is not the first Democratic hopeful in the 2026 race for governor to visit the Art House. Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley held a round table on child care issues in November at the same location. And virtually every other active Democratic primary candidate in the governor’s race mentions affordable child care on their website as a priority of their campaigns.

During his event Thursday, Barnes coupled state funding for child care with his support for better public education funding.

“If we aren’t invested in children, what are we doing as a state? What are we doing as a country?” he asked at the start of the nearly hour-long discussion. “We need to ensure, one, that our schools, K-12, are fully funded, but also that our children are ready to enter K-12. And that means that early childhood education has support.”

During most of the session, Barnes refrained from lengthy policy prescriptions and focused instead on questions for the round table participants — asking for both their biggest challenges and their “biggest ideas” for addressing Wisconsin’s child care needs.

“Direct investment to providers, I believe, would be the best to keep people from closing their doors,” said Heather Murray, the owner of Art House, who has been a child care provider for nearly two decades. “I like to call it a public good, because I don’t believe it can exist without government funding.”

Stephanie Frontz is an IT specialist and the mother of four, one of them at Art House. She recently gave birth to infant twins who are slated to be enrolled there.

“We need the help there so the state can help pay fair wages,” Frontz said. That will  ensure child care workers stay, which in turn makes it possible for more parents to work, she added. “It impacts my family and the economy if I can’t work.”

Child care providers who have a shortage of teachers reduce the hours that they’re open, said Carly Eaton, a parent whose day job is with an organized labor environmental group.

She understands why, but jobs in construction, manufacturing and especially health care often “don’t fit in the 7 a.m. to 6 a.m. hours that you may be able to find child care,” Eaton said. “To hear legislators on a certain side of the aisle talk about the worker shortage and then not do anything about child care just breaks my brain.”

During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal relief funds included money designated for child care. In Wisconsin that money went to the Child Care Counts program, which originally distributed $20 million a month to the state’s child care providers.

The monthly support was later cut in half and extended through mid-2025 after the GOP majority in the Wisconsin Legislature rejected the proposal Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, made in the 2023-25 state budget to continue the subsidy with state funds.

Evers again proposed ongoing state funding in the 2025-27 budget. “I heard a lot of people say during the last budget cycle, ‘We can’t just keep writing checks …. It didn’t work,’” said Kayla Gardner, engagement specialist at the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association. “It actually did — it very much did work.”

“When the payments were the highest, we had very few closures,” said Paula Drew, director of early childhood education policy and research at WECA. “It stabilized the field.”

When the current budget finally passed in late June, it for the first time included some direct state funding for centers, but just for one year and at a smaller amount than Evers or child care advocates originally sought.

That money helped, said Jenn Bilderback, administrative director of Big Oak Child Care in Madison. But it also came with restrictions that made it less accessible for some providers and it will go away in June 2026.

“We have to do something that’s much more universal and that allows the flexibility for a provider,” Bilderback told Barnes.

She said her center’s board of directors, most of whom are parents, have supported providing benefits — a rarity for many child care providers — and paying a living wage. “We need to do this, but the cost of living in Madison and outside Madison is increasing too high to be able to keep up with that.”

Barnes — who along with most Democrats running for elected office in the 2026 cycle has seized on affordability as a campaign theme — responded that “the cost of living is top of mind for everybody.” But then he turned back to her earlier comments.

“You mentioned ‘something more universal,’ Barnes said. “I want you to say the thing out loud. Somebody can say it — universal child care, right?”

“We do dream big, and we do think of all these things,” said Gardner. “But what we see in return is almost nothing.”

Drew said that with turnover among child care teachers, programs are often operating at less than capacity, even as parents have trouble finding care.

“We don’t necessarily, right now, need new buildings, because we’ve got 33,000 open spots . . . across the state. We need teachers that can be working in programs to open up those 33,000 spots,” Drew said. “We’ve got the demand, but we also need the supply available in early education.”

Katie Licitis, an Art House Preschool teacher, said she first took the job four years ago after she and her husband moved to Wisconsin from Georgia. For the first time, she said, she needed child care after having been a stay-at-home mom until then. But with the turnover that providers are seeing, she asked Barnes, “Do you have a plan to retain teachers?”

“You shouldn’t have to choose between a job you love and Kwik Trip, as an example, because they’re paying more money, right?” Barnes replied. “Like, that’s an indictment on the way that things have been going. And I think that’s a big part of the broader universal child care package. And I don’t think people should be shy about wanting universal child care in this state. I think that this is exactly one of those areas that Wisconsin should be a leader in the nation.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin politicians denounce the "billionaire loophole" that makes state elections so expensive, but they're still raising tons of cash. | Getty Images

Two high-profile candidates for governor of Wisconsin, Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany and Democratic former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, have denounced the unlimited flow of cash into state political campaigns. Then, practically in the same breath, both men announced their plans to raise tens of millions of dollars, signalling to their less well funded primary opponents that they might as well get out of the way.

In an interview with PBS Wisconsin on Dec. 5, Tiffany criticized “that pass-through loophole, I call it the ‘billionaire loophole,’” in Wisconsin law, adding, “there’s just so much money that comes into Wisconsin.” 

“You can cry about it or you can compete,” Tiffany continued. “We choose to compete … We’re hoping to raise $40 million.”

As Baylor Spears reports, Tiffany actually voted for the “billionaire loophole” he now criticizes back when he was serving in the state Senate in 2015. 

Mandela Barnes, in a recent campaign stop in Madison, told Spears and other reporters that he has raised a “strong haul,” in the first week of his campaign, and that he intends to raise a staggering $50 million by the end of the race. He added that he doesn’t like the role of money in politics. “It’s not a good sign,” he said, and his future goal is “to get big money out of politics” and enact “campaign and ethics reform.”

Back in 2015, when Republicans were ramming through the “billionaire loophole,” Barnes opposed it, saying at the time that it would allow “shady special interest money and allow for more corruption to go undetected and unprosecuted.”

Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause Wisconsin, remembers that moment well. Under former Republican Gov. Scott Walker, Republican legislative majorities passed the law eviscerating campaign finance limits along with other measures getting rid of the nonpartisan Government Accountability Board and eliminating the John Doe procedure that was used to criminally prosecute leaders of both political parties for campaign finance crimes in the infamous caucus scandal of the early 2000’s.

The 2015 law doubled the amount individuals could give to candidates. More importantly, it eliminated all limits on state party contributions to candidates and allowed coordination between candidates and outside groups that make issue ads supporting the campaigns. Donors were able to give as much as they wanted to political parties, which then funneled that money to candidates, creating the billionaire loophole to which Tiffany belatedly objects. The 2015 law cleared the way for outsiders like Elon Musk to pour limitless cash into state races to try to affect the outcome.

“The Republicans did that in 2015 because they were convinced that they would have a great financial advantage since they generally raised more money from donors and special interests,” says Heck. “Of course, what they didn’t anticipate was [former Wisconsin Democratic Party chair] Ben Wikler and the Democratic Party’s ability to take that big hole in the law and use it to raise massive amounts of money.”

Recently, Democrats in Wisconsin have been beating Republicans in the fundraising arms race. In 2025, in the most expensive judicial election in U.S. history, Susan Crawford, the candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court supported by the Democratic Party, raised $28.3 million compared with Republican-supported Brad Schimel, who raised $15.1 million. Outside special interests accounted for most of the spending on the race, with Musk alone putting in nearly $20 million through his political action committees and millions more laundered through the state Republican Party for Schimel, while the Democratic Party of Wisconsin funneled $10 million to Crawford.

The lesson of the 2015 law, says Heck, is, “be careful what you wish for.”

That certainly applies to Republicans, who lost the two most expensive state Supreme Court races in history as well as the last two record-breaking gubernatorial races won by Gov. Tony Evers with $93 million in total spending in 2018 and $164 million in 2022. 

But it also applies to Democrats, who cannot count on continually bringing in more money than Republicans.

More importantly, when it costs tens of millions of dollars to win state elections, regular voters’ voices are drowned out by billionaires, who are not investing in candidates just out of the goodness of their hearts.

Heck believes that change will only come when voters demand reform, most likely because a big scandal clearly illustrates that politicians are doing favors for their donors in exchange for campaign cash.

“It’s going to require a bipartisan coming-together to establish some limits,” Heck says. 

Even as the U.S. Supreme Court has opened the floodgate for campaign spending with the Citizens United decision, which in 2010 struck down a federal ban on political donations from corporations, and McCutcheon v. FEC, which in 2014 found that annual caps on total political donations from one person are unconstitutional, states have the ability to impose limits. 

A report by the National Conference of State Legislatures shows Wisconsin is one of only 11 states that allow unlimited candidate contributions by state parties and among the top 10 for the highest limits on PAC contributions to candidates. Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois and most other states limit how much political parties can accept, which reduces the Elon Musk effect. Plus, “We are one of few states that allows so-called coordination between political candidates and outside groups,” Heck says.

The problem is that candidates, while acknowledging that massive amounts of money fueling their campaigns is a bad look, don’t want to unilaterally disarm. 

But now, as the Trump administration drags the country to new levels of overt corruption, it could be a good time for a campaign that ties together billionaires’ destructive influence on society and the fact that they are buying our democracy. 

“There has to be public disgust with the amount of money being spent,” says Heck. “If a candidate put corruption front and center, it might get a lot of traction.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order as, left to right, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and White House artificial intelligence and crypto czar David Sacks look on in the Oval Office of the White House on Dec. 11, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday night that aims to preempt states from enacting rules governing artificial intelligence, a major departure from the typical federalist structure of American government that Trump said was necessary because of the issue’s high stakes.

In an early evening signing ceremony in the Oval Office, Trump said the order would position the United States to win a competition with China to dominate the burgeoning AI industry. Coordinating policy among 50 different states would put the U.S. at a disadvantage, Trump said, adding that Chinese President Xi Jinping did not have similar restraints.

“This will not be successful unless they have one source of approval or disapproval,” he said. “It’s got to be one source. They can’t go to 50 different sources.”

The order creates a task force to monitor state laws on AI and to challenge them in court, and directs the Commerce secretary to complete a review of state laws within three months.

David Sacks, the chair of a White House board on technology, said there were more than 1,000 pending AI bills in state legislatures.

White House staff secretary Will Scharf said during the Oval Office event that the order would “ensure that AI can operate within a single national framework in this country, as opposed to being subject to state level regulation that could potentially cripple the industry.”

“The big picture is that we’re taking steps to ensure that AI operates under a single national standard so that we can reap the benefits that will come from it.”

The order, a major assertion of presidential power over state governments and Congress, is likely to see court challenges, including from environmental groups that oppose AI expansion because of the energy resources the technology requires.

“Congress has repeatedly rejected attempts to undermine states’ and local communities’ efforts to protect themselves from the unchecked spread of AI, which is driving a wave of dangerous data center development,” Mitch Jones, the chief of policy and litigation at the advocacy group Food and Water Watch, said in a statement. 

“We’ll be following the administration’s attempts to implement this farcical order, and we’ll fight it in Congress, in the states, in the courts, and with communities across this country.”

Protesters rally outside of the Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on Feb. 5, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House passed a bill Thursday that would overturn an executive order from President Donald Trump that strips collective bargaining rights for roughly 1 million federal employees. 

The 231-195 vote was a rare bipartisan pushback against the president. The bill was sponsored by Maine’s Jared Golden, a Democrat, and Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick, a Republican. Twenty Republicans joined all Democrats in supporting the bill.

It’s now referred to the Senate, but it’s unclear if it will garner enough support to reach the chamber’s 60-vote threshold — or even be brought to the floor for a vote.

The move also bucked House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, who did not bring the bill to the floor for Wednesday’s vote. Instead, lawmakers were able to vote on it through a legislative maneuver known as a discharge petition. 

The procedure allows rank-and-file members to compel the lower chamber to vote on measures that are not brought up by the leadership of the majority party, which is how bills typically reach the floor.

On Wednesday’s vote to advance the discharge petition, 13 Republicans joined all Democrats.

Following Wednesday’s procedural vote, Golden said in a statement that the bill would restore the rights of federal employees.

“President Trump said ending collective bargaining was about protecting our national defense,” he said. “But in my District, many affected workers build our warships and care for our veterans. If the majority we built over the past few months sticks together, we can overturn this union-busting executive order, and we can show America that this body will protect workers’ rights.”  

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, argued against the bill on the floor Thursday, saying lax accountability among the federal workforce harmed taxpayers.

“Accountability problems in the federal workforce are legendary,” he said. “It takes a Herculean effort to fire a poorly performing federal worker or one who is engaged in misconduct.”

Trump signed an executive order in March that banned collective bargaining agreements for federal agencies dealing with national security.

Those agencies include the departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, State and Energy, along with the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Coast Guard, most entities within the Department of Justice and several pandemic response and refugee resettlement agencies within the Health and Human Services Department, among others. 

Federal police and firefighters are exempt from the order.

Federal employees have limited bargaining agreements, compared to the private sector. Workers cannot strike or bargain for higher wages or benefits, but they can push for better working conditions, such as protection from retaliation, discrimination, and illegal firings. 

Sen. Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island speaks during a U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Dec. 11, 2025, as Chairman Roger Wicker looks on . The hearing examined the Trump Administration's deployment of the National Guard across the United States. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. lawmakers who oversee armed services policy split along party lines Thursday when examining the deployments of the National Guard to cities across the country under what President Donald Trump describes as a crime-fighting strategy.

Members of the Senate Committee on the Armed Services questioned for nearly two-and-a-half hours high-level Department of Defense officials, including the Pentagon’s No. 2 lawyer and the head of U.S. Northern Command who oversees National Guard troops under federal deployment.

The hearing on Capitol Hill came less than one month after a gunman shot two West Virginia National Guard members in broad daylight outside a Washington, D.C., Metro station just blocks from the White House.

U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died of her injuries the following day, Thanksgiving, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, is recovering from critical injuries. A 29-year-old Afghan national who worked with American troops in Afghanistan has been charged with first-degree murder. 

Senators on the panel expressed bipartisan messages of support and gratitude for Beckstrom, Wolfe and their families, but divisions were apparent over why and on what grounds Trump deployed the guard to five U.S. cities since June: Los Angeles; Washington, D.C.; Portland, Ore.; Chicago and Memphis, Tenn.

Trump also threatened to send the guard to other places, including New York City, Baltimore, St. Louis and New Orleans.

Trump first federalized the California National Guard in early June, deploying them to Los Angeles against the wishes of Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats. 

A California federal district judge ruled Wednesday the Trump administration must return the troops to Newsom.

A federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled Nov. 20 — six days before Beckstrom and Wolfe were attacked — that Trump’s deployment of the guard in the district was illegal. A federal appeals court has allowed the service members to remain in the district while the appeal plays out. 

Other cases, including challenges to Trump’s deployment of the guard to Oregon and Illinois, have also been tied up in court.

Countering crime

Sen. Roger Wicker, Armed Services Committee chair, opened the hearing by saying, “In recent years violent crime, rioting, drug trafficking and heinous gang activity have steadily escalated,” citing the Department of Justice.

For that reason, he said, Trump “ordered an immediate and coordinated response by deploying the National Guard to some of our nation’s most dangerous cities.”

“Not surprisingly, Democratic governors and left-wing pundits have decried these deployments,” the Mississippi Republican said, dismissing any concerns as “manufactured and misguided.”

While capturing accurate crime statistics is challenging — as many crimes go unreported — murder, rape, aggravated assault and robbery all decreased nationwide in 2024, according to the FBI’s latest crime statistics.

Data also show U.S. property and violent crime plunged between 1993 and 2022, according to the Pew Research Center. 

However, the analysis showed attitudes about crime split according to party affiliation.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., argued Thursday that guard deployments to cities across the U.S. are not out of the ordinary.

He asked Charles Young III, principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Defense, to explain how the process works.

Young, pointing to a stack of books on the table, said the examples are “voluminous.”  

“Rather than bringing in troops from the regular Army or the active component … the Founding Fathers wanted to resort to utilizing the National Guard because they were citizens and from the communities that were involved. And these books that I have here are just books on the role of federal military forces in domestic disorders,” he said.

‘Is that a legal order?’

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Army National Guard veteran who said she pushed for the hearing, slammed Trump’s guard deployments when she delivered the Democrats’ opening remarks.

Duckworth said Beckstrom’s death and Wolfe’s injuries “should never have happened in the first place.”

“Military service involves risks, and our service members accept those risks knowingly, selflessly. So we better be damn sure that the mission is the right one,” said Duckworth, who lost her legs and partial use of her right arm in Iraq when her Black Hawk helicopter was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade

Duckworth and other Democratic senators on the panel questioned the legality of Trump’s guard deployments and alleged the president was using the show of force to curtail public demonstrations and free speech.

Duckworth recalled Trump’s Sept. 30 speech to military generals in Quantico, Virginia, when he said the administration should use American cities as “training grounds for our military, National Guard, but military because we’re going into Chicago very soon.” 

In that same speech, Trump said Democratic-run cities are “in bad shape,” and “it’s a war from within.” 

Harking back to reports that Trump asked former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper about shooting protesters in 2020, Duckworth asked, “Let’s say the president issued such an order. He said so. Is that a legal order?”

“Senator, orders to that effect would depend on the circumstances,” Young replied.

“We have a president who doesn’t think that the rule of law applies to him, and he wants to show force,” Duckworth responded.

Sen. Jack Reed, the committee’s ranking member, delivered a similar line of questioning, asking Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot, commander of U.S. Northern Command, “If the president declared an organization, a terrorist organization … and you were ordered to attack them on U.S. soil, would you carry out that order?”

“Sen. Reed, as with any order I get, I would assess the order, consult the legal authorities to ensure that it was a lawful order, and I would, if I had questions, I would elevate that to the chairman and the secretary, as they welcome at all times,” Guillot said. 

“And if I had no concerns and I was confident in (the) lawful order, I would definitely execute that order.”

Reed noted that Guillot was present for Trump’s speech in Quantico.

“The president essentially indicated that you should be prepared to conduct military operations in the United States against this enemy within. Are you doing that?” he said.

“Sir, I have not been tasked to do anything that reflects what you just said,” Guillot replied.

Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said he didn’t believe testimony delivered Thursday by Mark Ditlevson, principal deputy assistant secretary of Defense for homeland defense, that Trump is “clearly doing the right thing” and the guard is working in conjunction with local authorities.

King, of Maine, said the testimony “was borderline humorous.”

“That didn’t happen in Illinois or in California,” King said. “We’re talking about a broader issue here that I think is extremely dangerous, and the reason it’s particularly dangerous in the present moment is we have a president who has a very low bar as to what constitutes an emergency.”

Cities targeted

Trump deployed thousands of guard troops to Los Angeles after local immigration raids sparked protests that city officials said local law enforcement were able to handle without assistance.

In D.C., he based his deployment on a “crime emergency” and the deployment of troops on the district’s streets happened as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents carried out weeks of raids, traffic stops and other actions as part of Trump’s mass deportation campaign. 

District residents protested the deployment, and opposition posters, stickers, flags and graffiti sprang up across the city.

Trump justified sending the guard to Portland after falsely claiming the city was “burning down.”

District of Columbia and Tennessee officials have worked with the administration to bring the guard to their cities, which grants the troops power to assist local law enforcement. 

Illinois, Oregon and California officials have not agreed to work with the guard, which results in an order restricting members to only duties of protecting federal property.

Trump previously activated the National Guard to the nation’s capital in response to protests during the summer of 2020 following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

“Costs, like everything else, are out of control, and coming from a family that had to make every dollar count, I know what that feels like,” Joel Brennan said in his launch video. (Screenshot from campaign video)

Joel Brennan, formerly the Department of Administration (DOA) secretary under Gov. Tony Evers, announced his campaign for governor Thursday, saying that President Donald Trump’s “chaos and incompetence” are hurting the state and that “the numbers just aren’t adding up for Wisconsin families.”

“Costs, like everything else, are out of control, and coming from a family that had to make every dollar count, I know what that feels like,” Brennan said in his launch video. “I’ll be a governor who will stand up to Trump’s dysfunction and be laser focused on improving the lives of people across our state.”

In the video, Brennan introduces himself, saying many voters “probably don’t know much about me.” He talks about growing up as one of 11 children in a family that was “long on potential, although sometimes a little short on resources.” He relates that he worked in many jobs including landscaping, retail and deep frying egg rolls to help put himself through college and that his first car had no working blinkers.

“I’ve raised two great kids with my wife, Audra, passing on lessons like rolling up our sleeves to get things done and showing up for our community, and for 25 years I’ve worked with businesses and non-profits to create jobs and strengthen Wisconsin’s economy.”

Brennan served as the DOA secretary from 2019 through 2021. The agency is responsible for assisting the governor with the state budget, providing centralized purchasing and financial management for state agencies and working with the 11 federally recognized Native Nations in Wisconsin on gaming and coastal programs. 

“It’s easy to forget how broken things were after [former Gov.] Scott Walker and his right-wing Legislature had spent eight years gutting state government,” Brennan said. “We got to work putting the state on firmer financial footing, generating a budget surplus of nearly $4 billion dollars and growing our rainy day fund to $1.7 billion, then COVID hit and all of that progress was put at risk. We stood up to the extremists and delivered help to tens of thousands of small businesses, farmers, and families across Wisconsin.”

Prior to his time in Evers’ administration, Brennan worked as the executive director of Discovery World, the largest science museum in Wisconsin. 

Brennan stepped down from leading the DOA in December 2021 to serve as the president of the Greater Milwaukee Committee (GMC). The private-sector, nonprofit civic organization works to foster economic development and cultural growth in Wisconsin’s largest metro area.

According to the Greater Milwaukee Committee, Brennan is stepping aside from the role as he runs for governor. 

Brennan joins a crowded field of hopefuls seeking the Democratic nomination next year. Candidates include Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison), state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Milwaukee County Exec. David Crowley, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and former state Rep. Brett Hulsey. The primary is scheduled for Aug. 11, 2026.

Roys criticized Brennan in a statement after his announcement over a position the GMC took on a Milwaukee Public Schools referendum last year, saying that Wisconsin needs “a leader who knows how to deliver higher wages, lower costs and the freedom to thrive.”

“While I look forward to a spirited primary, I will not be able to overlook the fact that only one of the candidates in this race tried to defeat a desperately needed referendum to fund our biggest school district,” Roys said. 

The GMC, under Brennan’s leadership, was one of the city’s business organizations that opposed the $252 million operational referendum successfully sought by Milwaukee Public Schools in 2024. GMC expressed concerns at the time over transparency and the “failure to clearly articulate a measurable plan for how these additional financial resources will improve student outcomes.”

The Republican field for governor is not as expansive with just two candidates: U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the frontrunner in the race, and Washington Co. Executive Josh Schoemann.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., center, joined by Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., left, and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., speaks to reporters following a Senate Republican policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 9, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate in long-anticipated votes failed to advance legislation Thursday that would have addressed the rising cost of health insurance, leaving lawmakers deadlocked on how to curb a surge in premiums expected next year. 

Senators voted 51-48 on a Republican bill co-sponsored by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo that would have provided funding through Health Savings Accounts for some ACA marketplace enrollees during 2026 and 2027. 

They then voted 51-48 on a measure from Democrats that would have extended enhanced tax credits for people who purchase their health insurance from the Affordable Care Act Marketplace for three years. A group of Senate Democrats in November agreed to end a government shutdown of historic length in exchange for a commitment by Republicans to hold a vote on extending the enhanced subsidies.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted for the Democrats’ bill. Paul also voted against the GOP bill. 

Neither bill received the 60 votes needed to advance under the Senate’s legislative filibuster rule. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., criticized the ACA marketplace and the subsidies for leading to large increases in the costs of health insurance. 

“Under Democrats’ plan insurance premiums will continue to spiral, American taxpayers will find themselves on the hook for ever-increasing subsidy payments,” Thune said. “And don’t think that all those payments are going to go to vulnerable Americans.”

Thune argued Democrats’ bill was only an extension of the “status quo” of a “failed, flawed, fraud program that is increasing costs at three times the rate of inflation. 

Thune said the Republican bill from Cassidy and Crapo would “help individuals to meet their out-of-pocket costs and for many individuals who don’t use their insurance or who barely use it, it would allow them to save for health care expenses down the road.”

Schumer calls GOP plan ‘mean and cruel’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the three-year extension bill was the only option to avoid a spike in costs for people enrolled in ACA marketplace plans. 

“By my last count, Republicans are now at nine different health care proposals and counting. And none of them give the American people the one thing they most want — a clean, simple extension of these health care tax credits,” Schumer said. “But our bill does extend these credits cleanly and simply and it’s time for Republicans to join us.”

Schumer referred to the Cassidy-Crapo proposals as “stingy” as well as “mean and cruel.”

“Under the Republican plan, the big idea is essentially to hand people about $80 a month and wish them good luck,” Schumer said. “And even to qualify for that check, listen to how bad this is, Americans would be forced onto bare-bones bronze plans with sky-high deductibles; $7,000 or $10,000 for an individual, tens of thousands for a couple.”

After the votes failed, Schumer outlined some of the guardrails Democrats would put in place regarding negotiations with GOP colleagues.

“They want to talk about health care in general and how to improve it — we’re always open to that, but we do not want what they want — favoring the insurance companies, favoring the drug companies, favoring the special interests and turning their back on the American people,” he said. 

Health Savings Accounts in GOP plan

The Cassidy-Crapo bill would have the Department of Health and Human Services deposit money into Health Savings Accounts for people enrolled in bronze or catastrophic health insurance plans purchased on the ACA marketplace in 2026 or 2027, according to a summary of the bill. 

Health Savings Accounts are tax-advantaged savings accounts that consumers can use to pay for medical expenses that are not otherwise reimbursed. They are not health insurance products.

ACA marketplace enrollees who select a bronze or catastrophic plan and make up to 700% of the federal poverty level would receive $1,000 annually if they are between the ages of 18 and 49 and $1,500 per year if they are between the ages of 50 and 64. 

That would set a threshold of $109,550 in annual income for one person, or $225,050 for a family of four, according to the 2025 federal poverty guidelines. The numbers are somewhat higher for residents of Alaska and Hawaii.  

The funding could not go toward abortion access or gender transitions, according to the Republican bill summary. 

Members of Congress have introduced several other health care proposals, including two bipartisan bills in the House that would extend the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits for at least another year with some modifications. 

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has been reluctant to bring either bipartisan bill up for a floor vote, though he may not have the option if a discharge petition filed earlier this week garners the 218 signatures needed. 

Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick wrote in a statement the legislation represents a “solution that can actually pass—not a political messaging exercise.”

“This bill delivers the urgent help families need now, while giving Congress the runway to keep improving our healthcare system for the long term,” Fitzpatrick wrote. “Responsible governance means securing 80 percent of what families need today, rather than risking 100 percent of nothing tomorrow.”

But Johnson said Wednesday that he will put a package of bills on the House floor next week that he believes “​​will actually reduce premiums for 100% of Americans who are on health insurance.” Details of those bills have not been disclosed.

Thune told reporters that if “somebody is successful in getting a discharge petition and a bill out of the House, obviously we’ll take a look at it. But at the moment, you know, we’re focused on the action here in the Senate, which is the side-by-side vote we’re going to have later today.” 

Alaska’s Murkowski said lawmakers can find a compromise on health care by next week “if we believe it is possible.”

Political costs

The issue of affordability and rising health care costs is likely to be central to the November midterm elections, where Democrats hope to flip the House from red to blue and gain additional seats in the Senate. 

The Democratic National Committee isn’t waiting to begin those campaigns, placing digital ads in the hometown newspapers of several Republicans up for reelection next year, including Maine’s Collins and Ohio’s Jon Husted. 

“Today’s Senate vote to extend the ACA tax credits could be the difference between life and death for many Americans,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a press release. “Over 20 million Americans will see their health care premiums skyrocket next year if Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Jon Husted, and Dan Sullivan do not stand with working families and vote to extend these lifesaving credits.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted Senate Democrats’ proposal during Thursday’s press briefing, calling it a “political show vote” meant to provide cover for Democrats, whom she blamed for creating the problem. 

Trump and Republicans would “unveil creative ideas and solutions to the health care crisis that was created by Democrats,” she said. “Chuck Schumer is not sincerely interested in lowering health care costs for the American people. He’s putting this vote on the floor knowing that it will fail so he can have another talking point that he can throw around without any real plan or action.”

Shauneen Miranda and Jacob Fischler contributed to this report. 

Kilmar Abrego Garcia speaks to a crowd holding a prayer vigil and rally on his behalf outside the ICE building in Baltimore, Maryland, on Aug. 25, 2025. Lydia Walther Rodriguez with CASA interprets for him. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)

WASHINGTON — The wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody after a federal judge ordered his release earlier Thursday, according to his attorneys and an immigrant rights group that has advocated his case.

CASA, the immigrant rights group that has supported Abrego Garcia and his family since he was erroneously deported to a brutal Salvadoran prison, told States Newsroom he was released from the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Pennsylvania before a 5 p.m. Eastern deadline set by the judge. He has remained there since September. 

 However, it remained unclear Thursday night if the Department of Homeland Security will follow the judicial order, and the White House press secretary said the Department of Justice would swiftly appeal the decision.

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to States Newsroom the “order lacks any valid legal basis and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts.”

She did not respond to a follow-up question if ICE would follow the order from U.S. District Court of Maryland Judge Paula Xinis to release Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran immigrant and longtime Maryland resident who cast a spotlight on the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration crackdown after he was wrongly deported.

Abrego Garcia was imprisoned in a brutal prison in El Salvador and returned to the United States to face criminal charges in Tennessee. After he was ordered released from U.S. marshals custody by a federal judge, ICE detained him again at an appointment at the Baltimore, Maryland, ICE field office.

‘Without lawful authority’

Xinis, in a ruling highly critical of the administration’s actions in the case, found that since Abrego Garcia was brought back to the United States, he was detained “again without lawful authority,” because the Trump administration has not made an effort to remove him to a third country, due to his deportation protections from his home country of El Salvador. 

The order comes after Abrego Garcia challenged his ICE detention in a habeas corpus petition. Xinis was mulling a Supreme Court precedent that deemed immigrants cannot be held longer than six months in detention if the federal government is not actively making efforts to remove them.

“Separately, Respondents’ conduct over the past months belie that his detention has been for the basic purpose of effectuating removal, lending further support that Abrego Garcia should be held no longer,” Xinis wrote in her opinion.

Costa Rica has agreed to accept Abrego Garcia as a refugee, but in court, Department of Justice lawyers did not give Xinis a clear explanation of why the Trump administration would not remove him to Costa Rica. Instead, the Trump administration has tried to deport Abrego Garcia to several countries in Africa. 

Prolonged detention found

In her opinion, Xinis said that Abrego Garcia’s release is required under the Supreme Court’s precedent, referred to as the Zadvydas v. Davis case, because his nearly four-month detention at an ICE facility in Pennsylvania had been prolonged. 

“Respondents’ persistent refusal to acknowledge Costa Rica as a viable removal option, their threats to send Abrego Garcia to African countries that never agreed to take him, and their misrepresentation to the Court that Liberia is now the only country available to Abrego Garcia, all reflect that whatever purpose was behind his detention, it was not for the ‘basic purpose’ of timely third-country removal,” Xinis said.

She also noted witness testimony from several ICE officials who were unable to provide any information on efforts to remove Abrego Garcia to a third country where he would not face torture, persecution or deportation to El Salvador.  

“They simply refused to prepare and produce a witness with knowledge to testify in any meaningful way,” she said of the Department of Justice.

While the Trump administration has floated removing Abrego Garcia to Eswatini, Ghana, Liberia and Uganda, the Department of Justice is moving forward with criminal charges lodged against Abrego Garcia that stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. 

The judge in that Nashville case is trying to determine if the human smuggling of immigrants charges against Abrego Garcia – to which he has pleaded not guilty – are vindictive. 

Missing order of removal

Another issue Xinis pointed out was the Department of Justice’s inability to produce a final order of removal for Abrego Garica.  

“No such order of removal exists for Abrego Garcia,” she said. “When Abrego Garcia was first wrongly expelled to El Salvador, the Court struggled to understand the legal authority for even seizing him in the first place.”

She also cited the ICE officials’ testimony, which did answer whether a removal order existed. 

“Respondents twice sponsored the testimony of ICE officials whose job it is to effectuate removal orders, and who candidly admitted to having never seen one for Abrego Garcia,” she said. “Respondents have never produced an order of removal despite Abrego Garcia hinging much of his jurisdictional and legal arguments on its non-existence.”

Attorneys for Abrego Garcia have argued if there is no order of removal, there is no basis for his ICE detention.

Abrego Garcia is not challenging his deportation, and has agreed to be removed to Costa Rica, but has remained in ICE detention since August.

William J. Ford contributed to this report. 

U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, speaks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Monday, Sept. 29, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

The Democratic National Committee will run ads Thursday on the home pages of newspapers in a quartet of Republican senators’ hometowns, calling on the incumbents up for reelection next year to support a Democratic bill to extend health care subsidies.

The digital ads target Sens. Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Jon Husted of Ohio and John Cornyn of Texas on the day the Senate is expected to vote on a Democratic proposal to extend enhanced subsidies for insurance purchased on the Affordable Care Act marketplace. 

Without the extension, premiums are projected to sharply rise next year.

“REPUBLICAN ARE DOUBLING HEALTH CARE COSTS,” one mockup of the ad provided to States Newsroom reads. “Tell Senator Collins we can’t afford their price hike.”

The ads running in states with two GOP senators also mention the one not on the ballot next year: Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Bernie Moreno of Ohio and Ted Cruz of Texas.

“Today’s Senate vote to extend the ACA tax credits could be the difference between life and death for many Americans,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a press release. “Over 20 million Americans will see their health care premiums skyrocket next year if Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Jon Husted, and Dan Sullivan do not stand with working families and vote to extend these lifesaving credits.”

‘Affordability’ on the ballot

Democrats have sought to make health care costs a major issue as both parties have projected a focus on affordability issues in next year’s midterm elections that will determine control of Congress.

Senate Democrats initiated a six-week government shutdown this year in an effort to force Republicans to negotiate on the expiring subsidies, which Congress expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., promised a vote on a bill to address rising premiums in exchange for ending the shutdown.

The chamber will vote Thursday on a Democratic proposal that would extend the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits for three years.

Senators will also vote Thursday on legislation from Republicans Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mike Crapo of Idaho that would provide up to $1,500 annually for people who buy either bronze or catastrophic health insurance plans from the ACA marketplace.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said Wednesday that chamber would vote next week on an unspecified measure to address the expiring tax credits.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that Republicans’ goal was to provide funding “directly to the people” to “buy their own health care.”

Kimberly LaRonge of the Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and other LCO members show their support for two Catholic nuns who have taught at a school on tribal land for more than 50 years. (Photo by Frank Zufall/Wisconsin Examiner)

Sisters Felissa Zander, and Maryrose Theobald, both 88 years of age, have served as teachers for more than five decades at the only tuition-free Catholic School in Wisconsin: St. Francis Solanus School, a mission school founded in 1885 on the Lac Courte Oreilles Lake Superior Chippewa Reservation in Sawyer County.

Recently, the two sisters informed tribal members, many of whom attended the school as children, that their religious order, School Sisters of St. Francis (SSSF), was calling them to leave their teaching positions on the reservation and move to an assisted living facility in Milwaukee.

The news caused a stir, especially after Sister Felissa expressed concern that no replacements from her order were scheduled to arrive, raising questions about how the school could continue to function.

A small group of protesters gathered at the entrance to the church/school Sunday morning, Nov. 23. The demonstrators all had a connection to the parish, the school and the sisters. 

Susan Aasen, a tribal member and lawyer who had attended the school, said she had been in contact with the two sisters and said they were distraught over the pressure to leave.

“They’re crying,” she said of the sisters. “This is their home. They have no connections in Milwaukee.”

“You see them crying and they’re sad,” said tribal member Denise Cross. “They don’t want to go.”

Sister Felissa, who has taught at the school for 64 years, told the Wisconsin Examiner she didn’t want to leave the mission or teaching and even though she had experienced some medical issues, she was still capable of serving the community and wanted to continue until she was unable. She added that she was originally informed she would have to leave Dec. 2 and then the date was changed to Jan. 6.

“I have known Sister Felissa for a generation; she’s woven into the fabric of our community,” said Kimberly LaRonge, a tribal member who practices the Midewinwin spiritual tradition, but whose family helped build the church. She said she had been helped by Sister Felissa over the years.

Laronge said there was “outrage” in the community because of the perceived disrespect towards the sisters and also the lack of communication with the tribe.

Tribal members expressed concern for the two sisters, the school, but also what would happen to the church property, including the graveyard where many of their ancestors are buried, and artifacts tribal members had given to the church. They said they had heard the convent would be converted into a retreat for retired priests, a rumor the local bishop said was not true at a community meeting on Dec. 2. He also assured tribal members the graveyard would not be disturbed. 

Applause for Bishop’s statement that the nuns won’t be sent away

On Tuesday night, Dec. 2 in the Bingo Hall of the St. Francis Solanus Catholic Church on the LCO reservation, Bishop James Powers spoke to 185 people, mostly tribal members.

“Let me begin first of all by saying that the School Sisters of St. Francis stationed in Milwaukee, headquartered there, have decided not to call Sister Felissa and Sister Maryrose back to Milwaukee, at this time,” he said, as the room burst into applause.

An undated statement to parishioners was circulated after the Dec. 2 meeting, from Sister Kathleen O’Brien, U.S. Provincial Coordinator in Milwaukee for the religious order.

“We have profound respect for our Sisters’ many decades of loving service to generations of Catholics in the Lac Courte Oreilles region,” Sister O’Brien wrote. “We have rejoiced in their milestone of consecrated life, supported their tireless ministry efforts, and worked closely with them to meet their physical and spiritual care in times of surgery and recovery.”

Sister O’Brien noted the order supports their sisters with a “philosophy of care of sisterhood.”

“…our sisters affirm that we are women of faith, responding to God’s call,” she wrote. “We value holistic growth and self-responsibility, interdependence and conservation of God’s resources. We believe in the goodness and potential of all sisters throughout the life course.”

Michael O’Loughlin, the congregation’s communications director, said that sisters from the Milwaukee order are in regular contact with Sister Felissa and Sister Maryrose.

O’Loughlin reiterated the order’s commitment to “self-responsibility as well as interdependence,” and the  “right of each individual to make informed health choices” while collaborating with others in making those decisions. 

“In keeping with this philosophy of care, our sisters in leadership and healthcare professionals will continue to work in partnership with Sister Maryrose and Sister Felissa to compassionately and evaluate their health needs and responsibilities,” he said.

O’Loughlin clarified that the sisters had not been ordered or directed to leave St. Francis Solanus. 

At the Dec. 2 meeting, Bishop Powers announced that no decision had been made about closing the school. O’Loughlin said that given the sisters’ advanced ages and that only a handful of students attend the school, the diocese has been in conversation with the order regarding the school’s financial viability.

Sister O’Brien acknowledged the widespread support the two sisters had received from the tribe and community, and she also pointed out that her order had sent sisters to the reservation for over 100 years, starting in 1909.

Dan Blank, the director of administrative services for the diocese, which has direct authority over the school, wrote in an email to the Examiner:

“The Diocese was aware that the School Sisters of St Francis (SSSF) had talked to Sisters Felissa and Maryrose about returning to Milwaukee on or about Jan 6. There was no specific intent to close the school, but the reality of having no one to replace the Sisters had put pressure on Father David (Father David Neuschwander, the local priest of a church cluster, five churches under one priest, that includes St. Francis) and the Diocese to evaluate the options. The SSSF became aware of the unrest among the parishioners and tribal community, and changed their position with hope that the Sisters will be able to continue their teaching ministry at the school through this school year.”

Financial questions and an uncertain future

After announcing the sisters were not leaving at the Dec. 2 meeting, Bishop Powers said he wanted to focus on the financial status of the school.

“Those accounts that are referred to as ‘sisters’ monies’ are monies the sister has received or raised for the direct support of the school,” he said. “And I need to know, how much is there, so that we can know, is it possible to continue the school? There’s nobody who wants to close a school. I don’t care what school where … but we can’t go on without money.”

Vickie Shibilski, a tribal member and a long-time volunteer and cook at the school, peppered the diocese with questions during the meeting. She also defended Sister Felissa saying she understood the school’s finances and “knew what she was doing.”

“Sister does, but we don’t,” responded the Bishop. “We have to know what funds are available. We need to know whether it’s money enough to keep running the school.”

Shibilski complained that Father David had not met with the community regarding the fate of the school.

“He may look at us like, oh, we’re just folks,” she said. “We’re just cleaners or whatever. We talk to the donors. We work with the donors. We’re in the community, and we’re everywhere, and we’re going to stay here. We’ll be here.” 

She also raised a complaint that a staff person at the church had been rude to Sister Felissa, swearing at her, and demanded the staff person be fired. Blank, the diocese administrator, said the incident would be investigated.

Another community member demanded clarification of the bishop’s statement that the nuns would not be sent away “at this time.” 

“Does that mean, like, not today, not tomorrow, but maybe in the spring, then they’re going to be asked to leave? Because that’s not a clapping matter,” she said. 

The Bishop responded, “I cannot stand up here and say that they’re going to be here til they die. No, I can’t, because, again, the community has that right to call them back,” adding that as the Bishop he had authority to call them back as well but had chosen not to.

A tribal member said the two nuns had given their lives to the tribe and the parish and school and if they retire, they shouldn’t be forced to live in Milwaukee.

Blank encouraged tribal members to make the Milwaukee order aware of community sentiment.

Another tribal member said she didn’t think Blank understood how much Native Americans care for elders, including their health needs.

Father David gave a presentation about the school’s finances.

“My desired outcome for this meeting is to raise awareness of the financial needs, particularly at the school, so that they can be met,” he said. “There are so many people who have volunteered so much and given so much of their lives. I would love to see more people financially supporting our school. In order to do that, people need to know what’s going on.”

Shibilski challenged the priest, saying he hadn’t mentioned the St. Francis parish or school during his Sunday services from Hayward that are broadcast on the radio. She was also critical that he had not attended important community events.

“Rarely do you visit our school or spend any time with our children, and I think you’ve only been in our classroom maybe once,” she said. “If you’re going to lead you need to lead all of us and be here and show the children and your parents, because right now, I don’t really believe they know you well. I don’t even know you well.”

Father David responded that he wanted to communicate “more clearly.” He added that during his first two years of service he looked at the finances of the church, and then the last year, he began looking at the finances of the school.

He noted neither the parish nor the school was in debt.

He then shared a pie chart showing the school’s expenses and revenue of $260,370. The biggest source of revenues is an endowment of $86,850. In two years, he said, the endowment would be spent down.

After the meeting, Father David said, “I hold Sister Felissa and Sister Maryrose in the highest respect, and I am grateful for their decades of loving ministry at St. Francis Solanus. They have been and remain a profound blessing to generations of families on the Lac Courte Oreilles Reservation.”

 As pastor, he said, “I am called to ensure the long-term health of all five parishes within the Lac Courte Oreilles and Hayward Area Catholic Churches, including financial health. Because of this responsibility, I expressed concerns to the Diocese regarding the long-term financial sustainability of the school.”

“The diocese is primarily focused on financial sustainability,” he added, “while the motherhouse in Milwaukee has the responsibility of caring for the health and well-being of their sisters.”

Parish concerns

At the Dec. 2 meeting, Bishop Powers noted the Catholic church has had a presence with the tribe since the late 18th century.

“Let me say again, there has never been nor will there ever be any talk of closing the parish as long as I am Bishop,” he said.

A complaint lodged several times during the meeting was that money from St. Francis and the other church on the reservation, St. Ignatius, is going to fund staff working at the Hayward church, and the perception that the tribal parishes were not receiving value from their dollars.

“What has St Francis gained from having this cluster?” Shibilski asked. “I don’t see that we gained anything; we’re losing here.”

Bishop Powers noted there were not enough priests in the diocese to serve just one parish, and he said the advantage of a cluster is “stability of operation” and the use of standard bookkeeping, which he said hadn’t been used for years at either the St. Francis parish or the school.

Shibilski said the cluster could just consist of St. Francis and St. Ignatius, with Father Karunakar Madanu (an international priest from India) serving both parishes.

“I’m begging you. I’m begging you, please, give us our cluster back,” she said. “Give us our parish back.”

“I can’t make that promise,” responded the Bishop.

Father David said he would like to hire a bookkeeper from the parish and create a finance council.

“But sometimes we think you’re just worried about the money, that’s all you’ve been asking about,” Shibilski responded.

Another community member said churches often donate to the mission field, and that St. Francis was designated as a mission and therefore should not be expected to generate revenue for the Church.

Larry French, the director of finance for the diocese, said when he asked about receipts for St. Francis school none could be produced.

“We didn’t have receipts for this school,” said French. “We didn’t know what was coming in. We didn’t know what was going out. You can’t audit when you don’t have anything to audit.”

Blank also noted that St. Francis parish didn’t have a finance council and questioned whether it had a parish council. And he also said if there are concerns on how contracts were given for facility work, there should be a building and grounds committee overseeing those projects

Several audience members then suggested an audit of the Hayward church.

“You know you should respect us a little more than what you are giving us,” said one community member.

Blank responded, “We have great respect, and we continue to support you. We are listening and learning. So yes, there can be an audit. Yes, there can be a request to the mother house that the sisters stay here forever. We can’t speak to that. We don’t have authority for that. Bishop can be in conversation with them.”

Blank also asked the audience to give Father David a second chance to work with the parish and school.

After the Dec. 2 meeting, the  diocese put out a statement thanking those who participated.

“We listened to the many concerns and requests from parishioners and LCO tribal members. There are many issues to consider and act on. In order to move forward together, we will need many volunteers for councils and committees for St Francis and St Ignatius. We promise to continue to communicate and to respect the many years of service by Sisters Felissa and Maryrose.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Covering Wisconsin webpage. The nonprofit, housed at the University of Wisconsin Extension, is a navigator agency to help people understand their options when buying health insurance through the HealthCare.gov marketplace. (Screenshot)

About 4,000 fewer people in Wisconsin signed up at the federal HealthCare.gov marketplace in November for a health plan for next year than did in November 2024 for coverage this year, recently released numbers from the federal government show.

It’s too soon to tell for sure whether that will forecast a significant drop in health coverage through the marketplace, according to William Parke-Sutherland of the Wisconsin family policy research and advocacy group Kids Forward.

Parke-Sutherland and others who pay close attention to health care access in Wisconsin are watching those numbers closely, however.

Monday, Dec. 15, marks a critical deadline — the last day that people who purchase a health plan through the marketplace can sign up for coverage that starts Jan. 1, 2026.

The Healthcare.gov marketplace was created as part of the Affordable Care Act. Enacted in 2010 to drive down the ranks of Americans without access to health care, the ACA established the marketplace to make it easier and cheaper for people without coverage from an employer or through government programs such as Medicaid to buy health insurance.

Enhanced tax credit subsidies first enacted in 2021 on health plans sold through the marketplace have helped boost enrollment to new records over the last four years nationally and in Wisconsin. More than 300,000 state residents received their health coverage for 2025 through the marketplace.

Those enhanced subsidies expire at the end of this year, however, leading to forecasts that enrollment will decline in 2026 as the cost of insurance climbs.

“Many Wisconsinites will see their premiums double, and some will see staggering increases of over $30,000 a year,” Gov. Tony Evers said Wednesday during a press call with the ACA advocacy groups Protect Our Care and Main Street Alliance. “That’s ridiculous and unattainable for many.”

The event was held both to alert people about Monday’s open enrollment deadline and to urge voters to lobby Congress to extend the subsidies.

“Each year, the Affordable Care Act and open enrollment has ensured hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites having life-saving health care coverage,” Evers said. “These tax credits are not luxuries — they are lifelines that make the difference between kids and families and communities getting care or going without it.”

This year, 88% of Wisconsin residents who enrolled at HealthCare.gov qualified for the enhanced subsidies and saved $644 a month on average, Evers said.

Thad Schumacher, a Fitchburg pharmacist who also joined the call, said losing coverage would lead people to forgo “their primary care visits, their medications, for chronic conditions like diabetes and hypertension, and preventative care that keeps people healthy.”

Early numbers send mixed signals

The federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid reported that from Nov. 1 to 29 this year, 84,398 Wisconsinites enrolled in coverage through the marketplace. From Nov. 1 to Nov. 30, 2024, Dairy State enrollment totaled 88,189, according to CMS.

Nationally numbers are up, however — 5.76 million in November this year, compared with 5.36 million in November last year, according to CMS.

While Wisconsin’s decrease of less than 4,000 people signing up may look small, “It’s just hard to know what this means,” Parke-Sutherland told the Wisconsin Examiner.

In the years going back to 2022, the first month of open enrollment saw anywhere from 29% to 42% of that year’s total HealthCare.gov sign-ups, he said.

At Covering Wisconsin — a federally licensed navigator that helps guide people through the process of enrolling in HealthCare.gov plans — the volume of November calls and contacts through the navigator’s web-based chat portal have been about even with the same month last year, said Allison Espeseth, the Covering Wisconsin director.

In 2024, however, there was “a pretty big spike” in contacts in the first two weeks of December leading up to the Dec. 15 deadline for coverage to start Jan. 1.

“This year, we are definitely continuing to have people call us, but we haven’t seen that spike,” Espeseth said.

She offered several possible reasons for that. Some people may have seen higher premiums for their plans and decided to go without. Others may think that there won’t be any subsidies, despite the fact that smaller subsidies that were part of HealthCare.gov plans from the beginning remain in place.

And some have wondered whether they should hold off on signing up in case Congress does reach a deal and extend the subsidies, Espeseth noted.

“We’ve been encouraging people to please sign up regardless,” Espeseth said. “Don’t wait.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Abortion-rights advocate Kristin Hady helps a car navigate past protesters toward  A Preferred Women’s Health Center of Atlanta in Forest Park, Georgia, in August 2023. Independent clinics are facing fresh challenges, and at least 23 more closed this year, bringing the total to 100 since the Dobbs decision. (Photo by Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder) 

When Wisconsin Planned Parenthood clinics temporarily paused abortion services in October because of a new law halting federal Medicaid reimbursements, patients turned to the state’s two independent clinics for care. 

Demand at Affiliated Medical Services in Milwaukee quadrupled, according to clinic director Dabbie Phonekeo. 

“It happened all of a sudden. We were all scrambling to figure out what we needed to do and how we were going to accept all patients,” Phonekeo said. 

The staff secured additional funding to meet need before Wisconsin’s Planned Parenthood clinics resumed abortions, adapting under a law that bans certain reproductive health care providers from receiving federal funding until July 2026. 

“This was a reminder of why it’s so important to have independent clinics and abortion access overall,” Phonekeo said. 

At least 23 independent clinics have closed this year, according to a report released Tuesday by Abortion Care Network, compared with 12 last year.

Most were in states with abortion-rights protections, the report found. 

Independent providers face less recognition than Planned Parenthood and ongoing barriers to funding. Donations to abortion clinics and funds have waned, leading to more out-of-pocket costs for patients, States Newsroom reported last year.  

Independent clinics provide 58% of all abortions nationwide, while Planned Parenthood provides 38%, hospitals 3%, and 1% occur at physicians’ offices, according to the latest Abortion Care Network findings. 

Medication abortion, allowed during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, has been a focus of abortion-rights advocates and opponents this year. But independent clinics are more likely to offer legal procedural abortions after that. 

More than 60% of all U.S. clinics that offer abortion care after the first trimester are independent, 85% that provide abortion at 22 weeks or later are independent, and all clinics that perform the procedure after 26 weeks are independent, according to the report. 

“While both medication and in-clinic abortion are safe and effective, people may need or prefer one method over another,” the report states. “This is especially true for patients for whom it’s not safe or feasible to terminate outside the clinic — including those experiencing intimate partner violence, minors without support at home, people experiencing homelessness, and patients who cannot take time off from work or caretaking.” 

The latest clinic closures come more than three years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision forced many to cease operations: 100 independent clinics closed between 2022 and 2025. 

Affiliated Medical Services in Wisconsin is one of the few independent abortion providers that was able to reopen after closing the day the nation’s highest court overturned federal abortion rights on June 24, 2022. 

The clinic reopened in March 2024 a few months after a Wisconsin judge ruled that a 19th century abortion ban was invalid, Wisconsin Examiner reported. 

Phonekeo said people were initially hesitant to book appointments at the clinic. 

“Most of our patients that we saw had asked, ‘Is this legal? Am I going to go to jail if I have an abortion today? Can we do this in Wisconsin?’ So I think a lot of patients were still afraid to be seen,” she said. 

Independent clinics could become even more significant to reproductive health care access if lawmakers permanently bar Planned Parenthood from receiving federal resources.  

Some anti-abortion groups have urged the Trump administration to disqualify Planned Parenthood as a federal vendor, States Newsroom reported in November. 

Nearly 50 Planned Parenthood clinics closed this year due to federal health officials’ cuts to Title X and Medicaid. At least 20 closed since a federal “defunding” provision that halts Medicaid funds for reproductive health care providers that offer abortion and received more than $800,000 in fiscal year 2023 took effect, according to a tally released on Nov. 12 by the national organization. 

Some of the clinics that closed did not offer abortion. And under the law, federal funding only covers abortions in extreme circumstances, so the Medicaid reimbursement ban primarily affects patients who go to Planned Parenthood for other services, like birth control, cervical cancer screening and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. 

Some independent clinics offer non-abortion care, too, but many don’t accept Medicaid, clinic directors said at a Wednesday news briefing. 

Amber Gavin is the vice president of advocacy of operations at A Woman’s Choice, an organization that has three clinics in North Carolina and one each in Florida and Virginia. She said staff members at the Charlotte location have seen an uptick in patients seeking STI testing and related services. 

Karishma Oza, chief of staff at DuPont Clinic in Washington, D.C., also said providers there have seen an increase in patients who are uninsured or underinsured since the Medicaid ban, which mostly affects Planned Parenthood, took effect. 

Phonekeo said the Wisconsin clinic hasn’t dealt with more demand for reproductive health care services beyond abortion. Still, Affiliated Medical Services offers birth control pills, IUDs, STI testing and treatment, miscarriage care and even follow-up care for medication abortion provided through online-only clinics such as Hey Jane. 

While all three clinic leaders said they don’t accept Medicaid, they offer sliding-scale payments for people who cannot afford the full cost of care. 

“We’re more than just abortion providers,” Phonekeo said. 

Gov. Tony Evers signed “Bradyn’s Law,” which creates a new crime for sexual extortion and the “Swenson Starkie Act,” which extends the statute of limitations for hiding a corpse. Evers addresses the Legislature in his 2024 State of the State message. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers signed two bills this week introduced in response to crimes, including “Bradyn’s Law,” which creates a new crime for sexual extortion and the “Swenson Starkie Act,” which extends the statute of limitations for hiding a corpse. 

AB 201, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 48, was introduced by Rep. Patrick Snyder and Sen. Jesse James after the death of 15-year-old Bradyn Bohn from Kronenwetter, a village outside of Wausau. Bohn died by suicide in March after being targeted online by a perpetrator who convinced him to send photos of himself and told him that he needed to send money or face major consequences. He suffered through hours of threats and was coerced into sending money before his death.

“Today is an important day to remember Bradyn as we honor him and his memory, because now, moving forward, we will be able to hold bad actors responsible for reprehensible behavior, especially when they prey on our kids, and that is so important,” Evers said in a statement. “We wouldn’t be here today without Bradyn’s family and their relentless advocacy to keep kids safe online and hold predators accountable. We will be able to protect more of Wisconsin’s kids because of Bradyn’s family’s efforts to fight back.”

Sexual extortion, or “sextortion” is defined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a crime in which “an offender coerces a minor to create and send sexually explicit images or video and then uses that material to extort the victim by threatening to release it.” 

2025 Wisconsin Act 48 makes it a Class I felony to coerce someone to engage in sexual conduct or to produce “an intimate representation” by threatening to injure someone’s property or representation, by threatening to commit violence or by threatening to distribute intimate photos of another person. The crime would be a Class H felony if the victim does any of those acts or is under the age of 18, and a Class G felony if the defendant was previously convicted of a sexually violent offense, the violation was committed during the course of a child abduction or the victim is under age 18 and the defendant is more than four years older than the victim. 

A person can also be prosecuted for felony murder if the person commits extortion and it causes the death of the victim. 

Sexual extortion has become a growing threat in the U.S. in recent years. The FBI observed from October 2022 to March 2023 an increase of more than 20% in reports of financially motivated sextortion incidents involving minor victims. 

From October 2021 to March 2023, the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations received over 13,000 reports of online financial sextortion of minors that included at least 12,600 victims, mostly boys, and led to at least 20 suicides.

Rep. Brent Jacobson (R-Mosinee) said in a statement that the bill is the first step towards “protecting vulnerable Wisconsinites from exploitation.” 

“As technology creates new avenues for exploitation, my colleagues and I have an obligation to make sure our laws protect our constituents, and that Wisconsin parents have the resources and awareness to keep their children safe from harm,” Jacobson said. “We must continue to come together to prevent these heinous crimes from claiming children in our state.”

Statute of limitations for hiding a corpse

SB 423, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 59, extends the statute of limitations for prosecuting the crime of hiding or burying a corpse by specifying that it only begins “once the victim’s remains are found and identified or when the crime occurs, whichever is later.” The current statute of limitations is six years in Wisconsin.

The legislation was introduced by Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) and Rep. Ron Tusler (R-Harrison) after the case of Starkie Swenson. Swenson disappeared in 1983 but his remains weren’t found until 2021, 38 years later. 

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, John C. Andrews accepted a plea in the case and was convicted on a charge of homicide by negligent use of a vehicle in 1994 and served 16 months in prison. He refused to reveal where Swenson’s body was. 

Police charged him with hiding a corpse after identifying the remains in 2021, but the charges were dismissed due to the statute of limitations. 

“The killer should’ve faced justice for hiding the remains in an attempt to conceal his crime. However, because of a loophole in Wisconsin law, Starkie’s killer was able to avoid charges,” Tusler said in a statement. “Although we cannot heal the wounds caused by the murder of Starkie Swenson, 2025 Wisconsin Act 59 ensures that no violent criminal will be able to exploit the corpse-hiding loophole again,” Tusler said in a statement.

Notifying parents of sex offenses

AB 74, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 57, requires Wisconsin schools to notify a pupil’s parent or guardian if the pupil is an alleged victim, target or recipient of alleged sex offenses while at school. The law also requires school boards to provide parents and guardians each year with information on their rights to access records regarding school employee discipline.

“Doing everything we can to keep our kids safe at school, at home, and in our communities is a top priority for me, as well as our schools and education professionals, who are frontlines of doing what’s best for our kids every day,” Evers said in a statement. “This bill will strengthen transparency by making sure parents and family members are notified if any misconduct at school affects their kids’ safety or well-being and bolster accountability by ensuring they know what their rights are and what their kids’ rights are.”

Evers signs several other bills this week

Under AB 136, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 55, the penalty for impersonating a peace officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical services practitioner or an emergency medical responder is increased from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class I felony. Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) and Rep. Chuck Wichgers (R-Muskego) introduced the legislation this year following an incident in New Berlin.

AB 388, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 75, creates a legal framework to establish a behavioral health hospital in Chippewa Falls using $10 million, which was set aside in the state budget this year to be used for Rogers Behavioral Health. Sen. Jesse James, who coauthored the bill, said in a statement that it “is extremely monumental for the people of northwestern Wisconsin” and provides “a renewed sense of optimism” to the community as it will provide mental health support for children and adults in the area.

Under SB 11, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 79, principals will now be required to allow youth membership organizations, including the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts, to schedule at minimum one time to visit their school to encourage students to join their organization. The visit can consist of both spoken and written information on how the organization helps students with educational interests and civic engagement. 

Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) celebrated Evers signing the bill, saying that the organizations “create more engaged, confident, and community-minded citizens” and the law “ensures the next generation of Wisconsin children will continue to benefit from these life-changing experiences.” She also criticized Evers for vetoing another bill that would have added new requirements on schools related to military recruiters, saying the state should “proudly support our military, not slam the door shut when they’re offering students legitimate career options, which is precisely what the governor did with this veto.”

SB 310, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 61, limits the amount of time covered by an emergency power proclamation by a local government’s chief executive officer to 60 days, unless extended by a local governing body. The bill was part of a controversy surrounding Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez earlier this year who claimed that Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, who is running for governor, abused his power during the COVID-19 pandemic when he issued emergency orders in 2021.

AB 265, now 2025 Wisconsin Act 56, requires judges to sentence offenders to a minimum of 10 years in prison if convicted of a human trafficking crime and 15 years for a child trafficking crime.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A 2026 America the Beautiful Annual Pass to gain entry to U.S. national parks. (Photo from federal court documents)

WASHINGTON — A public lands advocacy group sued the Trump administration in federal court Wednesday over the inclusion of President Donald Trump’s face on the forthcoming National Park annual pass.

The Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that alleges the Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture violated the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, which requires department officials to feature an image on the annual pass chosen from a public photo contest.

The 16-page complaint alleges the administration has replaced a contest-winning photo of Montana’s Glacier National Park on the annual pass for U.S. residents with a graphic featuring the images of George Washington and Trump commemorating the 250th anniversary of the United States.

The photo of Glacier National Park will still be featured on the administration’s newly created, more expensive non-resident pass, according to the lawsuit.

“The Interior Department’s bait-and-switch betrays the expectations of the thousands of people who participate in the contest and is directly at odds with the public participation mandates of the statute,” according to the complaint. “It also undermines the stability of this well-established program and the conservation, recreational, and educational outcomes (the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act) provides.”

The White House and the Department of Interior did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

‘Treasured’ national parks

In a statement, the center’s Executive Director Kierán Suckling said, “Blotting out the majesty of America’s national parks with a closeup of his own face is Trump’s crassest, most ego-driven action yet.” 

“The national parks are treasured by Americans of every stripe. Their timeless power and magnificence rise above even the most bitter political differences to quietly bring all Americans together. It’s disgusting of Trump to politicize America’s most sacred refuge by pasting his face over the national parks in the same way he slaps his corporate name on buildings, restaurants, and golf courses. The national parks are not a personal branding opportunity,” Suckling said.

Passes in recent years have featured photos of Everglades National Park, Wupatki National Monument, Sequoia & Kings Range National Park, San Juan National Forest, Redwood National Forest, Bridger-Teton National Forest, Acadia National Park, Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, and Nantahala National Forest. 

Passes for non-residents to be $250

The America the Beautiful annual pass is $80 for U.S. residents and provides entry to every national park and special fee areas of national forests, wildlife refuges and other national lands. 

The new nonresident annual pass is priced at $250.

Sales of the pass generated $119.4 million in revenue in 2023 that went back into the care and maintenance of the parks, according to data included in the court filing.

Democratic U.S. Rep Jared Golden of Maine announces plans for a discharge petition to force a vote on his bill to overturn an executive order restricting collective bargaining for federal workers Washington, D.C., on July 17, 2025. (Photo via Rep. Jared Golden)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House agreed Wednesday to consider a bill that would void President Donald Trump’s executive order that strips collective bargaining rights for roughly 1 million federal workers.

The 222-200 vote was a rare bipartisan agreement from the lower chamber to rebuke a policy decision from the president. Thirteen Republicans joined all Democrats voting for the resolution. 

Maine’s Jared Golden, a Democrat, and Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick, a Republican, forced the vote by garnering enough signatures from lawmakers under a legislative move known as a discharge petition. The procedure allows rank-and-file members to compel the chamber to vote on measures that are not brought up by the leadership of the majority party, which is how bills typically reach the floor.

Wednesday’s vote was to discharge the bill out of committee and bring it to the floor for a vote. A vote on the bill itself is expected Thursday. 

The discharge petition gained the 218 signatures needed from 213 Democrats and five Republicans: Fitzpatrick, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania, and Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler of New York. 

In March, Trump signed an executive order that banned collective bargaining agreements for federal agencies dealing with national security. 

Those agencies include the departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, State and Energy, along with the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Coast Guard, most entities within the Department of Justice and several pandemic response and refugee resettlement agencies within the Health and Human Services Department, among others. 

“Protecting America’s national security is a core constitutional duty, and President Trump refuses to let union obstruction interfere with his efforts to protect Americans and our national interests,” according to the executive order.

Federal law enforcement and firefighters are exempt from the order.

Bargaining agreements for federal employees are somewhat limited. Workers cannot strike or bargain for wages or benefits, but they can push for better working conditions, such as protection from retaliation, discrimination, and illegal firings. 

Cows graze at Nice Farms Creamery in Federalsburg, Maryland.  (Photo by Preston Keres/USDA)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture will spend $700 million to support regenerative agriculture as part of the Make America Healthy Again agenda, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Wednesday. 

The USDA pilot program for regenerative agriculture — a conservation management approach centered on improving the health of soil and increasing biodiversity — enacts part of President Donald Trump’s administration’s September “Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy,” which offered more than 120 recommendations for addressing childhood chronic diseases.  

The pilot program will take funding from existing USDA conservation programs, which provide financial and technical assistance to farmers, with the aim of improving soil health.

“Protecting and improving the health of our soil is critical, not only for the future viability of farmland, but to the future success of American farmers,” Rollins said at a press conference alongside Kennedy and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. 

“In order to continue to be the most productive and most efficient growers in the world, we must protect our topsoil from unnecessary erosion and boost the microbiome of the soil,” Rollins said.

Kennedy said a September report from the administration’s Make America Healthy Again Commission, which the health secretary chairs, included “the promise to make it easier for farmers in this country, to give them an off-ramp — farmers who are dependent on … chemical and fertilizer inputs — to give them an off-ramp where they can transition to a model that emphasizes soil health.” 

Kennedy has long advocated against use of chemicals in farming.

Repurposing funding

The department will dedicate $400 million to the initiative through the department’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program and $300 million from its Conservation Stewardship Program, according to a USDA press release.

“It’s baseline funding that we received through our budget, so we have the ability to tag that funding specifically for this pilot, and that’s what we’re doing,” Aubrey J.D. Bettencourt, chief of USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service, or NRCS, said.

Rollins also said she would seek corporate partners for the program using a 2022 law that authorizes USDA to channel private contributions to conservation programs. 

The move “will bring corporate label and supply chain partners directly into partnership” with NRCS, Rollins said.

The pilot program “connects the producer and the work that they’re doing on the farm, granting them the credit for that voluntary action of change in practice on their farm that then can transition into the supply chain, into the marketplace and directly back to the consumer,” Bettencourt said. 

SNAP waivers 

Meanwhile, Rollins and Kennedy also announced Wednesday six more states whose waivers were approved to prohibit Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits from being used to purchase certain non-nutritious items beginning in 2026. 

The effort, also part of the Make America Healthy Again agenda, adds Hawaii, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, Virginia and Tennessee to the list of states that will have such bans. 

The bans restrict which items recipients of the federal food assistance program that helps 42 million Americans afford groceries can buy with their SNAP benefits.

Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and West Virginia already have similar incoming bans.