Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu said that “looking at the way [WisconsinEye is] currently run, it seems like they’re really burning through money. It’s not the most effective use of taxpayer money, so we’re not going to give WisconsinEye a blank check to keep running it irresponsibly.” LeMahieu speaks on the Senate floor in September 2023. (Screenshot via WisEye).

Legislative leaders have been in discussions with WisconsinEye, the broadcast network that recently stopped offering coverage of state government business, about a potential long-term solution for the financial crisis facing the organization, the president of the organization told the Wisconsin Examiner Wednesday.

Due to a lack of funding, WisconsinEye halted its livestream coverage of state government on Monday and pulled down its video archive of over 30,000 hours of state government proceedings, candidate interviews and other programming. WisconsinEye launched in 2007 as an independent, nonprofit organization funded mostly by charitable donations.

Jon Henkes, president of WisconsinEye, has said that the organization had trouble raising sufficient funds to meet its operational costs due to a competitive fundraising environment. The organization sent a letter to lawmakers in November asking them to modify the terms of $10 million in state matching funds set aside for an endowment for the organization, giving it access to the money without raising the dollar-for-dollar match.

Henkes told the Wisconsin Examiner on Wednesday that conversations are taking place in the state Capitol as legislators look for a solution so that WisconsinEye can continue in its current form. 

“We’re not there yet. This is a process, and it’s going to take a little bit of time as it relates to when will we go back up,” Henkes said. “The conversations going on right now would be a long-term solution.” 

The organization has until June 30, 2026, to raise matching funds to access the $10 million endowment funding first set aside in the 2023-25 state budget.

WisconsinEye asked the state to provide about $1 million in funding without the matching requirement to cover its 2026 operational budget. 

Henkes said another potential solution would be for the state to remove the matching requirement and manage the money as an endowment on behalf of WisconsinEye. He said there would be a “significant amount of money that would generate earned income” to take care of the majority of the organization’s budget and complement the income WisconsinEye brings in from on-air sponsorships and small online giving.

“It’s early in the process, but the signals that we’re getting from the people who are the decision makers are very encouraging to us,” Henkes said. 

The Wisconsin Examiner reached out to Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) for comment but did not hear back by Wednesday evening. 

LeMahieu has expressed skepticism about giving the organization state funding, telling the Associated Press that it’s “important to make sure the public can view what’s going on in state government” but that “looking at the way [WisconsinEye is] currently run, it seems like they’re really burning through money. It’s not the most effective use of taxpayer money, so we’re not going to give WisconsinEye a blank check to keep running it irresponsibly.” He also told the Wisconsin State Journal that it “may not be the most responsible way to provide this service to the public.”

Democratic Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) told the Wisconsin Examiner in an interview last month that she thinks WisconsinEye is “essential” and that lawmakers “should have structured their funding a little differently in the state budget, but we have an opportunity to do so now to make sure that they can provide that service.”

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) told the Examiner in an interview on Monday that WisconsinEye has been a “helpful tool” that has been “nice for people to be able to stay at home and be able to watch what we’re doing” and she is open to having conversations with her Democratic and Republican colleagues on a path forward. 

Henkes said the organization is still looking for funding from donors to help get its coverage up and running in the short term. 

“There are a couple of six-figure gift requests that are under consideration right now with prominent people in Wisconsin,” Henkes said, adding that those donations would put WisconsinEye in the position “to bridge the gap toward what the state intends to do and get us back on back on the air. We’re hopeful.”

“Our board has said, well, if we’ve got an agreement for the long-term, and we found some short-term funding, we’re back in business,” Henkes said.

Four Democratic lawmakers propose replacing WisconsinEye

A group of Democratic lawmakers, including Sens. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit), Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee), Kelda Roys (D-Madison) and Rep. Brienne Brown (D-Whitewater), introduced their own proposal on Tuesday to replace WisconsinEye with a public affairs network run and operated by the state government. 

“Thanks to this shutdown, the public will not have online access to committee hearings and public meetings happening this week, which they have come to rely upon,” the lawmakers said in a co-sponsorship memo. “This failure underscores a fundamental need: Open government requires reliable and permanent public infrastructure, not a private entity that can be shut down due to difficulties raising funds or in an attempt to pressure legislators to provide funds. Public access should not be dependent on the generosity of donors.”

Under the proposal, the $10 million would be repurposed to start an Office of the Public Affairs Network that would be attached to the Department of Administration. The office would have a $2 million annual appropriation under the bill.

The network would need to provide live coverage of state government including all legislative floor sessions, all meetings of legislative committees, meetings of executive branch agencies, the state Supreme Court and other judicial proceedings, news conferences as well as related civic events.

According to the lawmakers’ memo, the office would need to operate in a “strictly nonpartisan manner” and “guarantee unrestricted public access without requirements such as online account registration, paywalls, or other burdens.”

A Public Affairs Network Board would also be created that would be responsible for appointing the director of the office and overseeing its activities. The board would include the governor, two public members appointed by the governor and four state lawmakers.

The bill also includes a provision to allow current employees of WisconsinEye who have demonstrated their talent and technical expertise to be rehired.

The DOA would also need to attempt to obtain the complete digital archives of WisconsinEye in order to permanently maintain them as part of the new network’s archive.

Henkes had a number of concerns about the proposal. 

“WisconsinEye, as an independent network, is in fact in the tradition of Wisconsin’s commitment to open, transparent government of the people, for the people, by the people,” Henkes said. “We just strongly believe that a state-run, government-controlled state Capitol network is not in the best interest of Wisconsin.”

Henkes said the proposal brings up questions about whether having a board that includes lawmakers and the governor could politicize things and “inject partisanship into decision making on programming and what committee gets covered and what committee doesn’t get covered.”

Henkes said he is also concerned about the expanded capacity that lawmakers proposed. He said that under its contract, WisconsinEye is required to cover floor sessions as well as a certain percentage of committee hearings, but not everything. 

“Truth be told, the Legislature in its wisdom in the current contract with WisconsinEye does not require us to cover every committee hearing because they know that some of those are of minimal interest to the public and would probably draw the attention of 10 viewers,” Henkes said, adding that he also thought the cost to expand that coverage would be “at least double” the $2 million lawmakers included annually.

Henkes added that for 18 years WisconsinEye has exceeded its contractual obligations and that includes covering over 14,000 hours of live video, which is also archived, as well as over 16,000 additional hours of interviews with hundreds of candidates for office, news conferences, rallies, debates and other coverage. 

“We bleed for this mission and we care greatly about civil dialogue in this state and inspiring informed voter participation, and it’s a model in terms of programming and coverage that’s exceptional,” Henkes said. “Its just that the funding model in the current philanthropic environment is not sustainable.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Donald Trump addresses the nation in an address from the Diplomatic Room of the White House on Dec. 17, 2025. (Photo by Doug Mills - Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — As Americans continue to face rising prices ahead of year-end holidays, President Donald Trump blamed inflation and health care costs on his predecessor during a prime-time speech Wednesday in which he also claimed to have fixed the issues.

Trump “inherited a mess” and has turned the United States into the “envy of the entire globe” by imposing an immigration crackdown, tariffs and tax breaks, he said. 

“Over the past 11 months, we have brought more positive change to Washington than any administration in American history. There’s never been anything like it, and I think most would agree I was elected in a landslide,” Trump said.

Standing before a backdrop of Christmas decorations, Trump also promised $1,776 checks would arrive for members of the United States military by Christmas.

And he continued to blame Democrats for health care costs that are projected to skyrocket next month when tax credits for Affordable Care Act marketplace plans expire.

Nearly a year into his second term, Trump remains fixated on blaming former President Joe Biden even as his own approval ratings sink, according to numerous recent polls.

A plaque below Biden’s photo in Trump’s newly installed “Presidential Walk of Fame” display reads “Sleepy Joe Biden,” according to reports from journalists present at the White House Wednesday.

“When I took office, inflation was the worst in 48 years, and some would say in the history of our country, which caused prices to be higher than ever before, making life unaffordable for millions and millions of Americans. This happened during a Democrat administration, and it’s when we first began hearing the word ‘affordability,’” Trump said.

In recent weeks, Trump has said “affordability” is a “hoax.”

Yet the bulk of Trump’s somewhat hastily scheduled address — the White House announced it Tuesday — focused on lowering costs for housing, electricity and health care.

Trump announced he will send a $1,776 “warrior dividend” to every U.S. servicemember. The amount is in honor of the year of the country’s  founding, Trump said. Checks are “already on the way,” he said.

That could add up to as much as $2.6 billion, according to a White House estimate Wednesday night that 1.45 million service members would receive the payment.

Health care costs

He also touted trumprx.gov, where he said Americans can find “unprecedented price reductions” on prescription drugs starting in January.

“These big price cuts will greatly reduce the cost of health care,” Trump said.

He boosted a Republican plan on Capitol Hill to fund individual health savings accounts, or HSAs, in annual amounts of $1,000 to $1,500 depending on age and poverty level. An HSA is not health insurance.

“I want the money to go directly to the people so you can buy your own health care. You’ll get much better health care at a much lower price,” Trump said.

Four House Republicans defected Wednesday to sign a Democrat-led petition to bypass Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and force a floor vote in January on extending health insurance premium subsidies for people who buy insurance on the Affordable Care Act marketplace.

‘My favorite word’

Trump spent several minutes addressing the economy, stating that prices on groceries and fuel are coming down. Both claims are false, according to government data.

“I am bringing those high prices down and bringing them down fast,” Trump said.

The latest consumer price index for September showed gasoline prices rose 4.1% over the past 12 months, and “was the largest factor in the all items monthly increase,” increasing 1.5% over the previous month.

Food prices rose faster than overall inflation in recent months, according to the government’s latest data. Food prices in August were 3.2% higher than a year ago, according to the data.

Still, Trump claimed an economic turnaround that he credited to his international trade policy.

“Much of this success has been accomplished by tariffs — my favorite word ‘tariffs’ — which for many decades have been used successfully by other countries against us, but not anymore,” he said.

The U.S. ended fiscal year 2025 with a deficit reaching nearly $1.8 trillion, or roughly 6% of the domestic economy’s gross domestic product.

Trump unilaterally imposed a global 10% tariff on all foreign goods in April, plus higher tariffs on many major trading partners, including the European Union, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether Trump’s emergency tariffs are legal.

Americans have lost faith in Trump’s ability to handle the economy, according to an NPR/PBS News/Marist poll published Wednesday.

Trump received a 36% approval rating on his economic strategy, the lowest rating over the past six years that the survey has asked voters the question.

A Fox News poll released Nov. 19 found 76% of respondents saw the economy negatively. Of all voters polled, 41% approved and 58% disapproved of Trump’s performance. That’s down from the conservative news network’s poll of Biden’s approval ratings during the same point in his presidency, which the network says was 44%.

Mum on Venezuela

The president did not spend much time addressing his military campaign off the coast of Venezuela, despite declaring just 24 hours beforehand that the U.S. had formed a “blockade” in the Caribbean Sea.

Trump posted on his own social media platform Truth Social Tuesday night that Venezuela is “completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America.”

The campaign, which has become top of mind for many lawmakers on Capitol Hill, is about preventing drug smuggling to the U.S., Trump and Republican lawmakers have repeatedly said.

Democratic lawmakers are pressing the Trump administration to release unedited footage of a Sept. 2 strike that killed two shipwrecked individuals who were clinging to what was left of a boat after an initial strike.

Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, the largest immigrant detention center on the East Coast, was the site of a May demonstration against the Trump administration’s immigration policies. (Photo by New Jersey Monitor)

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Wednesday blocked a policy from the Department of Homeland Security, finding that it violated an appropriations law that allows members of Congress to make unannounced oversight visits to federal facilities that detain immigrants.

Judge Jia Cobb rejected the Trump administration’s argument that the new policy doesn’t prevent members of Congress from entering a DHS facility that detains immigrants. 

“The notice requirement as implemented by ICE officials does just that: it stops visiting Members of Congress from entering a facility unless they have provided seven days of advance notice,” she wrote in her opinion.

The stay on the DHS policy from Cobb is temporary, while the case proceeds.

This year, DHS created the new policy to require lawmakers to give the agency seven days’ notice, plus approval from an agency official, before visiting a facility where immigrants are detained. 

In July, 12 members of Congress sued, arguing that DHS overreached its authority in creating the policy and that it violated a 2019 appropriations law, referred to as Section 527.

“The Court thus finds that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that Section 527 funds are being used to implement a seven-day notice requirement for Members of Congress seeking to enter ICE detention facilities, and that the notice requirement is contrary to law and in excess of DHS’s statutory authority,” Cobb wrote.

As the Trump administration continues with its aggressive immigration crackdown, the number of immigrants held in detention has ballooned. One of the few tools Democrats have, as the minority party, is oversight of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities.  

The suit in the District Court for the District of Columbia charged that the Trump administration overreached its authority in creating the policy.

Those Democrats who sued include: Joe Neguse of Colorado, Adriano Espaillat of New York, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Robert Garcia of California, J. Luis Correa of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Dan Goldman of New York, Jimmy Gomez of California, Raul Ruiz of California, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Norma Torres of California.

In a statement, lawmakers praised the decision. 

“It reinforces the rule of law and reminds the administration that oversight is not optional,” they said. “Real-time, on-the-ground visits to immigration detention facilities help prevent abuses and ensure transparency. Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress—and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly.”

Democrats created the policy that allows members of Congress to show up unannounced at DHS facilities that detain immigrants, including ICE field offices, after the first Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the southern border in 2018.

At that time, Democrats were unable to conduct interviews with separated immigrant families and often denied entry into DHS facilities, so lawmakers included the provision in the fiscal year 2019 appropriations law.

The provision was later expanded to include all immigrants detained at DHS facilities, not just children, and allowed for unannounced visits by members and the inclusion of congressional staff to enter with their members during oversight visits.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on May 8, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans on a Judiciary Committee panel during a Wednesday hearing defended the Trump administration’s move to end temporary protections for immigrants who hail from countries deemed too dangerous to return. 

Republican Rep. Tom McClintock of California, the chair of the Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee, slammed former President Joe Biden for “abusing” Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, and other humanitarian programs. 

The federal government grants TPS when a national’s home country is too dangerous to return to, such as after a major natural disaster, ongoing violence or political instability. The status allows immigrants to have legal status and work authorization for up to 18 months before needing to renew the status, which requires a background check. It is not a pathway to citizenship.  

Under the Biden administration, the program expanded to include 1.2 million immigrants. Republicans largely opposed that expansion, and have noted that groups that gain TPS status are rarely removed from the program.

“Along the way TPS became permanent protected status,” McClintock said.

Since being confirmed by the Senate earlier this year, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has moved to end legal status for 1 million TPS recipients hailing from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria and Venezuela. 

The top Democrat on the panel, Pramila Jayapal of Washington state, said the move to end TPS for those 9 countries “will lead to people’s death.”  

“When TPS is terminated, we are forcing people to return to real and imminent harm,” Jayapal said. “I’m sad to see us go down this path, but I can’t say I’m surprised.”

There are multiple lawsuits from immigration advocacy groups challenging the Trump administration’s termination of TPS.

Union leader says crackdown harms workers

Democrats on the panel said reducing TPS was part of the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

Rep. Deborah Ross, Democrat of North Carolina, said construction sites in her area have been targets of immigration raids, even though workers on the sites have TPS.

She asked the witness tapped by Democrats, Jimmy Williams, president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, about the effects of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown at construction sites.

Williams said those TPS workers are leaving the industry and that immigration enforcement at construction sites can put workers in danger.

“You can’t work safely when you’re worried about being targeted for removal,” he said. “The truth is people just won’t show up to work.”

Williams defended TPS as one of the few legal forms that immigrants have in order to have work authorization. He said that TPS falls short because it doesn’t give a pathway to citizenship and creates a limbo for recipients. 

“I believe that this body’s inability to act over the course of the last 40 years on immigration reform is what has led us to this point,” Williams said of the current state of TPS.

Call to narrow program

One of the witnesses invited by Republicans, James Rogers, senior counsel of the America First Legal Foundation, argued that TPS is too broad, and that entire countries should not be designated. Instead, the designation should be limited to a specific location that is affected, he said. 

America First Legal Foundation is a litigation organization founded by Stephen Miller, a top White House adviser who is the main architect of the president’s immigration crackdown. 

Missouri GOP Rep. Bob Onder asked Rogers how much vetting is conducted for immigrants in the TPS program. 

Rogers said it was “impossible” to vet TPS recipients. 

However, in order to be approved for the status, a background check must be completed and with each renewal, the individual with TPS has to be revetted. 

Another witness tapped by Republicans, Larry Celaschi, a councilman for the Borough of Charleroi, Pennsylvania, said in 2022 his town experienced an increased population of TPS recipients from Haiti and that the sudden population change strained local resources. 

“Our borough absorbed an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 migrants in a very short period of time,” he said, adding that the population was previously 4,000. 

Vetting questioned

Over its four years, the Biden administration expanded TPS from roughly 400,000 recipients to over 1.2 million TPS people. Separately, the Biden administration used several humanitarian parole programs to grant temporary legal status for nearly 750,000 immigrants hailing from Afghanistan, Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, Venezuela and Ukraine. 

Republicans have long criticized the Biden administration’s expanded use of not only TPS, but other humanitarian programs to handle one of the largest influxes of migrants at the southern border in decades. 

Last month’s shooting near the White House that left one National Guard member dead and another wounded inflamed the debate because the suspect is an Afghan national who had been granted asylum. Since the shooting, GOP officials have increasingly made the accusation that immigrants who came to the U.S. under the Biden administration had little to no screening. 

Republicans on the panel, including Arizona’s Andy Biggs, argued immigrants admitted to the country under Biden were not vetted and allowed into the U.S. illegally, despite being given legal status.

“It’s just B.S. to say ‘everybody’s fully vetted,’” Biggs said. “We don’t know.”

Members of the National Guard patrol near Union Station on Aug. 14, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A U.S. appeals court ruled Wednesday that National Guard troops can remain in the District of Columbia while the judges take up the case that began when the district sued the Trump administration for deploying roughly 2,000 troops to the nation’s capital.

Pointing to the district’s special status as a federal territory, a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found President Donald Trump would likely succeed in his administration’s argument to keep federalized National Guard troops in Washington, D.C.

Wednesday’s ruling means the guard troops from the District of Columbia and nine states will continue patrolling Washington, D.C., through February, unless the appeals judges find a lower court order against the mobilization to be correct.

Guard members have been deployed to the district from South Carolina, West Virginia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Ohio, Georgia, Alabama, and South Dakota. 

Judge Patricia Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, wrote the decision, in which Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao, both appointed during Trump’s first term, concurred.

“Because the District of Columbia is a federal district created by Congress, rather than a constitutionally sovereign entity like the fifty States, the Defendants appear on this early record likely to prevail on the merits of their argument that the President possesses a unique power within the District — the seat of the federal government — to mobilize the Guard,” Millet wrote.

Trump mobilized the District of Columbia National Guard and several state guards to the capital under Title 32 status, meaning their members can assist local law enforcement.

District court order 

Judge Jia Cobb, for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, found the administration’s deployment of more than 2,000 guard troops in the city illegal but stayed her Nov. 20 decision until Dec. 11 to give the administration time to appeal and remove the guard members from the district’s streets.

The Trump administration asked the federal appeals court to grant an emergency stay by Dec. 4, which the judges did.

U.S. senators who oversee armed services policy heard testimony from high-level Department of Defense officials on Dec. 11 regarding the Trump administration’s National Guard deployments to five U.S. cities, including Washington, D.C.

Guard member shooting

Wednesday’s decision comes three weeks after two West Virginia National Guard members were shot on Nov. 26 just blocks from the White House. U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from her injuries the following day, Thanksgiving. U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, underwent surgery for critical injuries and remains hospitalized.

Prosecutors charged the suspected shooter, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national who was living in Washington state, with first-degree murder, among other charges. 

On the day of the shooting, the Trump administration filed an emergency motion to stay Cobb’s order that found Trump’s guard deployment to the district was illegal.

Trump initially mobilized 800 National Guard troops to the nation’s capital in August after declaring a “crime emergency.” 

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan leaves the Milwaukee Federal Courthouse. Judge Dugan is on trial on charges that she helped Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented immigrant, elude federal arrest while he was making an appearance in her courtroom on April 18. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Milwaukee County Chief Judge Carl Ashley took the stand on the third day of the high profile trial of  Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of obstructing federal immigration agents and hiding the man they came to the Milwaukee County Courthouse to arrest. 

Ashley was asked about an email he wrote on April 4 to his fellow judges, following a string of courthouse arrests by immigration officers. The chief judge, like many of his colleagues, was disturbed by the arrests, and feared that they would disrupt the courthouse’s business and erode the public’s trust that the courthouse was a safe place. 

Ashley wrote that ICE arrests could likely be prohibited inside courtrooms but that “I’m not sure we have the authority to intervene with what happens in the public hallway.”

As the judges were discussing a plan for responding to the ICE presence at the courthouse, Ashley offered a training presentation — which Dugan was unable to attend  — that highlighted in part that immigration enforcement could happen in the public hallways, but not against certain groups of people such as victims of crimes. 

While questioning Ashley, prosecutors showed the jury an email Dugan sent in response to the training which said that “optimally” a policy guiding how court staff should respond to the presence of immigration officers would be desirable. Less than an hour later, Ashley attached a draft policy to an email, and sent it off to Dugan and other judges. Ashley testified that he wanted as much feedback on the policy as possible, including from the sheriff’s office, the district attorney and other “system partners.” He also reached out to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to get their input, agreeing with prosecutors who said Ashley “wanted to get it right.” 

Although the policy had been drafted, it had not been officially instituted. The policy was non-binding on April 18 when agents arrived outside Dugan’s courtroom, and did not explicitly state that ICE could not make arrests in the public hallway, Ashley acknowledged on the stand. 

Part of the draft  policy advised court staff to contact their immediate supervisors about the presence of ICE, and said Ashley should be among those notified. Dugan’s defense attorneys argued in prior days of testimony that Dugan was following the draft policy when she went into the hallway outside her courtroom to confirm that the plain-clothes agents there had a a non-judicial, administrative warrant and to tell them to go check in with the chief judge. The draft policy stated that all court staff were expected to comply with its guidance, and advised staff that administrative  warrants do not compel staff to comply with requests from ICE agents. 

Ashley testified that he was at home when the agents were sent to his office by Dugan. He recalled getting a call from Brian Barkow, chief deputy of the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office, advising him that ICE was in the building to arrest someone. After calling the deputy administrator, Ashley confirmed that agents were there. However, Ashley did not direct them to be brought to his office, the chief judge testified. Texts Ashley sent to Dugan telling her to call him went unanswered. She later replied that she had left the court to attend Good Friday church services. 

“I was concerned about what might’ve happened,” said Ashley, who then sent out another email notifying the judges about the ICE activity at the courthouse. He mentioned in the email that “all the agent’s actions were consistent with the draft policy.” 

Judges, courthouse staff upset by ICE presence

Prosecutors have accused Dugan of having “strongly held views” about ICE arrests at the courthouse. Wednesday’s testimony demonstrated that judges and courthouse staff were struggling with the arrival of ICE at the courthouse and trying to formulate a response.

On April 6, in the wake of the first arrests, Ashley issued a press release stating that ICE operating around the courthouse “can deter individuals, particularly immigrants and marginalized communities, from attending court hearings, seeking legal assistance, or reporting crimes,” and that “this undermines the fundamental right to access the courts and seek legal remedies.” This could lead to a lack of trust in the judicial system which could foster “a reluctance to engage with law enforcement, legal representation, and the courts, ultimately hindering the administration of justice.” 

Ashley read the press release on the stand, his voice booming through the federal courtroom. It stated  that “allowing ICE agents to operate within courthouse complexes has the potential to significantly damage the integrity of the court system,” and that “it undermines the principles of justice, fairness, and equality before the law, and ultimately jeopardizes the rights of individuals seeking to navigate the legal process. Courts remain safe havens for all individuals, free from the threats of immigration enforcement.”

The chief judge confirmed on the stand that he continued to hold these beliefs. During cross examination, defense attorneys showed a version of the draft policy, highlighting that it was based on a policy created by San Francisco, California. Ashley testified to editing the draft policy by removing a sentence stating that ICE agents are allowed to arrest people in the public areas of a courthouse, which appeared in the original policy from California. 

Melissa Buss, a Milwaukee County assistant district attorney who was assigned to Dugan’s court, testified Wednesday that she saw Dugan motion to attorney Mercedes de la Rosa — who was representing Flores-Ruiz — to “come here” as she stood by the jury door leading to the non-public hallway. Buss said it was unusual that Dugan appeared to be “directing” de la Rosa, and that the judge seemed “frustrated” whereas de la Rosa seemed “frazzled or confused.” Buss said that she wasn’t aware that Dugan had called Flores-Ruiz’s case early, despite audio recordings showing that Dugan spoke into a microphone and called the man’s case loudly, and set a date for him to re-appear via Zoom. 

Clerk calls ICE agent ‘fascist’

Prosecutors also called Alan Freed Jr., a deputy clerk in Dugan’s court. Freed recalled hearing from public defenders that ICE was in the hallways, saying that he was “upset and a little outraged.” Freed walked back into the courtroom to tell Dugan that there were “ICE guys in the hallway,” which was captured on courtroom audio. Freed also said that Dugan told him not to call the chief judge. Later, when Freed checked back in the hall, he saw agents walking towards the chief judge’s office after being directed there by Dugan. As one of the agents walked past Freed testified that he called the agent a “fascist.” 

Freed was grilled by prosecutors about who said what in the audio recordings, but he testified that he couldn’t recall some of the events of April 18. He’d sat through thousands of cases, including many in Dugan’s court, and had never seen a similar chain of events play out. Freed said it is not unusual for cases to be called off the record as Flores-Ruiz’s was, echoing Buss who said judges can call cases at random and that this was not unusual as prosecutors argued. 

Hasty exit out a side door

De la Rosa also testified that she was concerned about the news that ICE was in the building when she arrived at the courthouse. She’d only been a public defender in Milwaukee since March 2025, not long before ICE began arresting people inside the building. When Flores-Ruiz arrived, she was nervous to get him in and out of the building as quickly as possible to avoid contact with ICE. She asked for the pretrial hearing to be called off the record, and described herself as visibly anxious and even “obnoxious.” 

After Dugan was finished calling her case, de la Rosa recalled Dugan motioning for her and Flores-Ruiz to come by the jury door. She’d had judges lead her and clients out of side doors before, but only in particular circumstances, such as to avoid emotional victims, she said. “I kind of remember being scared or freaked out,” she testified, adding that she was stressed about the agents, and was bouncing back and forth between two languages to translate what was happening to Flores-Ruiz. “My brain was spinning,” she said. When the jury door opened into the hallway, de la Rosa testified, Dugan took a couple of steps in and directed her and her client straight down the hall towards the door that led to the public hallway. 

De la Rosa testified that she was never directed to go to the staircase in that hall, which led to a different floor, and didn’t even know that it existed. Her case had been called before attorney Walter Piel, who arrived early to court with his client. “I was a little frustrated that I wasn’t called first,” Piel testified, but added that he didn’t think that was unusual. When de la Rosa got outside, after unknowingly riding the elevator down with a plain-clothes ICE agent, she heard someone call Flores-Ruiz’s name. Flores-Ruiz ran, and agents arrested him down the street after a brief foot pursuit. 

The young defense attorney recalled being grilled about the incident by the FBI multiple times in interviews which stretched four to six hours in total. De la Rosa testified Wednesday that when Dugan allowed her to use the non-public hallway, she interpreted it as a “mentoring moment” because she was a new attorney unsure how to handle this unique situation. 

Joan Butz, a court reporter in Dugan’s courtroom, testified that she  was irritated when she heard that ICE had returned. “That pisses me off,” she remembered telling one of the other staff. Butz was captured on audio talking with Dugan about “down the stairs,” in a  conversation that wasn’t cleanly recorded. Butz testified that she offered to show de la Rosa the exit near the jury box, saying she just wanted to be helpful. Butz admitted, however, that she believed the correct exit would have been the staircase, and that the wrong exit would have been into the hallway where the agents were waiting. 

Prosecutors rested their case Wednesday, allowing the court day to conclude almost two hours earlier than usual. On Thursday, defense attorneys are expected to call several more witnesses. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Medical Assistant Janet Casamichana gives a flu shot to a child in Coral Gables, Fla., in September. Measles cases nationwide rose to 1,958 this year as of Dec. 16. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Measles case are continuing to grow, reaching 1,958 confirmed cases in 43 states through Dec. 16 and threatening to undo next year the United States’ status as a nation that has eradicated the disease, according to a report released Dec. 17 by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The increase of 46 cases in one week, including dozens more in South Carolina alone, raises concerns for holiday travelers.

Cases have now reached 803 in Texas, 182 in Arizona, 142 in South Carolina, 122 in Utah, and 100 in New Mexico this year.

West Texas has been the epicenter this year, but recently South Carolina has seen measles “spread quickly in unvaccinated households” in the Spartanburg County area, and 168 people were quarantined as of Dec. 16, according to the state health department.

The state urged employers to accommodate people with quarantine orders to help avoid more spread, warning that the disease is highly contagious for days before a person is aware of being sick.

Towns with low vaccination rates along the Arizona/Utah border also have seen recent outbreaks.

By July, national case numbers had already surpassed a 2019 outbreak, bringing this year’s caseload to the largest in 33 years. The last time there were more cases was 1992, when there were 2,126, according to the CDC report.

The continued outbreak, reflecting a worldwide increase in the disease but also a rise in vaccine hesitancy that has been encouraged at times by U.S. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr. threatens the hard-won measles eradication declared in 2000 for the United States.

The status has already been taken away from Canada, where the Pan American Health Organization found an outbreak lasting 12 months invalidated the “eradicated” status, and the United States faces an assessment next year. The CDC maintained in November that it was still possible to eliminate measles in the U.S. by ensuring every child has two doses of vaccine, but vaccination rates have been falling further away from the 95% minimum rate that limits spread.

Even as cases have risen this year, the CDC has communicated less about the highly contagious disease on social media, according to Johns Hopkins University research published this month.

The agency posted 10 times on social media this year between January and August, compared with an average of 46 times in the previous four years, according to the report, despite a rising number of cases.

Ruth Lynfield, Minnesota state epidemiologist, said vaccine hesitancy may not be the whole story of low vaccination rates, in a video interview published Dec. 16 by Contagion, an infectious disease news service. Minnesota has 26 measles cases this year, down from 70 last year.

“Overall, there is vaccine confidence. Ninety-two percent of our kids [nationally] are vaccinated against measles. However, in particular communities, that number can be quite low,” Lynfield said. “One of the reasons is not that people may be vaccine hesitant, but they have other priorities.”

Physicians can counteract some of the low rates by gaining trust and listening to concerns, she said, and also just by making things simpler with reminders and easy choices.

“One thing we can do is ensure that we can make it as simple and convenient as possible for parents and families to bring kids in to get vaccinated,” she said.

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

Recruiters discuss jobs with students at a July 2024 jobs fair at St. Edward's University in Austin, Texas. A new jobs report shows jobs nationwide rebounded after October losses, with a 64,000 gain in November. (Photo Courtesy of St. Edward’s University)

A shutdown-delayed jobs report released Dec. 16 showed an increase of 64,000 jobs in November, rebounding from a large loss of 105,000 jobs in October. Unemployment ticked higher to 4.6%, the highest since September 2021.

The October loss was the largest since December 2020, during a COVID-19 surge when jobs dropped by 183,000, according to a Stateline analysis of federal records.

The most recent report shows health care and construction added jobs in November — 46,000 and 28,000 jobs, respectively — while transportation and entertainment lost the most.

Transportation lost almost 18,000 jobs, mostly couriers and messengers, while entertainment and recreation lost 12,000 jobs, mostly in the amusement, gambling and recreation industries. The federal government dropped 6,000 jobs, while state governments gained 3,000 jobs.

State-by-state unemployment for November will be released Jan. 7 in the shutdown-affected schedule. October unemployment reports were canceled; the numbers for September showed rates rising in 25 states and falling in 21 compared with last year.

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

The U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Republican leaders in the U.S. House will face a floor vote in early 2026 on Democrats’ plan to extend enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits for three more years, after passing their own legislation Wednesday night that has little chance of a future in the Senate and does not address the tax credits.

The House vote on that legislation will be required after a handful of moderate Republicans signed on to a discharge petition Wednesday morning. Their dissent with leadership sent a strong signal they are frustrated with the majority’s policies and the rising cost of health care for their constituents. 

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said after a morning vote series on the floor, where he was seen in a heated exchange with Republican Rep. Mike Lawler, that the two “just had some intense fellowship” and “it’s all good.”

Lawler is one of the four centrist Republicans who signed the discharge petition, putting it over the threshold of 218 to force a vote on the legislation. 

“We’re working through very complex issues as we do here all the time,” Johnson said. “Everybody’s working towards ideas — we’re keeping the productive conversation going.” 

The speaker also mounted his own defense, saying he has “not lost control of the House.”

That chamber has seen chaos and intraparty divides in the aftermath of the government shutdown, when Johnson opted to send lawmakers home for nearly two months. 

“We have the smallest majority in U.S. history,” Johnson said. “These are not normal times — there are processes and procedures in the House that are less frequently used when there are larger majorities, and when you have the luxury of having 10 or 15 people who disagree on something, you don’t have to deal with it, but when you have a razor-thin margin, as we do, then all the procedures in the book people think are on the table, and that’s the difference.”

Republicans push through ‘extremely modest’ bill

House debate on Republican leaders’ health care bill later in the day was largely along party lines, with members of both parties talking nearly as much about the Affordable Care Act as they did about the policy in the new legislation. 

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., said he believes that law, enacted during President Barack Obama’s first term, “has proven to be unaffordable and unsustainable.” 

Guthrie rebuked Democrats for approving the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits during the coronavirus pandemic and scheduling them to expire at the end of this year, leading to the current deadlock in Congress. 

“Democrats leveraged a public health emergency to shovel hundreds of billions of dollars to big health insurance plans to mask the risk of rising unaffordability of coverage,” Guthrie said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., urged Johnson to put the three-year ACA extension bill up for a vote this week, instead of in the new year. 

“Republicans need to bring the Affordable Care Act tax credit extension bill to the floor today,” Jeffries said. “Under no circumstances should we leave this Capitol this week, before voting on an extension of the Affordable Care Act tax credit bill that we know will pass.” 

California Republican Rep. Kevin Kiley, one of the centrists looking for bipartisan solutions on the expiring tax credits, expressed dismay at how debate on health care costs has been handled during the past few months by leaders in both political parties. 

“This whole issue encapsulates what is wrong with this institution, where party leaders focus most of their time and energy on trying to blame problems on the other side rather than trying to solve those problems,” Kiley said. 

The House Republican bill, he said, is “extremely modest and it has no chance of becoming law because it was hastily thrown together without, apparently, any bipartisan input when bipartisan support is necessary to pass any measure like this.”

“What are we supposed to tell these folks? ‘Oh, don’t worry, it’s Obama’s fault.’ Or, ‘Oh no don’t worry, we did a show vote on this Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act.’ Is that going to be any consolation?” Kiley said. 

New Jersey Democratic Rep. Frank Pallone called the House GOP bill a “sham” and said without a vote to extend the expiring ACA tax credits millions of Americans will have to decide if they can afford health insurance coverage. 

“They will see prices double, triple and even quadruple,” Pallone said. “It will leave millions with the difficult decision of going without coverage because they simply cannot afford rising costs.”

The House voted 216-211 to approve the Republican health care bill, sending it to the Senate, where it’s highly unlikely it would get the bipartisan support needed to advance without significant revision. 

Senate approach

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said earlier in the day he hadn’t yet decided whether to put the House Democrats’ bill on the floor if it is passed and arrives. 

“Well, we’ll see. I mean, we obviously will cross that bridge when we come to it,” Thune said. “Even if they have a sufficient number of signatures, I doubt they vote on it this week.”

Thune said the discharge petition on the three-year ACA tax credits extension is far different from the discharge petition that forced a House floor vote on a bill to require the release of the Epstein files. Files related to Jeffrey Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 awaiting federal trial on sex trafficking charges, have become a target of Congress and victims in recent months.

“That came over here pretty much unanimously, 427 to 1,” Thune said. 
“And my assumption is this discharge petition is going to be a very, probably, partisan vote.”

The Senate voted earlier this month on Democrats’ three-year ACA tax credits legislation, a move that Thune agreed to in order to get enough Democratic votes to end the government shutdown. That bill, which is identical to the House version, was unable to get the 60 votes needed to advance on a 51-48 vote. 

Both chambers are set to leave Capitol Hill later this week for their two-week winter break and won’t return to work until the week of Jan. 5. 

‘We have to do something’ 

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said she sees the House discharge petition reaching the 218-signature threshold as “constructive.” 

The New Hampshire Democrat said “bipartisan, bicameral talks continue that are also constructive, so hopefully we can see some movement.” 

Though she is “hopeful” for a deal in January, Shaheen said “obviously, there’s a lot that needs to happen in order to get something done, but people need relief,” adding that “people in both houses and on both sides of the aisle are hearing from constituents that they want to see something done.” 

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley — one of four Republicans who voted with Democrats to advance the three-year extension plan — reiterated his calls for lawmakers to take action to address the looming premium spikes. 

“I just think we have to do something on the cost of premiums, and I’m not locked into any one thing,” he said, acknowledging that he voted for both Democrats’ proposal and his GOP colleagues’ alternative bill. That effort also failed, at 51-48, to garner the 60 votes needed to move forward.  

“I mean, advance any solution — that’s my view, but what I think we should not do is just sit back and say, ‘Well, you know, good luck. We wish you all the best.’” 

Frustration breaks through

The House Republican bill, which Johnson released Friday evening, doesn’t extend the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits.

It 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. 

Johnson decided Tuesday not to allow the House to debate any amendments to the bill, blocking moderate Republicans from having their bipartisan proposal to extend the ACA marketplace tax credits with modifications taken up. 

That led to considerable frustration, and Wednesday morning, Pennsylvania Republican Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Rob Bresnahan and Ryan Mackenzie, along with New York’s Lawler, signed the Democrats’ discharge petition, putting it at the 218 signatures needed to force a floor vote in that chamber. 

“We’ve worked for months with both parties, in both chambers, and with the White House, all in good faith, to balance all equities and offer a responsible bridge that successfully threaded the needle,” Fitzpatrick wrote in a statement.   

“Our only request was a Floor vote on this compromise, so that the American People’s voice could be heard on this issue,” Fitzpatrick added. “That request was rejected. Then, at the request of House leadership I, along with my colleagues, filed multiple amendments, and testified at length to those amendments. House leadership then decided to reject every single one of these amendments. As I’ve stated many times before, the only policy that is worse than a clean three-year extension without any reforms, is a policy of complete expiration without any bridge. Unfortunately, it is House leadership themselves that have forced this outcome.”

Jeffries introduced petition

The discharge petition, introduced last month by House Democratic Leader  Jeffries, sat just below the signatures needed for weeks as centrist Republicans tried to broker a deal that could become law. 

When that logjam broke with the moderates’ signatures, it set up a House floor vote, but any legislation must move through the Senate as well and gain President Donald Trump’s signature. 

Without a law to extend the enhanced ACA marketplace subsidies, roughly 22 million Americans will see their health insurance premiums spike by thousands of dollars next year, if they can fit the rise in costs into their budgets. 

The Vernon County farm owned by Wisconsin Farmer's Union President Darin Von Ruden. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin lawmakers at the state and federal level have proposed a flurry of policies to support Wisconsin farmers after the first year of the second Trump administration brought increased uncertainty, the whiplash of trade wars and the fear of increased immigration enforcement against migrant workers. 

Last week, the Trump administration announced it would be providing $12 billion in bridge payments to American farmers to help them manage the economic fallout of Trump’s tariffs. The tariffs have increased the costs of inputs such as machinery and fertilizer while limiting international markets for U.S. farm products. 

After the bailout was announced, Wisconsin farm advocates said the money was needed to help make ends meet this year, but called for more permanent solutions so farmers can make a living from what they grow. 

“This relief will help many Wisconsin farm families get through a tough stretch, and we recognize the need for that kind of support in a crisis,” Wisconsin Farmers Union President Darin Von Ruden said in a statement. “But farmers in our state don’t want to rely on emergency payments year after year — we want a fair shot at making a living from the work we do. It’s time for long-term solutions that bring stability back to our markets, tackle consolidation, and ensure rural communities across Wisconsin can thrive.”

Wisconsin’s soybean farmers have been among the hardest hit by the Trump trade wars because China was a massive market for the crop. 

Dr. Success Okafor, policy fellow at the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, told the Wisconsin Examiner that the Trump administration needs to help farmers of commodity crops such as corn and soybeans and specialty crops such as vegetables. The U.S. Department of Agriculture program has set aside $11 billion for commodity producers and $1 billion for specialty crops. 

“For many Wisconsin farmers, especially those already under financial pressure, the relief is important, but the key issue is not whether the relief exists, but it is whether it is accessible and aligned with long-term resilience,” Okafor said. “Soybean farmers in Wisconsin have been hit particularly hard by the trade disruptions, and targeted relief for those losses is absolutely warranted. But the question is not whether soybean producers should receive support, but how this relief can be structured so it does not unintentionally exclude other farmers who are also economically vulnerable.”

Okafor said key elements of an equitable government relief program for farmers would include transparency in how losses are calculated, flexibility in program design and making sure access is not limited by short deadlines or complex paperwork. 

Bipartisan bill to help for organic farms

Last week, Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin and Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden joined a bipartisan effort to support organic farmers. The Domestic Organic Investment Act would extend a UDA grant program to help organic farmers find markets for their products. 

A number of Democratic state legislators also introduced legislation aimed at helping Wisconsin’s farmers find markets for their products. The bills are unlikely to move forward under the Republican-controlled Legislature, but the package of agriculture bills is among the proposals Democrats have made throughout the year to signal their agenda if they win a state legislative majority next year. 

The proposal includes grants to support specialty products that are sold locally, providing healthy food to federal food assistance recipients and expanding the state’s farmland preservation program. 

“The federal government has failed our farmers and our agricultural economy,” Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) said at a news conference last week. “We would not need a $12 billion bailout for our farmers if the Trump administration was doing right by them in the first place. We are now trying to play catch up, and here in Wisconsin, we are trying to fill in those gaps and support our farmers in these difficult times as the Trump administration fails.” 

At its annual conference in Wisconsin Dells last week, the Farmers Union set its 2026 priorities, which include managing the continued consolidation of the agricultural industry, protecting the rights of immigrant workers, supporting family dairy farms and ensuring access to quality health care. 

At the local level across Wisconsin, debates are raging over the best use of the state’s agricultural land. A number of communities had heated  arguments over proposals to construct massive data centers on existing farmland while others have continued yearslong efforts to oppose the expansion of massive factory farms. 

Despite pressure from industry groups and business lobbyists, towns across western Wisconsin have enacted local ordinances limiting the ability of farms to expand without local approval. Last week, the town of Gilman became the third Pierce County community to pass a local CAFO ordinance. Gilman officials said their goal was protecting local resources while trying to encourage a local agricultural industry that can support smaller family farms. 

The new ordinance, Gilman town board chair Phil Verges said, puts in place minimum standards to address community concerns.

“We have legitimate concerns and this is the best option we have to protect ourselves from the seemingly unlimited growth of these factory farms,” Verges said. “We can’t sit by and do nothing.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senators and two current representatives seeking Senate seats in 2026 have been touring the state to highlight affordability and the effects of Republican policy choices, including tariffs and cuts to health care at the federal level. Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein, second from left, listens as Christmas Tree farm operator Lance Jensen discusses his business with Hesselbein and Sens. Sarah Keyeski and Melissa Ratcliff, during a visit to Jensen's farm on Dec. 8. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein told the Wisconsin Examiner in a year-end interview that while she may have had a seat at the budget negotiating table this year, the Legislature still hasn’t engaged in as much bipartisan work as she had hoped. 

Democratic lawmakers entered this year with bolstered numbers under new voting maps, but still in the minority. The closely divided partisan breakdown in the Senate — 15 Democrats and 18 Republicans —  led to Republicans scrapping their plans to cut the University of Wisconsin budget and providing additional funding for K-12 schools, in budget negotiations with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers where Hesselbein had a seat at the negotiating table. But the current session still hasn’t matched up to Hesselbein’s “really high hopes at the beginning of the session that we were going to be able to do some really good bipartisan work.” 

Hesselbein noted that at the start of the session, lawmakers introduced three bills she thought were “really strong.”

“Unfortunately, Republicans are refusing to work with us on those issues,” Hesselbein said. “I am hopeful that they will go spend time with their families back home over the holidays, and they will realize that we can still get a lot of great things done for the state of Wisconsin in the spring.” 

One bill would provide school breakfast and lunch to students at no cost, another would make several policy changes aimed at helping bring down the costs of prescription drugs and the final one would expand the homestead tax credit to provide additional relief to low-income homeowners and renters.

Hesselbein said the “Healthy Schools Meals” legislation would help “every single kid, make sure they get a good nutritious lunch at school” and help “save the average family like $1800 a year on grocery costs.” She said the prescription drug legislation would help prevent more people from “choosing to cut their medicine in half” due to costs and the tax credit would help people stay in their homes longer. 

“These were three really common-sense bills. I still really think they are, and all we needed was two Senate Republicans to help us get these bills across the finish line and show that they care about the people of the state of Wisconsin and that they want to do some bipartisan work,” Hesselbein said. “Unfortunately, they weren’t interested in doing that work with us, and they don’t have a plan to help people with the rising costs in the state of Wisconsin.” 

Hesselbein said that passing helpful legislation, including the three bills she mentioned, could mitigate the upheaval of President Donald Trump’s administration.

“There’s so much chaos and confusion happening with the Trump administration that sometimes it’s hard to keep track of it day to day,” she said. “…What we can do as legislators in the state of Wisconsin is pass bills that actually help people.” 

Hesselbein said Senate Democrats continue to have conversations with Republicans in the hopes that they can get more legislation passed. One pressing concern is  the Knowles-Nelson stewardship program which, without legislative action, will sunset early in 2026. 

“We’re very worried about that happening, so our doors are open to any ideas they have,” Hesselbein said of her Republican colleagues, adding that she hopes a bill authored by Sen. Jodi Habush-Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) can move forward.

Hesselbein noted that the stewardship program, which was created in 1989 to fund land conservation in Wisconsin, has bipartisan roots. It is named after former Republican Gov. Warren Knowles and former Democratic Gov. Gaylord Nelson and was signed into law by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson.

“This has never been a partisan issue,” Hesselbein said, noting that the program is popular with people across Wisconsin who love the outdoors, “whether they’re going hiking or they’re fishing, or they’re hunting.”

Hesselbein also said she is hopeful that the bill she coauthored, which would bolster education on menopause and perimenopause, will advance. It received a public hearing in the Senate earlier this year.

Wisconsin Senate is the ‘most flippable’ in 2026

Next year will be a definitive election year in Wisconsin with control of the Senate, Assembly and governor’s office up for grabs.

Hesselbein said she believes that the Wisconsin State Senate is “the most flippable chamber” in the United States — and Democrats are working hard towards that goal. Wisconsin’s 17 odd-numbered Senate districts are up for reelections in 2026. It’s the first time new legislative maps adopted in 2024 that reflect the 50/50 partisan divide in the state will be in effect for those districts.

Hesselbein said Democrats are focused on winning districts that previously went to former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024, former President Joe Biden in 2020, Gov. Tony Evers in his two elections and to Mary Burke, who lost to former Gov. Scott Walker in 2014. 

Two seats targeted by Democrats to flip are Senate District 5, which is currently held by Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) and Senate District 17, which is currently held by Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green).

“Fair maps and great candidates matter, and we already have people on the field that are out there knocking on doors listening to voters today on a cold day in Wisconsin… We have people that want to be elected to do the right thing for the people in the state of Wisconsin,” Hesselbein said.

Democratic candidates in Wisconsin and nationwide are hammering a message about affordability. Through the State Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, senators and two current representatives seeking Senate seats in 2026 have been touring the state to highlight the effects of Republican policy choices, including tariffs and cuts to health care at the federal level. They also recently launched an ad titled “Aisle 5.”

The ad opens as a group of Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), Sen. Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska) and Hesselbein, declare: “Same groceries from the same store. Same people in power, calling the shots and driving the prices up.”  The words “Senate Republicans” pop up on the screen. “My colleagues and I are fighting every single day against tariffs that make beef, eggs, and even cheese more expensive,” Hesselbein says. “But guess what? They don’t care. We can’t keep hoping they’re going to make the right choice because they’ve shown us they won’t.”

Hesselbein vowed in the interview with the Examiner that under Democratic control the Senate will have more floor sessions, be more transparent and “be actually doing the people’s work.”

“When Senate Democrats are fortunate enough to be the majority, we will continue to work with our Republican colleagues and get the best policies to help the people in the state of Wisconsin, especially when it comes to rising costs,” she told the Examiner. 

Senate Democrats’ ability to pursue their agenda will not only rely on winning the majority, but will also depend on who wins the consequential gubernatorial race, though Hesselbein said she is prepared to work with whoever wins. 

“I was able to work with a Republican governor when Scott Walker was there. I was able to pass some bills,” Hesselbein said. “I’m hoping we have a Democratic governor so we can finally start listening to the people of the state of Wisconsin and get things done because we’ve been waiting a long time.” 

Hesselbein said she doesn’t plan to endorse anyone in the Democratic primary for governor. 

Many of the candidates have legislative experience including state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) and state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) as well as Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, Milwaukee County Exec. David Crowley, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and former state Rep. Brett Hulsey. Other Democratic candidates include former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes and former Department of Administration Sec. Joel Brennan.

“I have too many friends,” Hesselbein said of her decision not to make an endorsement. “I have been in caucus with some of them… They are really good people, and when the going got tough, they never ran from an argument or anything, so I’m really looking forward to seeing how that race shapes up.” 

Hesselbein said she is looking forward to seeing each candidate’s platform and a “robust” discussion among them. 

“What are the plans that they have for the state of Wisconsin? How do they see us addressing rising costs and affordability? What is their plan for K-12 education, higher education? For the environment and all the things that we’ve been hearing about for years that people in the state of Wisconsin want us to effectively address,” Hesselbein said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Rep. Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison), who has long advocated for a bill to create a task force on to examine the issue of missing and murdered Black women and girls, read testimony on behalf of Tanesha Howard, the grieving mother of Joniah Walker. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

At a Tuesday hearing, Wisconsin Rep. Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison), who has long advocated   creating a task force on missing and murdered Black women and girls, read testimony on behalf of Tanesha Howard, the grieving mother of Joniah Walker.

Walker went missing in 2022 at the age of 15 in Milwaukee and has not been found.

“They refused to issue an Amber Alert to allow the community to help search for her. They were telling me Joniah did not fit the requirement of anything,” Stubbs said. Howard sat next to her with her eyes closed. “What are the requirements to get help from your local police department when your Black… daughter [is] missing?”

SB 404, coauthored by Stubbs (D-Madison), Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) and Sens. Jesse James (R-Thorp) and LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee), would establish a 17-member task force to examine the issue of missing and murdered Black women and girls and produce a report.

“To help prevent other families from experiencing what my family and countless other families endured … this bill for missing and murdered African–American women and girls … needs to be passed into state law,” Stubbs read on behalf of Howard. “Help us. Find us. Give our families closure. We matter.” 

This is the third legislative session in a row that Stubbs has introduced legislation to create the task force. She was inspired in part by the Department of Justice’s task force on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, which was established in 2020 by Attorney General Josh Kaul after the Legislature failed to pass a bill to create that task force. Kaul has said that the funds don’t exist to take a similar path with this task force. 

Stubbs said during the hearing in the Senate Mental Health, Substance Abuse Prevention, Children & Families committee that the bill is “necessary to improve the mechanisms for preventing, investigating and healing for all forms of gender-based violence in our state, which impacts women and kids of all racial backgrounds, but which affect Black women and girls at the highest rate.”

Members of the task force would include four lawmakers and other stakeholders, including law enforcement representatives and representatives from advocacy or legal organizations that focus on Black women and girls.

The task force would be responsible for examining a number of issues related to the violence that Black women and girls face including systemic causes, the appropriate methods for tracking and collecting data, policing related to investigating and prosecuting crimes, measures that could reduce violence and ways to support victims and their families.

Under the bill, a final report would be due by 2027. It would need to recommend policies and practices that would be effective in reducing gender violence and increasing the safety of Black women and girls and help victims and communities to heal from violence.

Stubbs highlighted a 2022 report from the Guardian that found that in 2020 five Black women and girls were killed every day in the U.S. Wisconsin had the worst homicide rate for Black women and girls in the nation that year. Stubbs said data on the extent of the issue is incomplete, and the task force could help fill in the picture. 

“We are lacking crucial data, especially in Wisconsin,” Stubbs said. “The data already gathered is insufficient and lacks critical detail to understand the circumstances of violence.”

Johnson said the bill is a “necessary step toward understanding why African-American women and girls are so vulnerable to violence and disappearance and where our public safety systems are falling short.”

Sheena Scarborough, mother of 19-year-old Sade Robinson, who was murdered last year, also testified at the hearing. Johnson noted that both mothers are from her district.

“I think that speaks volumes to how serious the issue is and how it impacts communities, not just in the city of Milwaukee but across the state, but disproportionately it affects African-American women, especially in the city of Milwaukee,” Johnson said. 

The bill would provide one position in the Department of Justice to support the task force as well as $80,200 in 2025-26 and $99,500 in 2026-27 to fund it.

Last session, the bill passed the Assembly but never received a vote on the Senate floor. It received a public hearing but not without encountering roadblocks due to opposition from former Sen. Duey Stroebel (R-Saukville). Stroebel said he didn’t support the legislation because he didn’t support passing laws based on race or gender. 

Snyder, who described himself as “the Republican who likes to do what is right” said the bill is “the right thing to do,” and expressed frustration with the bill getting hung up last session. 

“I get really irritated when one person thinks that because they don’t like it, that they can kill it. That bugs me a lot,” Snyder said. 

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) asked the lawmakers if there are other groups, noting Hmong and Indigenous groups, that face disproportionate amounts of violence and suggested changing the bill to include them. 

“Instead of focusing on just one specific group… I would really love to see each one of these groups kind of meld together, so there’s representation so information can be shared,” Wanggaard said. 

James, who is the only member of the Legislature actively serving in law enforcement, answered Wanggaard’s question by pulling from his own experience. 

“Back at home, I mean, we have a high Hmong population. I don’t recall ever taking any cases involving any missing Hmong individuals to be honest with you. …I’ve had more white and African-American missing type cases,” James said. He said that a “caveat” to the issue is that “the data collection hasn’t always been prevalent and adequate… especially if we have agencies where they’re not even taking cases on missing persons, that data is not going to be collected.”

“My concern is that if they’re targeting young women — just young women in general, I’m not concerned what race they are — if they’re targeting these young women, is there a connection between some of the missing… say on the Menominee reservation as opposed to Milwaukee County,” Wanggaard said. “I’m just thinking about getting the most information to as many people as we can to help the process.”

Supporters of the bill addressed questions about why it was important to have a task force specifically focused on Black women and girls. 

Madison Police Chief John Patterson was asked whether he saw any value in creating one big task force.

“We shouldn’t be afraid to be surgical at times when it comes to disparities that we’ve identified in our system and, certainly, I believe this is one,” Patterson said. “In my almost three decades, I can tell you work that started off being very focused and surgical in nature to try to address a disparate impact in our community has led to greater communication, greater collaboration across all communities.”

Barbara Sella, executive director of the Wisconsin Catholic Conference, said it’s “so important to understand dynamics within communities and different communities have different dynamics.” 

“To just say, well let’s include everybody — could make the task almost impossible… It’s really important to have a laser focus,” Sella said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Student protesters shout during a “Hands Off Our Schools” rally in front of the U.S. Department of Education’s Washington, D.C., headquarters in April. Students from several colleges and universities gathered to protest President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the department. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Tuesday blasted ongoing efforts from President Donald Trump’s administration to dismantle the Department of Education, including plans to shift several of its responsibilities to other Cabinet-level agencies.  

Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono hosted a forum on the issue with several Democratic colleagues. The lawmakers, joined by education leaders, advocates and leading labor union voices, said the restructuring would lead to a loss of expertise, create more bureaucracy and weaken support for students and families. 

The administration announced six agreements in November with the departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State as part of a larger effort from the administration to dismantle the 46-year-old Education Department. 

Trump has sought to axe the agency in his quest to send education “back to the states” and tapped Education Secretary Linda McMahon to fulfill that mission. Much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels.

Losing expertise

Sen. Elizabeth Warren slammed the transfers as “illegal” because of federal laws assigning specific responsibilities to the Education Department.

“Congress already passed the laws on this,” she said. “Every one of the programs that’s moving out of the Department of Education specifically says we have allocated the money for a program in the Department of Education, not in whatever random other place Secretary McMahon decides to put it.” 

The Massachusetts Democrat said that if the transfers go through, “we’ve got now four federal agencies that have no experience with education suddenly in charge of more than 50 different educational programs, including ones that fund literacy, education for veterans, kids in rural school districts — you name it, it’s moving somewhere else.” 

Even before the announcements of interagency agreements, the Education Department had seen several changes since Trump took office, including layoffs of hundreds of employees that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in July could temporarily proceed.

In a late Tuesday statement to States Newsroom, department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said the transfers were part of a wider effort to initiate a sorely needed overhaul of the federal education bureaucracy.

“The opposition is protecting a system that produces dismal results for our students,” she said. “The Trump Administration demands better than the status quo.”

‘Nothing but chaos’

Under one of the agreements, the Education Department said the Labor Department would take on a “greater role” in administering elementary and secondary education programs currently managed under the Education Department’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. 

Rachel Gittleman, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents Education Department workers, said “nobody wins, the least of all, students and educators,” when the Labor Department takes on massive education programs, noting the current workforce at Education has the right experience.

“Our staff have decades of experience with the complicated programs we’re talking about today,” Gittleman said. “These moves will cause nothing but chaos and harm for the people they’re intended to help.” 

In general, the agreements “swap a highly efficient system for a chaotic, underfunded one spread across multiple agencies,” Gittleman said.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, also rebuked the administration’s efforts to gut the agency.

“What is happening here is not simply the dismantlement of the Department of Education,” she said. “It is taking away — it is abandoning the federal role in education.” 

Weingarten, who leads one of the largest teachers unions in the country, added that “we should be, as a nation, expanding the federal role in public education, not supplanting states.” 

Rhode Island commissioner condemns Brown shooting

Angélica Infante-Green, Rhode Island’s commissioner of elementary and secondary education, said the administration’s attempts to gut the agency are “already putting our nation’s education system and our students at a disadvantage.”

Communication from the Department of Education “lacks detail,” she added.

“We get these one or two sentences with edicts that often conflict with state and federal law. What do we do? The chaos has resulted in protracted legal battles across the country, raising serious constitutional questions,” she said. 

At the top of her remarks, Infante-Green also expressed her condolences for the victims, their families and the entire Brown University community after two students were killed and nine others were injured in a shooting on campus over the weekend. 

The federal courthouse in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Testimony from federal agents continued into the second day of Milwaukee Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan’s federal trial, where Dugan faces charges of obstructing immigration officers and concealing a man they were trying to arrest outside her courtroom in April. Prosecutors repeatedly asked agents about Dugan’s tone when she spoke with them, which they described as upset, angry, direct and stern. A colleague of Dugan’s, Judge Kristela Cervera, who was with Dugan when she confronted agents in the hallway outside her courtroom, also testified that Dugan’s demeanor during the encounter made her uncomfortable.

On Tuesday, FBI agent Jeffrey Baker testified about his encounter with Dugan as part of the six-man arrest team that entered the Milwaukee County Courthouse in April in search of Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a 30-year-old Mexican-born man who was in the country without legal authorization.

During Baker’s testimony, details emerged about a woman the agents encountered in the hallway whom they believed was a public defender and who noticed them and began taking  pictures of the agents before Dugan arrived and spoke with them. Images of a Signal Chat used by the arrest team which had been named the “Frozen Water Group,” a reference to ICE, revealed that agents texted that the woman had “been around for more than one of these before.” Another message stated “she was talking sh*t about us with another attorney about how we are not very covert.” 

The prior arrests the agents were referring to had occurred at the courthouse from late March to early April, fueling concern among Milwaukee County judges about how to ensure the courthouse remained a safe and orderly place to conduct business. Testimony and text messages suggest that the prior arrests had all been made by the same team Dugan spoke with on April 18. 

Defense attorneys highlighted the agent’s choice of profile images for the “Frozen Water Group” chat. One agent had chosen an image of a skull over a pill bottle crossed by two syringes with a thin blue line flag in the background. Brian Ayers, a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent, who said that this was his account in the Signal chat, testified Tuesday that the logo belonged to the DEA opioid task force. Another showed a man licking the barrel of a handgun. Ayers testified that he followed Flores-Ruiz down the hall, and rode the elevator down with him and his lawyer without revealing that he was a federal agent. 

FBI agents Phillip Jackling, Customs and Border Protection agent Joseph Zurao, and ICE deportation officer Joseph Vasconcellos, who were all part of that Signal chat, described Dugan coming out to ask whether they were there to attend court hearings, and pointing them down the hall to Chief Judge Carl Ashley’s office. Jackling described Dugan as “very direct, and she seemed upset,” and said that leaving the rest of the arrest team in the hall “caused me to have a little bit of uncertainty about what was going to happen next.” Zurao said that Dugan told the agents to “get out” or “leave”. 

Vasconcellos said that he was unnerved by the attorney photographing them, and that because he’d been stabbed, shot, and suffered nerve damage in his neck over the course of  his career, he had concerns that their plan to use the courthouse as a “safe place” to arrest people had gone south. “I was honestly concerned that we had had our pictures taken and the staff knew who we were,” Vasconcellos testified. He’d texted in the group chat, speaking of the public defender photographing them, “this is going to be a pain in the d-ck.”

Vasconcellos described Dugan as “very stern and upset,” and said when Dugan told them to leave the hall and go to Ashley’s office, “I told her no.” Vasconcellos eventually went into the chief judge’s office, where he and other agents waited to get connected to Ashley over the phone. Ashley discussed the courthouse draft policy governing immigration enforcement in and around the building at length with the agents. When Vasconcellos left Ashley’s office, the rest of the arrest team had already followed Flores-Ruiz outside and arrested him. 

Vasconcellos testified that he was aware that judges could speak  sternly and that he was not familiar with Dugan and didn’t know if that tone was normal for her. Defense attorneys highlighted that only DEA Special Agent Ayers told FBI investigators that he heard Dugan yelling at the team, something none of the other task force agents described in their testimony. Ayers also refuted testimony from Zuaro, who claimed to have told Ayers to “get your ass out in the hallway in case he comes out,” an assertion that was not  documented in reports and interviews conducted by investigators. Nile Hendrix-Whitmore, a victim witness advocate with the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office, also testified that she did not hear any yelling or arguing when Dugan spoke with the agents. 

Judge testifies about discomfort with Dugan

Later in the day, Judge Cervera took the stand. Cervera recalled that she had a busy schedule on April 18, and had arrived to court early to begin working on her cases. She’d left the building to move her car and as she walked back she ran into Dugan who was presumably doing the same. Not long after she arrived back to her courtroom, Cervera testified that Dugan came in and beckoned her over. “I thought something bad had happened,” said Cervera. “It was embarrassing to be summoned in that way.”

Cervera testified that Dugan gave the impression that  “it was urgent” and that Dugan “seemed irritated.” When Cervera began to remove her robes, she testified that Dugan told her to keep them on, which she did because Dugan was a more senior judge. “I didn’t want to walk into the hallway with my robe,” Cervera testified, though she said she didn’t tell Dugan that she was uncomfortable. 

When the two approached the agents and Dugan asked whether they had a judicial warrant, Cervera said that “her irritation seemed to progress into anger.” Cervera said that Dugan was “expressing her views to the officer” and that she thought Dugan “could have been a little more diplomatic.” Nevertheless, Cervera testified that the interaction was “pretty straightforward and quick,” and that she had her own questions about the kind of warrant the agents had. Dugan told them that a judicial warrant signed by a judge, not an administrative warrant signed by an ICE officer, would be needed, Cervera testified.

Cervera escorted the agents to Ashley’s office and recalled looking back and not seeing Dugan follow them. “I felt abandoned,” she said on the stand. “I thought she left me.” As Cervera looked over the warrant herself, she noticed other agents coming into the hall leading to the chief judge’s office. When Cervera took a short cut through Dugan’s court to get back to her own room, Cervera noticed that Dugan was hearing cases. “I was irritated at that point,” she said, repeating that she felt “abandoned” by her fellow judge. 

Bits and pieces of what happened then made it to Cervera, including Flores-Ruiz being arrested outside, and attorneys pumping their fists telling her, “You go, Judge,” and saying, “Judge, you’re ‘goated’ now,” a reference to the term “Greatest Of All Time.” Cervera testified that one attorney, the same who took pictures of agents in the hall, told her, “We knew what you guys were trying to do.” The next day, she heard that the FBI would be getting involved. “I was shocked” and “mortified,” she testified. “Judges shouldn’t be helping defendants avoid arrest.”

Sometime after April 18, Cervera recalled running into Dugan in an elevator. “I didn’t want to run into her at this point,” Cervera testified. Dugan allegedly told Cervera that she was “in the dog house with Carl,” referring to the chief judge. “She seemed eager to tell me about what happened on Friday,” Cervera said. 

Defense attorneys questioned Cervera about whether she knew ICE agents were waiting outside her courtroom as well, which she denied. When she got home on April 18, she Googled Vasconcellos’ name, and warned her sister — who is also an attorney who had cases with clients at the Milwaukee courthouse coming up — that ICE was more active in the building. Defense attorneys noted that when she was called to a grand jury, Cervera did not reveal that she had warned her sister about the federal operations. 

Cervera said on the stand that she was talking to her sister about what appeared to be “sweeping arrests” happening around the country, and that she’d never heard of ICE arrests at the courthouse prior to March. Multiple members of the arrest team testified that they had only been transferred to ICE Emergency Removal Operations (ERO) duties in early 2025, after President Donald Trump took office. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio speak to reporters on Dec. 16, 2025, following a closed-door briefing with all senators about U.S. military action in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. senators left a closed-door meeting Tuesday with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio split over the Trump administration’s strikes on alleged drug-running vessels near Venezuela, particularly an early September follow-up strike that killed two survivors clinging to boat wreckage.

Hegseth and Rubio delivered the all-member briefings to Senate and House lawmakers on Capitol Hill as the death toll from U.S. military strikes on alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean has surpassed 90, and as U.S. Navy ships are amassed off the coast of Venezuela.

Controversy over the possibility of war crimes during the Sept. 2 follow-on strike that killed shipwrecked survivors drew attention after The Washington Post reported details last month, calling into question Hegseth’s orders.

Hegseth told reporters Tuesday he briefed members on a “highly successful mission to counter designated terrorist organizations, cartels, bringing weapons — weapons, meaning drugs — to the American people and poisoning the American people for far too long. So we’re proud of what we’re doing.”

Dems decry edited video

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told reporters Hegseth again refused to show unedited footage, which Schumer described as “deeply troubling,” of a second strike on Sept. 2 that killed two people who survived the initial strike. 

“The administration came to this briefing empty handed,” Schumer, D-N.Y., said. 

“If they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean? Every senator is entitled to see it. There is no problem with (revealing) sources and methods” because the senators will view it in the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, a secure area of the Capitol where classified information is generally shared.

Schumer added that an “appropriate version” of the video should be disclosed to the public.

Senate Republicans downplayed loud concerns from Democrats, pointing to former President Barack Obama’s numerous counterterrorism drone strikes in the Middle East.

“We’ve been using the same technique for 24 years, and nothing has changed except the hemisphere,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla.

Public release called for

Hegseth told reporters the unedited video will be shown to members of the Senate and House committees on the Armed Services Wednesday, alongside Admiral Frank Bradley, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, who oversaw the strikes.

Hegseth did not address why the department declined to show the unedited video to all 100 senators. 

He did say, “Of course, we’re not going to release a top-secret, full, unedited video of that to the general public.”

Several Democratic senators have called for the video to be publicly released.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said he was told during the meeting that the video won’t be released because of “classification concerns.”

“It is hard to square the widespread, routine, prompt posting of detailed videos of every strike, with a concern that posting a portion of the video of the first strike would violate a variety of classification concerns,” Coons said.

Coons added “it’s increasingly important that the national security team of the Trump administration increasingly respect and recognize the role and power of Congress.” 

He highlighted a provision in Congress’s annual defense authorization bill that compels Hegseth to release the video or lose 25% of his travel budget. The massive defense bill is expected to pass this week.

Body count from boat strikes rising

U.S. Southern Command posted a video on social media Monday night of the military’s latest strikes on three boats “operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations in international waters” in the eastern Pacific. The strikes killed eight people, according to the post.

President Donald Trump has officially promoted his military actions in the Caribbean as a fight against drug trafficking and overdose deaths in the United States, particularly from illicit fentanyl. 

On Monday Trump issued an order declaring the powerful synthetic opioid as a “Weapon of Mass Destruction.”

The smuggling routes for illicit fentanyl and the chemicals used to make it follow the path from China to Mexico to the U.S., and is highlighted as such in the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency’s 2025 National Drug Threat Assessment.

The administration has designated several drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, including “Cartel de los Soles,” an alleged Venezuelan group that the Department of State described as spearheaded by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Trump has hinted at a land invasion of the South American country.

When asked by States Newsroom on Tuesday whether Hegseth addressed during the meeting what type of drugs were alleged to be in the targeted boats, Mullin and Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, said cocaine.

“We’ve always heard it’s mainly cocaine. It doesn’t matter. It’s drugs,” Mullin said.

Sullivan said “it’s the same groups” smuggling the cocaine as the ones smuggling fentanyl.

Cocaine mixed with illicit fentanyl has become “an increasing public safety concern” over the last eight years, according to the National Drug Threat Assessment. 

Overall, all U.S. drug overdose deaths have decreased in recent years, according to the assessment and latest data published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Bad River in Mellen, south of the Bad River Band's reservation. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, challenging the corps’ decision to grant a permit allowing the oil company Enbridge to reroute its Line 5 pipeline around the tribe’s reservation in northern Wisconsin

The lawsuit, filed in the Washington D.C. federal circuit court, is another step in the long legal history of the Enbridge pipeline and the company’s effort to move it from its current route through the tribe’s land. The tribe is asking that the permit approval be vacated. 

In October, the corps approved Enbridge’s permit to reroute the pipeline off the reservation despite significant public opposition. 

The new route moves the pipeline south but it still runs across land on three sides of the reservation and crosses the Bad River upstream of the reservation. The permit was approved as the administration of President Donald Trump has moved to more aggressively support oil and natural gas projects. Earlier in the year, the corps approved a fast-tracked permitting process for Enbridge to construct a tunnel across the Straits of Mackinac so Line 5 can cross from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula to its Lower Peninsula. 

The tribe’s lawsuit alleges that the corps violated the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Water Act and the Administrative Procedure Act by not properly conducting required environmental reviews or following the proper procedures. 

“For hundreds of years, and to this day, the Band’s ancestors and members have lived, hunted, fished, trapped, gathered, and engaged in traditional activities in the wetlands and waters to be crossed by the Project,” the lawsuit states. “The Project would encircle the Reservation on three sides and damage areas the Band highly values for their ecological and cultural significance. The Corps’ failure to properly review and address the Project’s environmental impacts to wetlands and waterways harms the Band’s interest in maintaining its Reservation homeland and resources in the ceded territory.”

The lawsuit alleges that the corps violated the NEPA by not giving proper consideration to the “environmental effects of construction, maintenance, and operation of the Project,” including how it will harm the health of resources on and near the reservation. 

Under the Clean Water Act, the corps cannot approve permits until the state or tribal government responsible for water quality in the project area certifies the project won’t harm the local water. While the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources did previously approve the state permits for the Line 5 reroute, those permits are currently being challenged in a separate legal process. 

The tribe alleges in the lawsuit that the corps should not have moved forward with its permits until after the state process is complete.  

[The corps] violated the Clean Water Act by issuing the Permit without ensuring that construction and maintenance of the Project would not adversely affect Wisconsin and the Band’s water quality,” the lawsuit states. “This includes issuing a … permit while the required … state water quality certification is not yet final, pending state administrative proceedings; without addressing the inadequacies the Band identified with Wisconsin’s Water Quality Certification; or ensuring compliance with the Band’s water quality standards.” 

The lawsuit also states the permit approval does not address how the project construction will affect the tribe’s “ability to exercise treaty-protected rights to hunt, fish, trap, and gather in ceded territory,” “failed to evaluate the risks and impacts of oil spills along the pipeline route” and “failed to evaluate the risks and impacts of blasting as a construction method.” 

In a statement, tribe chairwoman Elizabeth Arbuckle said the tribe would do whatever it can to protect the health of the Bad River, Lake Superior and surrounding watersheds. 

“For more than a decade, we have had to endure the unlawful trespass of a dangerous oil pipeline on our lands and waters,” Arbuckle said. “The reroute only makes matters worse. Enbridge’s history is full of accidents and oil spills. If that happens here, our Tribe and other communities in the Northwoods will suffer unacceptable consequences. From the Bad River to Lake Superior, our waters are the lifeblood of our Reservation. They have fed and nurtured our Tribe for hundreds of years. We will do everything in our power to protect them.”

Enbridge spokesperson Juli Kellner said in an email that while the Army Corps made an initial permit decision, it has not been signed by the corps or the company and therefore isn’t a final decision that can be challenged in court. She said the company would intervene in the lawsuit to defend the permit approval. 

“Enbridge submitted permit applications to state and federal regulators in early 2020 to build a new segment of pipeline around the Bad River Reservation,” she said. “Enbridge’s permit applications are supported by thorough and extensive environmental analysis and modeling by leading third-party experts confirming project construction impacts will be temporary and isolated, with no adverse effect to water quality or wetlands.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., talks with reporters inside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday he will not allow a floor vote this week on a bipartisan amendment supported by moderate Republicans that would extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced tax credits. 

Johnson was confident that blocking the amendment would not lead centrist GOP lawmakers to oppose the Republican health care bill scheduled to get a vote Wednesday. 

“There’s about a dozen members in the conference that are in these swing districts who are fighting hard to make sure they reduce costs for all of their constituents. And many of them did want to vote on this Obamacare, COVID-era subsidy the Democrats created,” Johnson said. “We looked for a way to try to allow for that pressure release valve and it just was not to be.”

The enhanced ACA tax credits are set to expire at the end of the year, sharply increasing the cost of health insurance for the roughly 22 million Americans who purchase plans through the exchange and benefit from the subsidies. 

The House Republican health care bill wouldn’t extend those tax credits, frustrating GOP lawmakers in that chamber who are most at risk of losing their reelection bids during the November midterm elections. 

Johnson said he expects that GOP bill will pass, though he didn’t address its prospects in the Senate, where bipartisanship is needed for nearly all bills to advance under that chamber’s 60-vote legislative filibuster. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation’s analysis of the bill shows it would reduce the federal deficit by $35.6 billion during the next decade. 

An average of 100,000 people per year would lose health insurance between 2027 and 2035, while  gross benchmark premiums for health insurance would drop by 11% on average through 2035, according to the joint analysis. 

‘Idiotic and shameful’

New York Republican Rep. Mike Lawler said in a speech on the House floor that GOP leaders’ decision to let the enhanced ACA tax credits expire was “idiotic and shameful,” especially after changes were added to address fraud and reduce costs. 

“So we have been forced to sign onto two discharge petitions,” he said. “And yet my Democratic colleagues will not join us, but for those that were at the negotiation table.”

Lawler then criticized House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, of New York, for not encouraging Democrats to sign onto the bipartisan discharge petitions, noting that would likely get the 218 signatures needed to force a floor vote. He argued that’s because Jeffries “doesn’t actually want to solve the problem, he wants the issue.”

“This place is disgraceful,” Lawler said. “Everybody wants the upper hand.  Everybody wants the political advantage. They don’t actually want to do the damn work. This problem could be solved today if everybody who says they care about extending this signs the discharge.”

GOP-only bill in 2026?

When the House returns from its two-week holiday break next year, Johnson said, leaders may try to use the complex reconciliation process they used to enact the “one big, beautiful bill” to address health care. 

“What we anticipate going into the first quarter of next year is, possibly in a reconciliation package or in regular order a stand-alone, ideas just like this,” Johnson said after being asked a question about Health Savings Accounts. “We have a long list of things that we know will reduce premiums, increase access and quality of care.” 

President Donald Trump said Monday he wants Republicans to use the reconciliation process or to eliminate the Senate’s legislative filibuster to address health care and other policy priorities. 

“Republicans should knock out the filibuster and we should approve a lot of things,” Trump said. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has said repeatedly he doesn’t intend to change or scrap the filibuster.

Direct payments or tax breaks

Trump also reiterated during the Oval Office event he would like to see Congress send direct payments to Americans to help them buy health insurance or afford health care. 

“I want all money going to the people and let the people buy their own health care. It’ll be unbelievable,” Trump said. “They’ll do a great job. They’ll get much better health care at a much lower cost.”

The Senate voted last week on two health care bills, one from Republicans and one from Democrats, but neither received the support needed to move toward a final passage vote. 

Republicans’ bill would have provided direct payments to some people enrolled in either bronze or catastrophic ACA marketplace plans with up to $1,500 in payments annually for 2026 and 2027. 

Democrats’ legislation would have extended the enhanced ACA marketplace tax credits for three years. 

Cost most urgent issue, poll finds

A bipartisan group of senators is trying to find solutions that bridge the political divide, though they are unlikely to achieve consensus on the details before the end of this week.

Thune said during a press conference Tuesday he believes there’s a way to address the rising costs of health care if Democrats continue negotiations with Republicans. 

“Our views on health care and the Democratic views on health care are very different. And I think that’s a difficult challenge that we have to figure out how to overcome,” Thune said. “But if they’re willing to accept changes that actually would put more power and control and resources in the hands of the American people and less of that in the pockets of the insurance companies, then I think there is a path forward.”

Thune acknowledged that Congress cannot pass anything this week but said he believes “there’s a potential pathway in January if Democrats are willing to come to the table on things that will actually drive down the costs of health care.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., didn’t entirely rule out using the Jan. 30 government funding deadline to force a partial shutdown over health care, though he implied nothing can be done on the ACA tax credits after they expire at the end of December. 

“Once it expires, the toothpaste is out of the tube,” Schumer said. 

A poll released Monday by the West Health-Gallup Center on Healthcare in America shows that cost is the “most urgent” health issue facing the country, followed by access and then obesity. 

Just 57% of those polled said they were satisfied with how much they pay for their own health care and only 16% were satisfied with the total cost of health care.

Nearly two-thirds of those in the survey said they believe it’s the federal government’s responsibility “to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage,” while 33% said it’s not. 

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy captain, speaks to veterans at a town hall in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Aug. 31, 2025. (Photo by Brandon Kingdollar/NC Newsline)

WASHINGTON — The Defense Department says it has upgraded its investigation into Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly over a video where he and other members of Congress told members of the military they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. 

“The Office of the Secretary of War, in conjunction with the Department of War’s Office of the General Counsel, is escalating the preliminary review of Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.), to an official Command Investigation,” a spokesperson for the department wrote in an email Monday night. 

“Retired Captain Kelly is currently under investigation for serious allegations of misconduct,” the spokesperson continued. “Further official comments will be limited to preserve the integrity of the proceedings.”

Paul J. Fishman, an attorney at the Arnold & Porter law firm who is representing Kelly, wrote in a Monday letter to the secretary of the Navy that “there is no legitimate basis for any type of proceeding against Senator Kelly, and any such effort would be unconstitutional and an extraordinary abuse of power.”

“If the Executive Branch were to move forward in any forum—criminal, disciplinary, or administrative—we will take all appropriate legal action on Senator Kelly’s behalf to halt the Administration’s unprecedented and dangerous overreach,” Fishman wrote. 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had set Dec. 10 as the deadline for the secretary of the Navy to recommend what to do about Kelly’s appearance in the video, but that came and went without any public announcements.

Hegseth also remained silent on the matter after rebuking Kelly weeks ago for posting the video where he and five other Democrats warned against illegal orders.

Kelly said on Dec. 9, one day before the deadline, he hadn’t received any information from the Navy or other administration officials. 

“Forget about an update. I haven’t heard anything from the guy,” Kelly told reporters. “That’s a good question for you guys to ask the Navy.”

The secretary of the Navy’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment from States Newsroom. 

The Department of Defense posted in late November that officials were looking into “serious allegations of misconduct” against Kelly for appearing in the video. 

It didn’t detail how Kelly might have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice but stated that “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.” 

Hegseth referred the issue to Navy Secretary John Phelan for any “review, consideration, and disposition” he deemed appropriate. Hegseth then asked for a briefing on the outcome of the review “by no later than December 10.”

Kelly said during a press conference in early December the military’s investigation and a separate one by the FBI were designed to intimidate the six lawmakers in the video from speaking out against President Donald Trump. 

The lawmakers in the video, who have backgrounds in the military or intelligence agencies, told members of those communities they “can” and “must refuse illegal orders.”

“No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant,” they said. “But whether you’re serving in the CIA, in the Army, or Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.”

The other Democrats in the video — Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, Pennsylvania Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan, and New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander — are not subject to the military justice system. 

Trump railed against the video a couple days after it posted, saying the statements represented “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

The first deadline for people to sign up for health insurance in 2026 through the federal health care marketplace passed Monday. With the loss of enhanced federal subsidies coverage is forecast to decline after rising for several years. (FS Productions/Getty Images)

When Chiquita Brooks-LaSure stepped into her job overseeing the federal health insurance marketplace in 2021, about 12 million Americans were purchasing their health coverage there.

By the start of 2025, that number had doubled.

Brooks-LaSure served as the administrator for the federal Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services in the Biden administration. In addition to managing the federal health insurance programs for people over 65 and people living at or below the federal poverty guidelines, CMS also manages HealthCare.gov — the health insurance marketplace created by the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

The purpose of the marketplace was to make it easier for people who had neither employer-provided  health insurance nor  Medicare or Medicaid to purchase a policy that would cover them.

 The ACA set standards for what the insurance plans are required to cover, and it established a system of nonprofit navigators to guide buyers as they sought to match their own health needs with the coverage that was available to them on the marketplace.

Early during President Joe Biden’s term, Congress passed and Biden signed legislation that increased tax credit subsidies making insurance plans purchased at HealthCare.gov much more affordable. Those enhanced tax credits brought in a flood of new insurance coverage.

“By the time we left, there were 24 million people who were enrolled” in marketplace health plans purchased through HealthCare.gov, Brooks-LaSure said during a video call with reporters last week. The call was organized by Opportunity Wisconsin, an economic issues messaging and organizing group aligned with the Democratic Party.

The federal move to give people on marketplace health plans larger  tax credits drove that increase in enrollment, health policy watchers agree.

Now the enhanced tax credits are due to expire at the end of this year. So far attempts in Congress to extend them, whether permanently or even temporarily, have gone nowhere.

On average, Brooks-LaSure said, premiums for 2026 have gone up by 26%. “For many people, they will choose to not buy health insurance coverage at all,” she said. “But others may choose to buy coverage that doesn’t cover all of their health care needs.”

Monday was the first of two red-letter days in the current history of the ACA and the health care marketplace. People hoping to get coverage starting Jan. 1 were required to sign up by the end of the day.

People can still sign up between now and Jan. 15, but policies won’t take effect until Feb. 1.

After four years of increases in the population with health insurance, the Congressional Budget Office has forecast about 4 million people will drop their coverage in 2026 without the higher subsidies.

“For 275,000 Wisconsinites, these tax credits have saved them on average almost $600 every month,” said Sen. Tammy Baldwin in another call with reporters. “Without them, these Wisconsinites will pay double, triple, or even worse for their premiums next year. And for 30,000 Wisconsinites, the price will be just too high. And they’ll choose to go without insurance.”

That was a decision that Shana Verstegen of Madison said she and her husband briefly considered. Verstegen spoke on Baldwin’s call about the choices the couple is having to make on behalf of themselves and their two sons, ages 7 and 10.

She and her husband both work for a small community gym, Verstegen said. Their employer has too few employees to be able to purchase a group health policy, so they went to the ACA marketplace.

This year they pay $460 a month, already a squeeze, but that will increase to more than $700 a month in 2026, she said.

“It’s an amount we just simply can’t afford,” Verstegen said. Realizing that they could not risk the family’s health by going without coverage, they’ve looked at other options — including possibly giving up work that has been a long-term career in order to find a job with employer-sponsored health insurance.

In the end, Verstegen said, the couple decided to increase their work hours and cancel some events in 2026 to save money to afford their higher-priced health plan.

“These are really tough and frustrating emotional and scary choices,” Verstegen said. “We’re a middle-class, healthy, hard-working family and like so many others we’re simply struggling to keep up.”

Forecasts are murky

The most recent “snapshot” from CMS on HealthCare.gov enrollment covers Nov. 1-29 this year. In Wisconsin, it shows enrollment down by almost 4,000 people compared to Nov. 1-30, 2024.

Nationally, however, the numbers are up — 5.76 million in November this year compared with 5.36 million a year ago. There isn’t enough data to confidently forecast a trend, however.

Of the people signing up in November, “a lot of those folks were probably people who already had coverage and were either renewing it or picking a new plan, but there were also likely some new enrollees,” said Louise Norris, a health policy analyst at healthinsurance.org, an insurance information website.

Norris said there could be a large upswing in enrollment ahead of Monday’s deadline for coverage starting Jan. 1. “Then again you’ll see another sort of surge as we get to mid-January” — the Jan. 15 deadline for coverage starting Feb. 1, Norris said.

Both Norris and Brooks-LaSure said that initial enrollment numbers also don’t tell the whole story.

“The people who are enrolling right now are people who absolutely know they need to have coverage,” Brooks-LaSure said. “But the number always drops when people have to pay their premiums. And so, it’s really the number in January, once people are enrolled, that we think that will be the important number to know about coverage.”

People who are not changing plans may be automatically renewed in their current plans, which can explain some of the initial signups, said Brooks-LaSure. In addition, she said, some people signing up may be opting for less expensive — but also less generous — health insurance than they purchased in the past.

HealthCare.gov classifies health plans as Gold, Silver or Bronze. Gold plans have costlier premiums but more generous coverage with lower deductibles and less cost-sharing required of patients. Bronze plans have lower premiums with higher deductibles and more cost-sharing, and Silver plans are in between.

Brooks-LaSure said she has heard anecdotally from people stepping down from Silver to Bronze plans, for example.

“Coverage is really important, of course, but your ability to actually pay when you go to the doctor is equally, if not more, important,” she said. “It may be that we don’t see the drop in the uninsured rate. We see people shifting to less generous coverage.”

Kelley Bruns, a Sawyer County resident who spoke on Baldwin’s call, said she and her husband took that route for 2026.

Bruns said her husband, a veteran and career firefighter, had to end his career early due to work injuries and resulting disabilities.

When the premium for the policy they had in 2025 rose to more than $1,600 a month — 40% of their monthly income — they opted for a less expensive plan for 2026. That plan, however, has copayments of up to $100, a $15,000 deductible and a cap on out-of-pocket expenses of more than $21,000.

“We have to pray we don’t need surgery or any other major medical procedure,” Bruns said, “since our out-of-pocket maximum is almost half of our annual income and would be a catastrophic expense for our family.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Judge Hannah Dugan leaves court in her federal trial, where she faces charges of obstructing immigration officers. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

The gallery was packed shoulder-to-shoulder Monday morning as Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan entered the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman not as a judge, but as a criminal defendant. Dugan is accused of obstructing federal agents in their efforts to arrest a Mexican-born man who was in the country without legal authorization, and who appeared in Dugan’s misdemeanor criminal court back in April. If convicted in what Adelman signaled would be no more than a week-long trial, Dugan could face six years in prison.

Attorneys on both sides of the trial painted very different pictures of Dugan during their opening statements, which can include statements which do not have to be demonstrated by evidence. 

Opening statements from prosecutors lasted nearly an hour, with the lawyers saying that Dugan “knew what she was doing was wrong.” Repeatedly, prosecutors pointed to courtroom audio transcribed by the FBI which captured Dugan saying, “I’ll get the heat,” when talking to her courtroom staff about how to respond to the fact that immigration agents were waiting in the hallway to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a man appearing before her on misdemeanor charges of battery and domestic violence. 

Prosecutors called the Milwaukee County Courthouse “a safe place where arrests are routine,” allowing federal agents to confront targets who have passed through security screening and are unarmed. An arrest team of six federal agents from the FBI, DEA, Border Patrol, and ICE wearing plain clothes and carrying concealed weapons were attempting to blend into the normal hustle and bustle in the courthouse. Prosecutors said that an FBI agent told a Milwaukee sheriff’s deputy, who was serving as a bailiff for Dugan’s courtroom, that they were there to arrest Flores-Ruiz. “Everything was proceeding in a routine way,” prosecutors told the jury, until the court clerk told Dugan that agents were in the hallway for an immigration arrest. 

Jurors watched mute video compiled from security cameras showing Dugan, accompanied by fellow Circuit Court Judge Kristela Cervera, walking down the public hall in their judge robes to find out what the agents waiting outside the courtroom wanted. Both judges can be seen pointing to the chief judge’s office, with agents then following Cervera to consult with Chief Judge Carl Ashley. 

When Dugan returned to her courtroom she called Flores-Ruiz first out of the at least 33 cases she had on the docket, setting a court date and telling Flores-Ruiz he was welcome to attend remotely over Zoom. After that, prosecutors allege that Dugan and her court staff directed Flores-Ruiz to an exit in the courtroom which led to a non-public hallway. At the end of the hallway Flores-Ruiz could either take a staircase leading down to the fifth floor, or go through a door which led back out to the public hallway where agents were waiting. 

Flores-Ruiz and his attorney exited through the door and walked  right past the federal agents. Some of the agents trailed Flores-Ruiz to the elevator, while the rest of the arrest team left Ashley’s office. Cameras outside the courthouse captured agents running down a sidewalk after Flores-Ruiz and his attorney. 

Dugan is accused by prosecutors of “dividing” the arrest team by directing them to the chief judge. They say that Dugan had “strongly held views” about immigration enforcement in courts which led her to “cross the line,” and that the now-suspended judge had “orchestrated” Flores-Ruiz’s “escape from federal law enforcement.” 

Prosecutors claimed Dugan told Cervera to keep her robes on during the interaction, and that Cervera and Flores-Ruiz’s defense attorney Mercedes De La Rosa were both uncomfortable with Dugan’s wishes to confront the agents. 

Dugan’s defense team emphasized that the door Flores-Ruiz used to exit the courtroom was just 11 feet from the courtroom’s main entrance. They also discussed the upheaval the Trump administration’s deportation operations had caused at the Milwaukee County Courthouse before the interaction with Dugan. ICE arrests had occurred in late March and early April, alarming county judges. The defense displayed emails from courthouse personnel they said demonstrated the “paranoid” atmosphere at the courthouse and which described concerns about people not showing up to court and suspicious vehicles parked outside that looked like they belonged to federal law enforcement. 

Courthouse was developing a policy on ICE

At the time of Flores-Ruiz’s arrest, Chief Judge Ashley was drafting a policy on how to respond to immigration enforcement coming inside the courts. Judges had been invited to a training presentation on the matter which Dugan was unable to attend, but she had been briefed on its main points. 

The draft policy noted that administrative warrants of the type federal agents presented to arrest Flores-Ruiz are not treated the same way as judicial warrants. Whereas a judicial warrant would give the agents full access to the building, administrative warrants limit them to the public areas of the courthouse. Court staff were also instructed to direct immigration officers to their immediate supervisors, which Dugan appeared to be doing by directing them to Ashley, her attorneys said, adding  that the chief judge needed to be notified if a warrant is executed. 

Ashley had also issued a press release after the rash of ICE arrests saying in part that “the court must remain a safe haven,” Dugan’s attorney Steven Biskupic noted, as images of courthouse emails, messages, and press releases were presented  to jurors on two screens. Dugan did not obstruct the agents, or give direction to anyone else to do so, her attorneys argued. 

Federal agents testify

Three federal agents took the stand Monday and gave lengthy testimony, starting with Erin Lucker of the FBI. Lucker was not involved with the immigration arrest, but helped gather and analyze video and evidence to charge Dugan. Using audio from courtroom microphones, Lucker created a transcript and timeline of events from the time Dugan first approached the agents until Flores-Ruiz was arrested outside. 

The audio was very poor in places, and Judge Adelman reminded the jury that the audio is evidence, not the transcript, and that if they could not understand what is said on the audio, they were not allowed to rely on the transcript instead. In a portion of the audio, Dugan can be heard talking to court staff about the exit to the hallway, with a voice saying “down the stairs,” though some of what’s being said was inaudible. Prosecutors also said that the alleged victims of the domestic violence and battery charges Flores-Ruiz faced were kept waiting in the courtroom to wonder what happened after he left. 

In response to questions from Dugan’s defense attorneys, Lucker said she had no firsthand knowledge of the courthouse itself or what business there usually looks like. She had not participated in an arrest team like the one assembled for Flores-Ruiz, she said. She also responded to the defense that she wasn’t aware that before January 2025 immigration enforcement officers did not, as a matter of policy, target people for arrest at courthouses. 

Defense attorneys also pointed out that a video Lucker helped produce shows a walkthrough of Dugan’s courtroom and the non-public hallway outside ends with the filmer walking down the stairs, not taking the entrance to the hallway which Flores-Ruiz took. Lucker said she hadn’t walked down those stairs, and was unaware that to get out of the building you’d need to pass by multiple security checkpoints. 

Testimony revealed that federal agents had been surveilling Flores-Ruiz at his home and followed him to the courthouse. Defense attorneys questioned why a traffic stop wasn’t made. The task force agents used an encrypted Signal chat which they’d named the “Frozen Water Group” to communicate about the ICE operation. 

FBI Special Agent Jeffrey Baker,  one of the plain-clothes agents on the arrest team, testified that he  had only been on the ERO team since February when the team came for Flores-Ruiz in April. Baker said Dugan “divided” the arrest team by leading members into the chief judge’s office, and that when he talked to Dugan “she seemed to be angry at that point.” When he went to Ashley’s office, Baker said he wasn’t told where he was going or why. He was informed that Flores-Ruiz had left the building either by a text or phone call from another agent.

On Tuesday, Baker will be questioned by defense attorneys.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE