The Joint Finance Committee unanimously approved the release of $53 million for the University of Wisconsin system to support campuses struggling with declining enrollment.
The UW system will have $26.5 million in the 2025-26 fiscal year and $26.5 million in the 2026-27 fiscal year that can be used for grants to campuses. The funds were initially set aside for the system in the recent state budget.
In each year, $15.25 million will be distributed to campuses with declining enrollment over the last two years and $11.25 million will be distributed through a formula dependent on the number of credit hours undergraduates complete.
In 2025, enrollment across the system’s 13 campuses remained stable with about 700 more students enrolled in the fall when compared to 2024. The slight increase represents the third consecutive year of increased enrollment.
UW President Jay Rothman thanked lawmakers and Evers in a social media post and said the release of the funds “affirms our shared commitment to student success and Wisconsin’s workforce.”
“Together, we’ll keep more talented graduates in Wisconsin and ensure our universities are delivering the education students deserve and parents expect,” Rothman said.
At the time of the budget process in June, committee co-chair Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) said the funds would “put the thumb on the scale” to help campuses with declining enrollment over the last decade including UW Platteville, which is in his district.
Lawmakers did not debate the release of the funds, though Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), who voted to release the money, noted that the system has had a growing number of staff members even as enrollment has declined.
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., talks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on Saturday, June 28, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance broke a tied Senate vote to block advancement of a war powers resolution that would have stopped President Donald Trump from taking further military action against Venezuela without congressional authorization.
Senate Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday night to halt debate on the Vietnam War-era statute that gives Congress a check on the president’s deployments abroad.
Sens. Todd Young of Indiana and Josh Hawley of Missouri flipped on their previous votes to advance the resolution, splitting support at 50-50 — and delivering a victory to Trump, who had strongly criticized Republican senators who earlier defected from the administration.
Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted to keep the effort alive in the Senate. Paul is the only Republican co-sponsor of the bill. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia was the leading Democratic co-sponsor.
Young said while he “strongly” believes Congress must be involved in any decisions about the commitment of U.S. troops, administration officials assured him that is not the state of play in Venezuela.
“After numerous conversations with senior national security officials, I have received assurances that there are no American troops in Venezuela. I’ve also received a commitment that if President Trump were to determine American forces are needed in major military operations in Venezuela, the Administration will come to Congress in advance to ask for an authorization of force,” Young said in a written statement after he cast his vote.
Rare rebuke doesn’t last
The vote came less than a week after Young and Hawley were among the five Senate Republicans who broke with party ranks to move the resolution across an initial procedural hurdle — a rare rebuke of Trump from some in his own party.
Trump pointedly attacked the five GOP senators after they voted, writing on his Truth Social platform that the lawmakers “should never be elected to office again.”
Senate Republicans argued a resolution to rein in Trump’s military actions against Venezuela is not relevant because “there’s no troops there, there is nothing to terminate,” as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch said on the floor ahead of the vote.
“Now, I know some of my colleagues will argue that a vote for this resolution is a prospective statement about limiting future action in Venezuela. That’s not what it says. They argue, ‘we still have ships in the Caribbean, and clearly the president is ready to invade again,’ they say. But again, that is not what the resolution says. … No language in this resolution addresses future action,” said Risch, R-Idaho, who moved to table the measure.
The vote came 11 days after U.S. special forces apprehended Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, from their bedroom during a surprise overnight raid. The couple was wanted by U.S. authorities on federal drug and conspiracy charges.
The vote also comes after a monthslong bombing campaign on small boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean in which U.S. strikes killed more than 115 alleged “narco-terrorists,” according to U.S. Southern Command.
Within an hour before senators voted to block any advancement of the war powers resolution, Trump posted on social media that he “had a very good call” Thursday morning with Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodríguez.
“We are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover. Many topics were discussed, including Oil, Minerals, Trade and, of course, National Security. This partnership between the United States of America and Venezuela will be a spectacular one FOR ALL. Venezuela will soon be great and prosperous again, perhaps more so than ever before!” Trump wrote on his own platform, Truth Social.
Trump hosted oil executives at the White House Friday for a meeting on potential investment in Venezuela’s oil industry. Prior to the meeting, the president announced the South American nation had already agreed to give the U.S. between 30 million and 50 million barrels of oil. Trump said he would control the money made from the sale.
‘We are heavily engaged’
Paul and Democratic sponsors of the war powers resolution vehemently disagreed with the GOP statements about the U.S. presence in and around Venezuela.
“You don’t have to be a great expert in military affairs to know that we are heavily engaged,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, ahead of the vote.
“Donald Trump says we’re not engaged in hostilities? Tell that to the 16,000 U.S. service members currently deployed in the Caribbean. Tell that to our service members on the Ford carrier strike force. Look at the Marine expeditionary unit operating in the region,” Schumer said. “Donald Trump is turning the Caribbean into a dangerous powder keg — and Congress must rein him in before one mistake ignites a larger, more unstable conflict.”
Kaine likened the Republicans’ procedural move to “a parliamentary gag rule on discussion of this military operation.”
“If this cause and if this legal basis were so righteous and so lawful, the administration and its supporters would not be so afraid to have this debate before the public and the United States Senate,” Kaine said on the floor ahead of the vote.
Paul said the administration’s claim that Venezuela is not an official war is “an absurdity.”
“The invasion of another country, blockading of a country and removing another country’s leader, to my mind, clearly, is war,” Paul said on the floor ahead of the vote.
U.S. Southern Command declined to confirm Wednesday the exact number of troops and warships present in the region.
Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello said more than 100 were killed in the raid, according to numerous media outlets that posted a video of his statement. The Cuban government announced on Facebook 32 of its citizens were among the dead.
Seven U.S. troops were injured in the incursion, according to the Pentagon. Five returned to work within days after the attack, while two were still recovering as of Jan. 8. Pentagon officials declined to comment further on their conditions Wednesday.
Nonprofits that address housing, addiction, mental health and other human service needs were notified this week that they will lose up to $2 billion in federal grant money, in a wave of termination letters issued to programs across the country.
The cuts will make it more difficult for frontline groups to provide treatment and harm reduction care that has been crucial to combating overdose deaths, and breaking the cycles of addiction and housing insecurity. Resources like Narcan medication used to save lives by reversing overdoses, peer support, and treatment access could dry up, just as communities nationwide began to see reductions in overdose deaths.
The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), which issued the letters, hasn’t yet commented on the cuts. There are 30 SAMHSA-funded opioid treatment programs scattered across Wisconsin including in Appleton; Beloit, Eau Claire, Fond Du Lac, Green Bay, Madison, Milwaukee, Oshkosh, Kenosha, and others, according to the agency’s website. One of those programs, Vin Baker Recovery, is named after a Milwaukee Bucks basketball team player and assistant coach.
Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley condemned the sudden funding cuts. “The Trump administration’s cuts are not just numbers on a budget sheet; they are threats to the wellbeing of real people — our neighbors, our families, and our loved ones,” Crowley said in a statement. “While I will continue fighting for funding and resources to deliver results for our most vulnerable communities, the federal government must recognize the urgent need to preserve these vital services. These cuts cannot stand, because the lives of Wisconsinites depend on it.”
A Milwaukee County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) spokesperson said that so far, no termination letters have been sent to the county. DHHS received $13.9 million in direct SAMHSA funds, with $6.2 million remaining as of December. The county also receives another $15.3 million in state mental health and substance use disorder grants which partially consist of federal funding through SAMHSA.
In an emailed statement the spokesperson said that “any termination of SAMHSA funding would result in immediate termination of mental health and substance use services in Milwaukee County.” Wisconsin’s most populous county has no other funding alternatives, and the loss of federal grant money would lead to more hospitalizations and higher incarceration rates, the spokesperson warned.
Elizabeth Goodsitt, a spokesperson for Wisconsin’s Department of Health Services (DHS) wrote in an email statement Wednesday that the department was “notified late yesterday that effective January 13, the Tribes of Wisconsin Prescription Drugs/Opioid Overdose-Related Deaths Prevention Program (PDO) grant has been terminated by the federal government.” Goodsitt described this as “part of a much larger set of cancellations across the country for federally funded projects that provided life-saving mental health and substance use disorder services.”
Wisconsin had received nearly $1 million to operate the PDO until August 2026. The program was in the third year of a five-year grant. “The goal of the PDO is to save lives,” said Goodsitt. “The funding supports training first responders and other key community sectors on overdose prevention strategies, and it supports the purchase and distribution of naloxone, the overdose reversal medication for opioids.”
For now the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, the Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents have not received termination letters regarding SAMHSA funding. Native American communities are disproportionately affected by overdose deaths in Wisconsin at a rate of 75.4 people per 100,000 in 2023, as compared to a rate of 20 people per 100,000 for white Wisconsin residents.
“We are assessing all avenues possible to ensure the federal government is following all requirements in these existing funding agreements,” said Goodsitt. “While there continues to be much uncertainty about this evolving situation, we will keep working to serve Wisconsinites and support their behavioral health needs. We will continue to closely monitor this situation and will share more information as it becomes available.”
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA - NOVEMBER 19: A person is detained by U.S. Border Patrol agents inside a fast food restaurant that is under construction on November 19, 2025 in Charlotte, North Carolina. The man sustained injuries to his face while agents wrestled him to the ground after he tried to run. Federal Agents are carrying out "Operation Charlotte's Web," an ongoing immigration enforcement surge across the Charlotte region.(Photo by Ryan Murphy/Getty Images)
This story was originally published by ProPublica.
Immigration agents have put civilians’ lives at risk using more than their guns.
An agent in Houston put a teenage citizen into a chokehold, wrapping his arm around the boy’s neck, choking him so hard that his neck had red welts hours later. A black-masked agent in Los Angeles pressed his knee into a woman’s neck while she was handcuffed; she then appeared to pass out. An agent in Massachusetts jabbed his finger and thumb into the neck and arteries of a young father who refused to be separated from his wife and 1-year-old daughter. The man’s eyes rolled back in his head and he started convulsing.
After George Floyd’s murder by a police officer six years ago in Minneapolis — less than a mile from where an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed Renee Good last week — police departments and federal agencies banned chokeholds and other moves that can restrict breathing or blood flow.
But those tactics are back, now at the hands of agents conducting President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign.
Examples are scattered across social media. ProPublica found more than 40 cases over the past year of immigration agents using these life-threatening maneuvers on immigrants, citizens and protesters. The agents are usually masked, their identities secret. The government won’t say if any of them have been punished.
In nearly 20 cases, agents appeared to use chokeholds and other neck restraints that the Department of Homeland Security prohibits “unless deadly force is authorized.”
About two dozen videos show officers kneeling on people’s necks or backs or keeping them face down on the ground while already handcuffed. Such tactics are not prohibited outright but are often discouraged, including by federal trainers, in part because using them for a prolonged time risks asphyxiation.
We reviewed footage with a panel of eight former police officers and law enforcement experts. They were appalled.
This is what bad policing looks like, they said. And it puts everyone at risk.
“I arrested dozens upon dozens of drug traffickers, human smugglers, child molesters — some of them will resist,” said Eric Balliet, who spent more than two decades working at Homeland Security Investigations and Border Patrol, including in the first Trump administration. “I don’t remember putting anybody in a chokehold. Period.”
“If this was one of my officers, he or she would be facing discipline,” said Gil Kerlikowske, a longtime police chief in Seattle who also served as Customs and Border Protection commissioner under President Barack Obama. “You have these guys running around in fatigues, with masks, with ‘Police’ on their uniform,” but they aren’t acting like professional police.
Over the past week, the conduct of agents has come under intense scrutiny after an ICE officer in Minneapolis killed Good, a mother of three. The next day, a Border Patrol agent in Portland, Oregon, shot a man and woman in a hospital parking lot.
Top administration officials rushed to defend the officers. Speaking about the agent who shot Good, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said, “This is an experienced officer who followed his training.”
Officials said the same thing to us after we showed them footage of officers using prohibited chokeholds. Federal agents have “followed their training to use the least amount of force necessary,” department spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said.
“Officers act heroically to enforce the law and protect American communities,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said.
Both DHS and the White House lauded the “utmost professionalism” of their agents.
Our compilation of incidents is far from complete. Just as the government does not count how often it detains citizens or smashes through vehicle windows during immigration arrests, it does not publicly track how many times agents have choked civilians or otherwise inhibited their breathing or blood flow. We gathered cases by searching legal filings, social media posts and local press reports in English and Spanish.
Given the lack of any count over time, it’s impossible to know for certain how agents’ current use of the banned and dangerous tactics compares with earlier periods.
But former immigration officials told us they rarely heard of such incidents during their long tenures. They also recalled little pushback when DHS formally banned chokeholds and other tactics in 2023; it was merely codifying the norm.
That norm has now been broken.
One of the citizens whom agents put in a chokehold was 16 years old.
Tenth grader Arnoldo Bazan and his father were getting McDonald’s before school when their car was pulled over by unmarked vehicles. Masked immigration agents started banging on their windows. As Arnoldo’s undocumented father, Arnulfo Bazan Carrillo, drove off, the terrified teenager began filming on his phone. The video shows the agents repeatedly ramming the Bazans’ car during a slow chase through the city.
Bazan Carrillo eventually parked and ran into a restaurant supply store. When Arnoldo saw agents taking his father violently to the ground, Arnoldo went inside too, yelling at the agents to stop.
One agent put Arnoldo in a chokehold while another pressed a knee into his father’s neck. “I was going to school!” the boy pleaded. He said later that when he told the agent he was a citizen and a minor, the agent didn’t stop.
“I started screaming with everything I had, because I couldn’t even breathe,” Arnoldo told ProPublica, showing where the agent’s hands had closed around his throat. “I felt like I was going to pass out and die.”
DHS’ McLaughlin accused Arnoldo’s dad of ramming his car “into a federal law enforcement vehicle,” but he was never charged for that, and the videos we reviewed do not support this claim. Our examination of his criminal history — separate from any immigration violations — found only that Bazan Carrillo pleaded guilty a decade ago to misdemeanor driving while intoxicated.
McLaughlin also said the younger Bazan elbowed an officer in the face as he was detained, which the teen denies. She said that Arnoldo was taken into custody to confirm his identity and make sure he didn’t have any weapons. McLaughlin did not answer whether the agent’s conduct was justified.
Experts who reviewed video of the Bazans’ arrests could make no sense of the agents’ actions.
“Why are you in the middle of a store trying to grab somebody?” said Marc Brown, a former police officer turned instructor who taught ICE and Border Patrol officers at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers. “Your arm underneath the neck, like a choking motion? No! The knee on the neck? Absolutely not.”
DHS revamped its training curriculum after George Floyd’s murder to underscore those tactics were out of bounds, Brown said. “DHS specifically was very big on no choking,” he said. “We don’t teach that. They were, like, hardcore against it. They didn’t want to see anything with the word ‘choke.’”
After agents used another banned neck restraint — a carotid hold — a man started convulsing and passed out.
In early November, ICE agents in Fitchburg, Massachusetts, stopped a young father, Carlos Sebastian Zapata Rivera, as he drove with his family. They had come for his undocumented wife, whom they targeted after she was charged with assault for allegedly stabbing a co-worker in the hand with scissors.
Body camera footage from the local police, obtained by ProPublica, captured much of what happened. The couple’s 1-year-old daughter began crying. Agents surrounded the car, looking in through open doors.
According to the footage, an agent told Zapata Rivera that if his wife wouldn’t come out, they would have to arrest him, too — and their daughter would be sent into the foster system. The agent recounted the conversation to a local cop: “Technically, I can arrest both of you,” he said. “If you no longer have a child, because the child is now in state custody, you’re both gonna be arrested. Do you want to give your child to the state?”
Zapata Rivera, who has a pending asylum claim, clung to his family. His wife kept saying she wouldn’t go anywhere without her daughter, whom she said was still breastfeeding. Zapata Rivera wouldn’t let go of either of them.
Federal agents seemed conflicted on how to proceed. “I refuse to have us videotaped throwing someone to the ground while they have a child in their hands,” one ICE agent told a police officer at the scene.
But after more than an hour, agents held down Zapata Rivera’s arms. One, who Zapata Rivera’s lawyer says wore a baseball cap reading “Ne Quis Effugiat” — Latin for “So That None Will Escape” — pressed his thumbs into the arteries on Zapata Rivera’s neck. The young man then appeared to pass out as bystanders screamed.
The technique is known as a carotid restraint. The two carotid arteries carry 70% of the brain’s blood flow; block them, and a person can quickly lose consciousness. The tactic can cause strokes, seizures, brain damage — and death.
“Even milliseconds or seconds of interrupted blood flow to the brain can have serious consequences,” Dr. Altaf Saadi, a neurologist and associate professor at Harvard Medical School, told us. Saadi said she couldn’t comment on specific cases, “but there is no amount of training or method of applying pressure on the neck that is foolproof in terms of avoiding neurologic damage.”
In a bystander video of Zapata Rivera’s arrest, his eyes roll back in his head and he suffers an apparent seizure, convulsing so violently that his daughter, seated in his lap, shakes with him.
“Carotid restraints are prohibited unless deadly force is authorized,” DHS’ use-of-force policy states. Deadly force is authorized only when an officer believes there’s an “imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury” and there is “no alternative.”
In a social media post after the incident and in its statement to ProPublica, DHS did not cite a deadly threat. Instead, it referenced the charges against Zapata Rivera’s wife and suggested he had only pretended to have a medical crisis while refusing help from paramedics. “Imagine FAKING a seizure to help a criminal escape justice,” the post said.
“These statements were lies,” Zapata Rivera alleges in an ongoing civil rights lawsuit he filed against the ICE agent who used the carotid restraint. His lawyer told ProPublica that Zapata Rivera was disoriented after regaining consciousness; the lawsuit says he was denied medical attention. (Representatives for Zapata Rivera declined our requests for an interview with him. His wife has been released on bond, and her assault case awaits trial.)
A police report and bodycam footage from Fitchburg officers at the scene, obtained via a public records request, back up Zapata Rivera’s account of being denied assistance. “He’s fine,” an agent told paramedics, according to footage. The police report says Zapata Rivera wanted medical attention but “agents continued without stopping.”
Saadi, the Harvard neurologist, said that as a general matter, determining whether someone had a seizure is “not something even neurologists can do accurately just by looking at it.”
DHS policy bars using chokeholds and carotid restraints just because someone is resisting arrest. Agents are doing it anyway.
When DHS issued restrictions on chokeholds and carotid restraints, it stated that the moves “must not be used as a means to control non-compliant subjects or persons resisting arrest.” Deadly force “shall not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing subject.”
But videos reviewed by ProPublica show that agents have been using these restraints to do just that.
In Los Angeles in June, masked officers from ICE, Border Patrol and other federal agencies pepper-sprayed and then tackled another citizen, Luis Hipolito. As Hipolito struggled to get away, one of the agents put him in a chokehold. Another pointed a Taser at bystanders filming.
Then Hipolito’s body began to convulse — a possible seizure. An onlooker warned the agents, “You gonna let him die.”
When officers make a mistake in the heat of the moment, said Danny Murphy, a former deputy commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department, they need to “correct it as quickly as possible.”
That didn’t happen in Hipolito’s case. The footage shows the immigration agent not only wrapping his arm around Hipolito’s neck as he takes him down but also sticking with the chokehold after Hipolito is pinned on the ground.
The agent’s actions are “dangerous and unreasonable,” Murphy said.
Asked about the case, McLaughlin, the DHS spokesperson, said that Hipolito was arrested for assaulting an ICE officer. Hipolito’s lawyers did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Hipolito limped into court days after the incident. Another citizen who was with him the day of the incident was also charged, but her case was dropped. Hipolito pleaded not guilty and goes to trial in February.
Some of the conduct in the footage isn’t banned — but it’s discouraged and dangerous.
Placing a knee on a prone subject’s neck or weight on their back isn’t banned under DHS’ use-of-force policy, but it can be dangerous — and the longer it goes on, the higher the risk that the person won’t be able to breathe.
“You really don’t want to spend that amount of time just trying to get somebody handcuffed,” said Kerlikowske, the former CPB commissioner, of the video of the arrest in Portland.
Brown, the former federal instructor and now a lead police trainer at the University of South Carolina, echoed that. “Once you get them handcuffed, you get them up, get them out of there,” he said. “If they’re saying they can’t breathe, hurry up.”
Taking a person down to the ground and restraining them there can be an appropriate way to get them in handcuffs, said Seth Stoughton, a former police officer turned law professor who also works at the University of South Carolina. But officers have long known to make it quick. By the mid-1990s, the federal government was advising officers against keeping people prolongedly in a prone position.
When a federal agent kneeled on the neck of an intensive care nurse in August, she said she understood the danger she was in and tried to scream.
“I knew that the amount of pressure being placed on the back of my neck could definitely hurt me,” said Amanda Trebach, a citizen and activist who was arrested in Los Angeles while monitoring immigration agents. “I was having a hard time breathing because my chest was on the ground.”
McLaughlin, the DHS spokesperson, said Trebach impeded agents’ vehicles and struck them with her signs and fists.
Trebach denies this. She was released without any charges.
“No, no!” one bystander exclaims. “He’s not doing anything!”
DHS’ McLaughlin did not respond to questions about the incident.
Along with two similarchoking incidents at protests outside of ICE facilities, this is one of the few videos in which the run-up to the violence is clear. And the experts were aghast.
“Without anything I could see as even remotely a deadly force threat, he immediately goes for the throat,” said Ashley Heiberger, a retired police captain from Pennsylvania who frequently testifies in use-of-force cases. Balliet, the former immigration official, said the agent turned the scene into a “pissing contest” that was “explicitly out of control.”
“It’s so clearly excessive and ridiculous,” Murphy said. “That’s the kind of action which should get you fired.”
“How big a threat did you think he was?” Brown said, noting that the officer slung his rifle around his back before grabbing and body-slamming the protester. “You can’t go grab someone just because they say, ‘F the police.’”
In November, Border Patrol agents rushed into the construction site of a future Panda Express in Charlotte, North Carolina, to check workers’ papers. When one man tried to run, an officer put him in a chokehold and later marched him out, bloodied, to a waiting SUV.
Freelance photographer Ryan Murphy, who had been following Border Patrol’s convoys around Charlotte, documented the Panda Express arrest.
“Their tactics are less sophisticated than you would think,” he told ProPublica. “They sort of drive along the streets, and if they see somebody who looks to them like they could potentially be undocumented, they pull over.”
Experts told ProPublica that if officers are targeting a specific individual, they can minimize risks by deciding when, where and how to take them into custody. But when they don’t know their target in advance, chaos — and abuse — can follow.
“They are encountering people they don’t know anything about,” said Scott Shuchart, a former assistant director at ICE.
“The stuff that I’ve been seeing in the videos,” Kerlikowske said, “has been just ragtag, random.”
There may be other factors, too, our experts said, including quotas and a lack of consequences amid gutted oversight. With officers wearing masks, Shuchart said, “even if they punch grandma in the face, they won’t be identified.”
As they sweep into American cities, immigration officers are unconstrained — and, the experts said, unprepared. Even well-trained officers may not be trained for the environments where they now operate. Patrolling a little-populated border region takes one set of skills. Working in urban areas, where citizens — and protesters — abound, takes another.
DHS and Bovino did not respond to questions about their agents’ preparation or about the chokehold in Charlotte.
Experts may think there’s abuse. Holding officers to account? That’s another matter.
Back in Houston, immigration officers dropped 16-year-old Arnoldo off at the doorstep of his family home a few hours after the arrest. His neck was bruised, and his new shirt was shredded. Videos taken by his older sisters show the soccer star struggling to speak through sobs.
Uncertain what exactly had happened to him, his sister Maria Bazan took him to Texas Children’s Hospital, where staff identified signs of the chokehold and moved him to the trauma unit. Hospital records show he was given morphine for pain and that doctors ordered a dozen CT scans and X-rays, including of his neck, spine and head.
From the hospital, Maria called the Houston Police Department and tried to file a report, the family said. After several unsuccessful attempts, she took Arnoldo to the department in person, where she says officers were skeptical of the account and their own ability to investigate federal agents.
Arnoldo had filmed much of the incident, but agents had taken his phone. He used Find My to locate the phone — at a vending machine for used electronics miles away, close to an ICE detention center. The footage, which ProPublica has reviewed, backed the family’s account of the chase.
The family says Houston police still haven’t interviewed them. A department spokesperson told ProPublica it was not investigating the case, referring questions to DHS. But the police have also not released bodycam footage and case files aside from a top sheet, citing an open investigation.
“We can’t do anything,” Maria said one officer told her. “What can HPD do to federal agents?”
Elsewhere in the country, some officials are trying to hold federal immigration officers to account.
In California, the state Legislature passed bills prohibiting immigration officers from wearing masks and requiring them to display identification during operations.
In Illinois, Gov. JB Pritzker signed a law that allows residents to sue any officer who violates state or federal constitutional rights. (The Trump administration quickly filed legal challenges against California and Illinois, claiming their new laws are unconstitutional.)
In Minnesota, state and local leaders are collecting evidence in Renee Good’s killing even as the federal government cut the state out of its investigation.
Arnoldo is still waiting for Houston authorities to help him, still terrified that a masked agent will come first. Amid soccer practice and making up schoolwork he missed while recovering, he watches and rewatches the videos from that day. The car chase, the chokehold, his own screams at the officers to leave his dad alone. His father in the driver’s seat, calmly handing Arnoldo his wallet and phone while stopping mid-chase for red lights.
The Bazan family said agents threatened to charge Arnoldo if his dad didn’t agree to be deported. DHS spokesperson McLaughlin did not respond when asked about the alleged threat. Arnoldo’s dad is now in Mexico.
Asked why an officer choked Arnoldo, McLaughlin pointed to the boy’s alleged assault with his elbow, adding, “The federal law enforcement officer graciously chose not to press charges.”
Nicole Foy is ProPublica’s Ancil Payne Fellow, reporting on immigration and labor. journalists Nicole Foy, McKenzie Funk, Joanna Shan, Haley Clark and Cengiz Yar gathered videos via Spanish and English social media posts, local press reports and court records. We then sent a selection of these videos to eight police experts and former immigration officials, along with as much information as we could gather about the lead-up to and context of each incident. The experts analyzed the videos with us, explaining when and how officers used dangerous tactics that appeared to go against their training or that have been banned under the Department of Homeland Security’s use-of-force policy.
We also tried to contact every person we could identify being choked or kneeled on. In some cases, we also reached out to bystanders.
Research reporter Mariam Elba conducted criminal record searches of every person we featured in this story. She also attempted to fact-check the allegations that DHS made about the civilians and their arrests. Our findings are not comprehensive because there is no universal criminal record database.
We also sent every video cited in this story to the White House, DHS, CBP, ICE, border czar Tom Homan and Border Patrol’s Gregory Bovino. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin provided a statement responding to some of the incidents we found but she did not explain why agents used banned tactics or whether any of the agents have been disciplined for doing so.
President Donald Trump displays a signed bill in the Oval Office on Jan. 14, 2026. Trump signed the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, which restores whole milk to school lunches across the country. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed a law Wednesday that will restore whole milk in federally subsidized school lunches.
The dairy staple — out of school meal programs for more than a decade amid a broader push to curb childhood obesity — will soon return to school cafeterias under the law.
Trump said during a signing ceremony in the Oval Office that the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act will “ensure that millions of school-aged children have access to high-quality milk as we make America healthy again.”
Seated with a jug of milk on the Resolute Desk, Trump said the changes will also be “major victories for the American dairy farmers who we love and who voted for me in great numbers.”
White House ceremony
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins celebrated the legislation becoming law and said her department would post Wednesday the “new rulemaking that is necessary to get whole milk back into school lunches.”
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also lauded Trump’s efforts and described the measure as a “long overdue correction of the school nutrition policy that puts children’s health first.”
Trump was also joined by Dr. Ben Carson, national advisor for nutrition, health, and housing at USDA, along with Democratic Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont, GOP Sens. John Boozman of Arkansas, Mike Crapo of Idaho and Roger Marshall of Kansas, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and advocates who supported the bill.
Rep. Glenn “GT” Thompson of Pennsylvania, who chairs the House Agriculture Committee, and Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan, chair of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, also attended the ceremony.
The U.S. House passed the bill in December, following unanimous passage in the Senate in November.
Welch and Marshall, along with Pennsylvania Sens. Dave McCormick, a Republican, and John Fetterman, a Democrat, introduced the measure in the Senate.
Thompson and Democratic Rep. Kim Schrier of Washington state brought corresponding legislation in the House.
What the new law does
Under the law, schools that are part of the USDA’s National School Lunch Program can offer “flavored and unflavored organic or nonorganic whole, reduced-fat, low-fat, and fat-free fluid milk and lactose-free fluid milk.”
The program — which provides free or low-cost lunches in public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions — saw nearly 29.4 million children participate on a typical day during the 2023-2024 school year, according to the Food Research & Action Center.
The schools can also provide “nondairy beverages that are nutritionally equivalent to fluid milk and meet the nutritional standards established by” the Agriculture secretary.
The law exempts milk fat from being considered saturated fat as it applies to schools’ “allowable average saturated fat content of a meal.”
Parents and guardians, as well as physicians, can also offer a written statement for their student to receive a nondairy milk substitute.
Michael Dykes, president and CEO of the International Dairy Foods Association, celebrated the bill becoming law in a Wednesday statement.
Dykes dubbed the law a “win for our children, parents, and school nutrition leaders, giving schools the flexibility to offer the flavored and unflavored milk options, across all healthy fat levels, that meet students’ needs and preferences.”
The signing marked the second major nutrition policy change this month. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which encourages more full-fat dairy and protein.
Louisiana Republican U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy speaks during a press conference on Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026. Also pictured, from left, are Family Foundation of Virginia President Victoria Cobb, National Association of Christian Lawmakers Founder and President Jason Rapert, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Missouri Republican U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Republicans on a key U.S. Senate committee on Wednesday called on the Food and Drug Administration to wrap up its ongoing safety review of medication abortion and pressed for the Trump administration to once again require in-person dispensing.
Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee argued women, not politicians, are in the best position to determine whether to ask for a prescription for mifepristone.
Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, chairman of the panel, said he hopes FDA Commissioner Marty Makary will agree to testify before the committee on the process in the future, though he didn’t set a deadline.
“At an absolute minimum, the previous in-person safeguards should be restored and it should be done immediately,” Cassidy said.
Republicans and anti-abortion organizations have become increasingly skeptical about the FDA’s review after news broke in December that Makary wanted to delay its release until after the November midterm elections.
Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray questioned Cassidy’s reasons for holding the hearing, saying more than “160 high-quality studies have been conducted and millions of women around the world use mifepristone safely every year with fewer complications, by the way, than Viagra or penicillin.”
Supreme Court case
Access to mifepristone, one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortion, which is FDA-approved for up to 10 weeks gestation, surged to the forefront after the U.S. Supreme Court ended the nationwide right to abortion in 2022.
Many Republican state legislatures have moved to bar access to mifepristone for abortions, while Democratic states have enacted shield laws to protect health care providers who prescribe and ship it to people in states with limited or no access.
Dr. Nisha Verma, a fellow at Physicians for Reproductive Health in Atlanta, testified before the committee that “the science on mifepristone’s safety and effectiveness is long-standing and settled.”
“Over the past 25 years, medication abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol has been rigorously studied and proven safe and effective in over 100 high-quality, peer-reviewed studies,” Verma said. “Extensive data show that medication abortion through telehealth is equally safe and effective and provides vital access for those who live in rural areas and in the growing number of maternity care deserts in the country.”
Verma contended the likely reason for the hearing was not genuine concern from Republicans about the safety and efficacy of mifepristone but “because people in this room feel uncomfortable with abortion.”
“And that’s okay, and we can talk about that,” Verma said. “And we can have an honest conversation about that and complexity and the reasons that my patients need abortion care. But we should not pretend that this is an issue of the science.”
Louisiana attorney general testifies
Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill, a Republican, criticized the FDA’s decision during the Biden administration to allow prescriptions via telehealth and for the pharmaceuticals to be shipped, sometimes into states that bar their use.
“Shield laws in some states protect providers from liability and effectively nullify laws in other states,” Murrill said. “Their purpose is to make it more difficult to sue or prosecute individuals in those states.”
Indiana Republican Sen. Jim Banks expressed frustration that FDA Commissioner Makary was not among the witnesses testifying at the hearing and urged the agency to release the results of its review of mifepristone quickly.
“I’m disappointed that the FDA under Dr. Makary’s leadership hasn’t moved faster to restore the in-person dispensing requirement and strengthen the (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) program for mifepristone,” Banks said. “I hope the rumors are false, some of them are in print, that the agency is intentionally slow-walking its study on mifepristone health risks.”
Emily G. Hilliard, press secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services, which includes the FDA, wrote in a statement the department “is conducting a study of reported adverse events associated with mifepristone to assess whether the FDA’s risk mitigation program continues to provide appropriate protections for women.”
“The FDA’s scientific review process is thorough and takes the time necessary to ensure decisions are grounded in gold-standard science,” Hilliard wrote. “Dr. Makary is upholding that standard as part of the Department’s commitment to rigorous, evidence-based review.”
Cassidy said after Banks raised his concerns that he hopes to have Makary testify “before the committee very soon and we’ve been speaking with the FDA to facilitate discussion on this and other issues.”
Cassidy added that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “did promise to come back and we have requested that he come back and testify.”
Republicans, Family Research Council urge action by FDA
During a press conference after the hearing, Cassidy joined a handful of other GOP lawmakers and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins to further press the Trump administration to change the prescription guidelines for mifepristone.
Perkins said the Trump administration could change FDA guidelines around how mifepristone is prescribed and distributed “overnight” if it wanted to.
He also said it should immediately begin enforcing The Comstock Act, an 1873 law that could block shipping medication abortion.
“This is a two-step solution. One, is the in-person requirement being reestablished, the medical examinations to ensure that the women, their lives, are not put at risk,” Perkins said. “But then also … simply enforcing the law as it pertains to Comstock.”
Federal agents stage at a front gate as Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar, Kelly Morrison and Angie Craig of Minnesota attempt to enter the regional ICE headquarters at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building on Jan. 10, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb Wednesday probed whether the Trump administration has violated her court order, after Minnesota lawmakers said they were denied an oversight visit to a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility following a deadly shooting by an immigration officer in Minneapolis.
Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar, Angie Craig and Kelly Morrison of Minnesota said they were denied entry to the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis last weekend.
An attorney representing the lawmakers, Christine L. Coogle, asked Cobb to make it clear to the Trump administration that her stay order is in place.
Last month, Cobb issued a temporary block on a policy by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem that required seven days notice for lawmakers to conduct oversight visits at ICE facilities.
Cobb found Noem violated a 2019 appropriations law, referred to as Section 527, that allows for unannounced oversight visits at facilities that hold immigrants.
“If the government is using 527 funds to exclude members of Congress from (ICE) facilities, that does run afoul of my order,” Cobb said during Wednesday’s hearing.
Dems eye DHS funding
As the Trump administration has carried out an aggressive immigration campaign, and with Democrats the minority party in both chambers of Congress, unannounced oversight visits to ICE facilities are one of the few tools Democrats can use. The other way they could try to counter the enforcement push is through appropriations to the Department of Homeland Security.
For example, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is made up of nearly 100 Democrats, vowed on Tuesday to vote against any DHS appropriations bill unless major changes are made at ICE regarding immigration enforcement.
Separately, Democrats on Wednesday introduced articles of impeachment against Noem. One count is connected to the denial of oversight visits.
New Noem policy after Renee Good killing
One day after federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross killed 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis, Noem issued a new memo for members of Congress who want to conduct oversight visits at ICE facilities.
She required a seven-day notice, nearly identical to the policy that initially prompted the suit from Democrats last year.
Noem argued in her new policy that because those federal ICE facilities are using funds through the spending and tax cuts package, and not the DHS appropriations bill, they are therefore exempt from unannounced oversight visits by members of Congress.
In an emergency request, Democrats argued the funds DHS is using apply under Section 527, and DHS is violating Cobb’s stay.
Cobb said on Wednesday she could not make a determination if her order was violated until she can get a clear answer from the Trump administration as to the source of the funds. She directed Department of Justice lawyers to determine what it is.
Funding stream question
In court filings, DOJ argued the facilities are funded through the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act” passed and signed into law last year, and that DHS does not need to comply with Section 527.
The OBBBA, passed through a congressional process called reconciliation, is allowed to adjust federal spending even though it is not an appropriations law.
Coogle said until OBBAA, the only funding for ICE came from appropriations, and argued the two funding streams can’t be separated. She said the Trump administration is trying to “make a game here” with appropriations law.
“Appropriations are not a game. They are the law,” Coogle said.
The House 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.
Exterior of the U.S. Department of State Harry S. Truman Building, in Washington, D.C., in May 2024. (Official State Department photo by Linda D. Epstein)
WASHINGTON — The State Department announced Wednesday it would suspend all visa processing for immigrants hailing from 75 countries because they are deemed likely to need governmental assistance in the United States, known as a “public charge.”
The State Department did not answer States Newsroom’s inquiry as to when the policy would take effect or a list of the 75 countries in question. The State Department, in a social media post, listed several that would be affected, including Somalia, Haiti, Iran and Eritrea.
“The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from 75 countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates,” the State Department wrote. “The freeze will remain active until the U.S. can ensure that new immigrants will not extract wealth from the American people.”
The Department of Homeland Security in November published a notice for proposed rulemaking that outlined major changes to how immigration officials assess whether certain immigrants are likely to become a public charge and if that constitutes grounds for inadmissibility, meaning a noncitizen would be ineligible for admission or adjustment of their immigration status.
During President Donald Trump’s first administration, he tried to broaden the definition of public charge to include any immigrant who had received certain public benefits for more than 12 months in a 36-month period. The move was tied up in the courts.
One of the earliest federal immigration laws is an 1882 law that barred the immigration of people to the U.S. if they were likely to become a public charge. The Clinton administration in 1999 formally defined public charge as those who were dependent on cash assistance, such as food assistance.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on May 8, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — U.S. House Democrats Wednesday introduced three articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, after a deadly shooting of a woman in Minneapolis by a federal immigration officer.
The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.
The three articles of impeachment were introduced by Illinois Democratic Rep. Robin Kelly. Nearly 70 Democrats have co-signed, but as the minority party in both chambers, any support or movement for the articles will likely only occur if Democrats win the midterm elections and flip the House.
“She needs to be held accountable for her actions,” Kelly said. “Renee Nicole Good is dead because Secretary Noem allowed her DHS agents to run amok.”
On Jan. 7, 37-year-old Renee Good was shot and killed by federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis. Federal immigration officers have intensified immigration enforcement, leading to massive pushback from the community there and protests across the country.
The articles from Kelly accuse Noem of obstructing Congress after lawmakers were denied oversight visits at DHS facilities that hold immigrants; violating public trust through due process violations of U.S. citizens’ and immigrants’ rights and aggressive warrantless arrests in immigration enforcement; and misusing $200 million in taxpayer funds by awarding a contract to a company run by the husband of DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, according to ProPublica.
A dozen members of Congress have sued Noem over those denied visits at ICE facilities to conduct oversight and were granted a stay to that policy by a federal judge. But Noem issued a new policy and last weekend several Minnesota lawmakers were blocked from visits to ICE facilities.
A federal judge is currently probing to see if the new policy from Noem violates her court order from December.
Kelly was joined by several Democrats, including Minnesota’s Angie Craig, who represents a swing district.
“We are being terrorized by Homeland Security and ICE,” Craig said. “This has crossed a line. This rogue agency is violating the rights of American citizens in our communities, and last Wednesday … the escalation by ICE in our communities got Renee Good killed.”
Noem would not be the only Homeland Secretary to be impeached, should the House take that action.
In 2024, Republicans impeached the Biden administration’s DHS secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, on the grounds that he lied to Congress that the southern border was secure and that he violated his duty when he rolled back several Trump-era immigration policies.
The Senate, then controlled by Democrats, dismissed the articles of impeachment.
Kenosha County courthouse. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Immigrant rights groups are condemning a move by Kenosha County Sheriff David Zoerner to join the federal 287(g) program, a cooperation agreement between local law enforcement agencies and federal immigration enforcement. Although Zoerner previously distanced his office from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), on Monday he announced that an agreement had been signed with the federal agency back mid-December.
Just a couple of months before joining the 287(g) program, Zoerner questioned whether the program would benefit Kenosha County taxpayers. “This is a rapidly evolving program,” Zoerner told TMJ4. “We are monitoring it to ensure that our participation would ultimately be in the best interest of the taxpayers of Kenosha County.” At the time of the interview, the sheriff’s office did not cooperate with ICE beyond honoring immigration detainers for people held in the Kenosha County jail.
The Wisconsin Examiner’s Criminal Justice Reporting Project shines a light on incarceration, law enforcement and criminal justice issues with support from the Public Welfare Foundation.
The immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera condemned Zoerner’s policy shift. “As an elected official, Sheriff Zoerner took an oath to defend the Constitution and ensure community safety,” Voces’ executive director Christine Neumann-Ortiz said in a statement. “Instead, he has broken promises behind closed doors and sacrificed the public trust for political expediency. It is the height of irresponsibility for Sheriff Zoerner to deputize his officers as ICE agents in a city that already experienced the tragic shooting of Jacob Blake and the community outrage that sparked massive protests, unrest, and the tragic death of two young protesters in 2020.”
Neumann-Ortiz said that Zoerner’s decision “only heightens the risk to the community of harm by the militarized tactics of ICE.”
In a statement issued Monday, Zoerner walked back his previous caution about cooperating with ICE.
Zoerner said that “for well over a year” he has been working with ICE and other sheriffs “to bring the 287(g) to Kenosha County.” Saying that “this is not a new idea, and this is not reactionary,” Zoerner said that joining the program “is the result of deliberate, responsible planning focused on one mission: protecting the people of Kenosha County.”
The sheriff pushed back against what he called “misinformation” about the issue and asserted that this office “works closely and consistently with our federal law enforcement partners.” He added, “I will not tolerate the release of violent criminal offenders back into our community. Period. As Sheriff, I use every lawful tool at my disposal to protect citizens.” Zoerner noted that he currently serves on the Border Security Committee for the National Sheriffs Association, and that he’s undergone border security training and observed enforcement operations along the southern border in Texas and Arizona.
Zoerner said that he signed a 287(g) agreement under a jail enforcement model. The agreement was signed by ICE and sent back to the Kenosha County Sheriff’s Office on Jan. 12. “We have already selected staff for this program and are actively moving forward with implementation,” Zoerner said in a statement, adding that the program “applies only to individuals who are already lawfully in custody for serious criminal offenses.”
Kenosha County’s 287(g) program, Zoerner said, will focus on people arrested for violent crimes, felony drug charges, repeat offenders, or those with histories of assault, sexual violence and other serious crimes. “These are people who pose a demonstrated threat to public safety,” said Zoerner. “This agreement ensures they are not released back into our community.”
ICE cooperation a campaign issue
On Jan. 7, five days before Zoerner’s announcement, James Beller declared that he will challenge Zoerner in the upcoming election for sheriff. Beller is currently a Kenosha police captain, and said that if elected he would move forward with joining the ICE 287 (g) program.
Beller pitched the program as focusing only on serious criminal offenses, using the same language Zoerner used to describe the deal he struck with the federal government. “This is about public safety and accountability,” Beller said in a press release. “The focus will be on serious offenders already in custody, implemented professionally, lawfully, and consistent with our responsibility to keep the community safe.”
Those reassurances did not assuage the concerns of people worried about the effects of ICE surges in Chicago and Minneapolis, where violent clashes with residents have made headlines and U.S. citizen Renee Good was shot and killed last week.
There are currently 13 law enforcement agencies in Wisconsin with 287(g) programs, all of them sheriff’s offices. “This has to end,” said Nuemann-Ortiz. “We stand with Kenosha families in calling for an end to 287(g) in Kenosha.”
Voces de la Frontera is organizing a protest on Saturday at 11 a.m. at Kenosha’s Civic Park.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul addresses the Wisconsin Farmers Union at its annual lobby day in Madison. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul said that Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s large presence in Minnesota, which has resulted in the shooting death of one resident and numerous clashes between community members and federal agents, is not the right way to make communities safe.
Speaking at the Wisconsin Farmers Union’s annual lobby day Wednesday morning, Kaul said he’s concerned about the federal government “obstructing” the investigation into the death of Minneapolis resident Renee Nicole Good, touted his office’s briefs in support of jurisdictions suing to get federal personnel out of cities and said he’s preparing for similar federal actions in Wisconsin.
“What’s happening in Minneapolis now could very well be repeated in other communities around the country,” he said. “And so making sure that we’re prepared if that does happen is really important to me.”
He said that targeting people based on their race, ethnicity and political beliefs weaponizes the justice system in a way that makes communities less safe.
“We do a lot of thinking about public safety at the Department of Justice, it is my top priority,” he said. “Taking actions that strengthen communities, that strengthen community ties, that build trust, that ensure that laws are evenhandedly enforced … and ensure that people who commit serious crimes are held accountable” is the Wisconsin DOJ’s focus, Kaul said.
“If you start targeting people based on any number of inappropriate factors, whether it’s their race or ethnicity or their viewpoint on political issues or any other inappropriate topic, that takes you away from the kind of law enforcement that makes a positive impact and makes communities safer,” he added.
Kaul noted he’s worked often with Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and said that the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension needs to be involved in the investigation so there is transparency for everyone involved.
“I’m very concerned that Minnesota BCA has so far been excluded from the investigative process into the death that happened,” he said. “It is critically important that there be transparency and that there be fairness. That, by the way, is important for everybody involved. If you were an officer involved in a critical incident, you deserve to have a fair investigation conducted so that the public knows what happened in that case, because without a fair, transparent investigation, there’s going to be uncertainty.”
“There’s been reporting recently that the FBI is not investigating necessarily the incident, but rather the wife of the woman who was killed,” he added later. “There’s the fact that six Assistant U.S. Attorneys, six federal prosecutors, have resigned in Minnesota because of the way that that investigation is being conducted. And I think it is really important that we distinguish between good faith efforts to get to the truth, that provide information clearly, and what’s going on in Minnesota, because what’s going on right there is obstructing full investigation and full review and risks that we not have information publicly available.”
“This is not about vague feelings or misunderstandings," Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said of her bill to make child grooming a crime. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)
The Wisconsin Assembly, which met for its first floor session of the year on Tuesday, passed two constitutional amendments that could be on ballots in November as well as bills to withhold pay from suspended judges and to make “grooming” to establish a sexual relationship with a child a felony crime.
For the first time in nearly two decades, the floor session occurred without livestream coverage from WisconsinEye, the nonprofit organization that produces live and archived videos of state government similar to C-Span.
Two constitutional amendments advance
The Assembly passed two constitutional amendment proposals. One would bar the closure of places of worship during a state of emergency and the other would eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs throughout Wisconsin.
Each proposed amendment is up for the second of two required votes in consecutive sessions of the Legislature. If they pass the Senate, they will appear on voters’ ballots in November. A majority of voters must approve them before the state constitution can be amended.
AJR 10, which would prohibit the state from ordering the closure of places of worship during a state of emergency, passed 56-43. Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez (D-Milwaukee) joined Republicans in favor of the proposal.
The proposal was first introduced during the 2023-25 session in response to actions taken by the Evers administration during the COVID-19 pandemic. A “Safer at Home” order issued by Evers in March 2020 designated religious entities as essential but said gatherings should include fewer than 10 people in a room at a time and said people needed to adhere to social distancing requirements as much as possible. The order also advised places of worship to have drive-in services.
Only Rep. Ron Tusler, the proposal’s author, spoke about it during the floor session.
“No more than 10 people at a time, no matter how big the church structure was. What part of never infringe the right of every person to worship almighty God, according to the dictates of their conscience, did Gov. Evers not understand?” Tusler asked, referring to the Wisconsin State Constitution. “Evers was wrong to limit our churches to 10.”
Voters would be asked “Shall Section 18 of Article I of the Constitution, which deals with religious liberty, be amended to prohibit the state or a political subdivision of the state from ordering the closure of, or forbidding gatherings in, places of worship in response to a state of emergency, including a public health emergency?”
AJR 102, which seeks to target diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in state and local governments, passed 54-45 with only Republican support.
Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) said the proposal will restore “merit, fairness and equality to government practices from the state Capitol, all the way down to our school boards and everything in between” including when it comes to hiring, scholarships and contracting.
Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde (D-Milwaukee), speaking against the proposal, said it represents an opportunity for Republicans “to rev up voters for November and an opportunity to give red meat to the base.”
Voters across the state could find the constitutional amendment proposals alongside a slate of high stakes races on their ballots in November including a race for governor, congressional races and races for the state Senate and Assembly that will determine control of the chambers in 2027.
Rep. Margaret Arney (D-Wauwatosa) said the anti-DEI proposal creates a roadblock to helping her community.
“We need to do more to have Black and brown kids succeed in Wisconsin,” Arney said. “This change doesn’t help improve well-being in the district. It gets in the way.”
“This is the kind of fairness that the people of Wisconsin are looking for,” Murphy responded.
The proposal now needs to pass the Senate before it can go to voters. If it passes there, voters will see the following question on their ballots in November: “Shall section 27 of article I of the constitution be created to prohibit governmental entities in the state from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, public contracting, or public administration?”
Withholding judge’s pay during temporary suspension
AB 380 would require that if the state Supreme Court temporarily suspends a judge from practicing in the state pending final determination of proceedings or imposes a suspension as a disciplinary sanction in a case of misconduct then the suspension must be without pay.
The bill passed 57-42. Rep. Jenna Jacobson (D-Oregon), Rep. Steve Doyle (D-Onalaska) and Rep. Tara Johnson (D-Town of Shelby) joined Republicans in support of the bill.
The bill was introduced last year after the arrest and suspension of former Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who has since been found guilty of felony obstruction of federal immigration agents in December and submitted her resignation from her position in January.
Bill coauthor Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) told reporters before the session that the bill will ensure that “when a judge is suspended for misconduct, they are not being continued to be paid by the people of Wisconsin.”
“Not only is it an extended vacation, which is what Judge Dugan ended up enjoying while she was not doing her job, but in addition to that, we had to have other judges fill the role and get the job done so that cases could continue to be adjudicated in Milwaukee County,” he added. “If another judge decides to do this, they shouldn’t be able to collect their pay, hundreds of thousands of dollars, while that case is pending.”
Sortwell also said an amendment to the bill will ensure that should a judge be found not guilty they would receive backpay.
During floor debate, Rep. Andrew Hysell (D-Sun Prairie) called it a messaging bill given that it wouldn’t have applied to Dugan. He pointed out that the statute that the bill would change was not used by the state Supreme Court when it suspended Dugan.
“It would have saved taxpayers zero dollars,” Hysell said. “I understand that certain bills are meant to convey certain messages to the public, but even a messaging bill should have some arguable connection to the underlying problem that it supposedly fixes.”
Sortwell said that Hysell was right it wouldn’t have affected Dugan, but reiterated that his bill is looking towards the future.
“We do believe in innocence until proven guilty,” Sortwell said. “She was found to be guilty and good riddance to her.”
Grooming a crime
The Assembly also passed AB 677, which would make grooming a felony crime in Wisconsin, in a 93-6 vote. Reps. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee), Angelina Cruz (D-Racine), Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) and Angelito Tenorio (D-West Allis) voted against the proposal.
Bill author Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said the bill will help protect children and noted that she started working on the bill about 18 months ago due to the case of Christian Enwright, a former Kenosha teacher who pleaded guilty last year to over a dozen misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct after he had an inappropriate relationship with a 14-year-old student.
“Anyone who followed that case and saw the messages that Enright sent would know that his behavior is far more than disorderly. Because of the lack of a criminal definition of grooming, that was all he could be charged with,” Nedweski said.
Under the bill, grooming in Wisconsin would be defined as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of producing distributing or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.”
A person convicted of a grooming charge, under the bill, would be guilty of a Class G felony. The charge would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, and to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would need to register as a sex offender.
An amendment to the bill would change the crime to a Class I felony if the person convicted of the crime is a school staff member or volunteer.
“This is not about vague feelings or misunderstandings. There needs to be a pattern of predatory behavior with the intent to have sexual contact with the victim,” Nedweski said. “This bill came as a result of months of conversations with law enforcement prosecutors, district attorneys, educators and victim advocates.”
Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said in a statement that she appreciated the bipartisan effort on the bill.
“We all share a commitment to protecting kids in school and ensuring they can safely learn and grow,” Neubauer said. “This is a critical issue, and I hope we will continue working together to support and protect our kids.”
Assembly’s first time on the floor without WisconsinEye livestream
Ahead of the Assembly floor session, Neubauer called the absence of WisconsinEye as lawmakers continue their business this month an “unsustainable situation.” The nonprofit organization ceased coverage and pulled its archive offline on Dec. 15 due to financial difficulties.
“It is not a good day for accountability to the people who elected us to serve them,” Neubauer said. “Transparency is an essential part of a functioning democracy. Without it, mistrust thrives and multiplies at a time when we need to be building trust in state government. We need to be demonstrating that government can and must be a force for good. This is a step in the wrong direction, and it erodes the public’s trust in this institution.”
Neubauer said she is open to negotiating with her Republican colleagues to find a solution. She said that lawmakers did not set the organization up for success with the match requirements placed on the $10 million that the state set aside for an endowment.
“Not sure that a $10 million requirement was ever really realistic for WisconsinEye. We would of course like to see more fundraising,” Neubauer said.
Neubauer and Democrats also questioned why Republican lawmakers were not working more quickly towards a solution as well as why they began enforcing a ban against members of the public who try to record committee proceedings.
“I would ask that you ask yourself what kind of politician doesn’t want for a camera to film what we are doing. What kind of intentions does that politician have? What kind of motivations do they have? What do they have to hide? Why are they doing that?” Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona) told reporters. “We’re doing important work. People ought to be able to see what we’re doing.”
Gov. Tony Evers told reporters on Monday that he is open to exploring options for getting WisconsinEye back online, but isn’t supportive of just giving the nonprofit state funds without a match requirement.
“I think there has to be some skin in the game,” Evers said of WisEye.
Republican leaders have also said that they support improving transparency but expressed some concerns about giving the organization state funds.
In November, before WisconsinEye went dark, the organization’s president Jon Henkes told the Examiner that the board hadn’t raised any money. He said then that the organization had been reaching out to potential donors about providing large-sum contributions
“We’re not asking for $5,000 gifts right now. We’re asking for gifts in the $50,000 [to] $500,000 range and that’s a limited amount of people out there,” Henkes said in November.
The organization started seeing more small-dollar donations in December.
“Small gift fundraising… through online and small checks that have been arriving in the mail are helpful. They don’t get us where we need to be, but it’s a statement that it’s not just the lobbyists and elected officials around the state in the news media who are supporting us there,” Henkes said in December. “There are a lot of people who are citizen viewers who recognize the value of WisconsinEye and are taking the time to go online to make a small gift or send a check, and we’re very grateful for that. That’s a huge encouragement to us.”
WisconsinEye has increased its attempts to raise money from small-sum donations, including by launching a GoFundMe campaign on Monday. As of Tuesday, the campaign had raised more than $8,000 from over 100 donations. The goal is $250,000, which would help support three months of the organization’s operational costs.
The Madison Social Security Administration field office. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)
Wisconsinites are holding rallies across the state Wednesday to call on Congress and the Trump administration to increase funding for operations at the Social Security Administration.
Staff reductions and office closures in the last year have created bottlenecks in service for members of the public who need help from the agency, according to Jessica LaPointe, the Wisconsin-based president of American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Council 220. The union represents field operations employees for the Social Security Administration across the country.
“We’re struggling to meet the needs of the public,” LaPointe said, with more than 10,000 people a day becoming eligible for the federal retirement program.
Along with AFGE, the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans will be rallying outside Social Security offices in eight Wisconsin communities Wednesday.
“When they start closing offices, that hinders our senior citizens,” said Ross Winklbauer, president of WARA. “They call into Social Security if they have a question or to file a claim, and they’re sitting on the phone for hours because of short staffing and not getting their questions answered.”
WARA will take part in a rally starting at 12 noon outside the Social Security offices in the Milwaukee suburb of Greenfield along with AFGE. Rallies are also planned in Eau Claire, Madison, Racine, Rhinelander, Stevens Point, Wausau and Wisconsin Rapids. Winklbauer said WARA has about 100,000 members in the state, mostly union retirees, and about 1,000 active participants.
The rallies are part of a national day of action in anticipation of the possibility that the government will shut down at the end of January if Congress can’t agree on a budget for the rest of the year, LaPointe said.
Talks are underway between congressional Republicans and Democrats to enact the rest of the government’s spending plan for the current year by the upcoming deadline.
Nevertheless, LaPointe said the most recent shutdown that started Oct. 1 and ran for a record 43 days brought home to many field office workers in the Social Service Admin. the limits of their compensation, especially if they are furloughed.
In a report released Wednesday, the Strategic Organizing Center said its review of 36,000 Social Security workers’ pay rates showed that 54% — just over half — were paid less than what theMIT Living Wage Calculator has set as a living wage for the regions of the U.S. where they live. The developers of the calculator at the MIT Living Wage Institute define a living wage as “the rate that a full-time worker requires to cover the costs of their family’s basic needs where they live.”
“We don’t get paid enough to save for a rainy day,” LaPointe said. “We’re understaffed, we’re underpaid and we’re struggling to meet the needs of the public who are coming to us for their earned benefits.”
In January 2025, when President Donald Trump took office, the agency’s staff was at its lowest in 50 years, LaPointe said, and “the public was waiting too long for benefits and services.”
Since then, the agency instituted a buyout program, offering workers up to $25,000 to quit, and the staff dropped from 58,000 a year ago to about 50,000 now — “the largest single staffing cut in Social Security history,” LaPointe said.
About 2,000 field staff were lost in the last year — 10% of the field operations, she said, with the number of employees at some offices falling to single digits.
LaPointe said the agency has moved to “digital first” operations that favor online or telephone contacts instead of in-person visits. In addition, the agency has shifted to processing inquiries from the public nationally rather than at the local office she said — “where a customer out in California would be served by someone in Wisconsin, or a customer in Madison might be served by someone in New Jersey.”
In an email message, a Social Security Administration spokesperson depicted the digital shift as part of a modernization program so that “more Americans are choosing to resolve their needs online or over the phone.” The statement cited arecent audit by the Social Security Administration inspector general that found average hold times for callers had dropped to seven minutes by September 2025 from a high of 30 minutes in January.
Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano “has pledged to have the right level of staffing to operate at peak efficiency and deliver best-in-class customer service to the American people,” the spokesperson said.
The Social Security Administration “is taking action to improve workplace satisfaction, support professional development, and enhance communication across all levels of the organization,” the spokesperson added.
LaPointe, however, said there’s been “a breakdown in community based service” with the new system, and Social Security staffers are no longer the face of government in the local community.
“You now have to have an appointment to do anything with Social Security,” LaPointe said. “It’s created a bottleneck of service to where people cannot get access to apply for benefits in a timely fashion.”
Frontline workers are concerned that a move toward using artificial intelligence technology to review benefit applications will increase errors — either benefit approvals that are mistaken or unwarranted denials, she said.
“It still takes a human being to adjudicate claims — every claim, whether on the phone, online or in person,” LaPointe said.
The William L. Guy Federal Building in Bismarck. A North Dakota-based Christian employers group filed a lawsuit against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission a year ago over Biden-era regulations related to abortion and gender identity. (Photo by Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reached an agreement this month with a Christian business group to ignore regulations that allowed employees to receive abortion-related accommodations and barred workplace discrimination based on gender identity.
Christian Employers Alliance President Margaret Iuculano, whose organization sued the EEOC over the two provisions in January 2025, said in a statement Monday that the deal was a “major win” for businesses looking to operate in accordance with their religion. The CEOs of Hobby Lobby, Regent Bank and AllBetter Health are on the board of the North Dakota-based nonprofit, which has more than 22,000 members across the country.
The regulations, issued under former President Joe Biden’s administration, were alreadyinvalidated last year by federal courts, but the deal struck by the EEOC could foreshadow a move to rescind or rewrite rules for enforcing a landmark pregnant workers law. A spokesperson for the EEOC did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday.
“As attacks on women’s reproductive choice continue to escalate, we are disappointed, but not surprised, that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sided with the Christian Employers Alliance in federal court, relieving many large Christian employers of their obligation to protect employees seeking an abortion,” Inimai Chettiar, president of A Better Balance, said in a statement provided to States Newsroom.
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which took effect in 2023, requires employers with 15 or more staff to provide reasonable accommodations — additional restroom breaks, a stool to sit on and time off for doctors’ appointments, for example — as long as the requests don’t place “undue hardship” on the company.
According to a Jan. 9 court order signed by a North Dakota district judge, the EEOC agreed that current and future members of the alliance will not be penalized for declining to accommodate abortion, making employees follow gender-specific dress codes or directing staff to use private spaces that don’t align with their gender identity.
Under the stipulations, the agreement will expire if the EEOC issues new regulations for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and revises or rescinds gender identity-related guidance for complying with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, which bars workplace discrimination.
“The agreement does not prevent the EEOC from investigating allegations of unlawful conduct not specifically covered by this agreement, even if they are alleged within the same charge that alleges non-enforcement conduct against CEA or its members,” the order states.
Andrea Lucas, the chair of the EEOC, has said she supports the pregnant workers law overall but disagrees that abortion should be included in the definition of “pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions” when interpreting the measure.
She has also said the agency will reconsider regulations for the law once there was a Republican quorum reestablished on the commission. The Senate approved the confirmation of Brittany Bull Panuccio, the newest commissioner, in October during the federal government shutdown.
Lucas also opposed harassment guidance issued by Biden administration officials that said employers should respect workers’ pronouns and allow staff to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity.
Chettiar, A Better Balance’s president, said the laws’ regulations “clearly cover workers’ ability to receive reasonable accommodations for ‘pregnancy-related conditions,’ which has long been interpreted to include abortion as well as other essential reproductive healthcare like IVF. We will continue to fight to keep the regulations for the PWFA intact and as strong as possible as the EEOC appears poised to reopen them and potentially narrow the scope of the law.”
This story was originally produced by News From The States, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
Planned Parenthood and other providers got word in March that millions they anticipated in Title X funding would be withheld. The money was eventually released last year, though some providers say damage was still done. (Getty Images)
Planned Parenthood clinics in Utah resumed family planning services after the Trump administration unfroze millions in federal funds.
The American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday submitted a brief to dismiss a lawsuit filed on behalf of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association after the federal government notified nine Planned Parenthood affiliates and other family planning providers in March it would withhold annual Title X funding.
Shireen Ghorbani, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Association of Utah, said in a statement Monday that the restored funding does not erase all of the damage caused by nine months without it. Title X funds are meant to provide affordable family planning services, such as birth control, cancer screening, and STI tests and treatment.
Ghorbani noted that the Utah affiliate has been the only Title X grant recipient in the state since 1985.
“We are thrilled that Title X funding is restored to Utah for now, allowing more Utahns to get critical family planning services,” Ghorbani said. “But we cannot ignore the fact that too many Utahns have already felt the devastating effects of the Trump administration’s unwarranted decision to withhold this funding for the last nine months. Many of the 26,000 Utahns who rely on the program were forced to pay more for their health care or go without care altogether.”
Crucially, she said, the affiliate closed two health centers, in St. George and Logan, among dozens that have closed because of the withheld Title X funding and are unlikely to reopen, according to Planned Parenthood.
Some grantees had their funding restored over the summer, Politico reported, while others remained under investigation for possibly violating the Trump administration’s new rules around so-called diversity, equity and inclusion practices until December. That’s when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services informed Planned Parenthood affiliates that they would receive their promised funds dating back to last April, with no explanation beyond unspecified “clarifications made by, and actions taken by, the grantees.”
Planned Parenthood’s Utah affiliate said that on Jan. 9 it received $2 million in Title X funding for the current grant year that had been withheld since April.
In the lawsuit over the Title X funding, plaintiffs argued that the federal government withholding 22 federal Title X grants from Planned Parenthood and other family planning organizations was illegal and unjustified.
“Our lawsuit succeeded in holding the administration accountable for its unlawful acts, and today, NFPRHA members’ grants have been restored. We are relieved all of our members now have access to their promised funds, but we know the fight for contraceptive access in this country goes on,” said Clare Coleman, president & CEO of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, in a statement Tuesday.
She estimated that 865 family planning service sites were unable to provide Title X-funded services to an estimated 842,000 patients across nearly two dozen states.
While some states have fought to restore Title X family planning funding, Idaho last year declined its annual $1.5 million federal Title X funding, leaving patients statewide without free and low-cost contraception and reproductive health care services.
This story was originally produced by News From The States, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
A screenshot of the HealthCare.gov marketplace. Enrollment for 2026 fell in Wisconsin and nationwide as premium costs rose and enhanced subsidies ended at the end of 2025.
With premium costs sharply increased and enhanced subsidies to reduce them no longer available, the number of people signing up for health care in the federal marketplace is behind last year by more than 5%, according to a preliminary report.
The federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid, which manages the HealthCare.gov enrollment,reported this week that Wisconsin enrollment fell by more than 17,000 below 2025’s record enrollment, which topped 310,000. As of Jan. 3, 289,213 Wisconsin residents had enrolled in plans for 2026.
HealthCare.gov is the marketplace created as part of the Affordable Care Act. It is a platform for people to purchase health insurance who aren’t covered by an employer or by some other health plan, such as Medicare or Medicaid.
Nationwide, enrollment for 2026 is 22.77 million, CMS reported — a decline of about 1.5 million from 2025.
The loss of enhanced premium tax credits, which cut the cost of health insurance purchased at HealthCare.gov, has been predicted to lead many to drop out of the marketplace. The enhanced subsidies expired at the end of 2025. Smaller subsidies remain in place, but premiums have also risen in cost, for several reasons.
According to insurance analysts, one factor in that increase was that insurance companies expected the higher prices to drive some people out of the marketplace — particularly those with fewer health concerns who are willing to take the chance that they won’t need coverage.
The remaining population is expected to have more serious health needs, making their care more expensive but also raising the cost for insuring the entire remaining pool of customers.
Open enrollment through HealthCare.gov is still available until Thursday, Jan. 15, with coverage starting Feb. 1. For consumers who enrolled by Dec. 15, 2025, coverage began Jan. 1.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, speaks at a press conference with members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus on Jan. 13, 2026. At left is a photo of Renee Good, 37, who was killed by an immigration officer in Minneapolis.(Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus announced Tuesday they will oppose any federal funding for immigration enforcement following the deadly shooting of a woman by an immigration officer in Minneapolis.
“Our caucus will oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriations bills until meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices,” Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, who represents Minneapolis, said during a press conference.
Last week, federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross killed 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis, which has seen a drastic increase in immigration enforcement for weeks following allegations of fraud. After the shooting, massive protests against the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement occurred in Minnesota and across the country.
The U.S. Senate is moving forward with the remaining appropriations bills for Congress to avoid a partial shutdown by a Jan. 30 deadline, and negotiations continue over funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday that funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “one of the major issues that the appropriators are confronting right now.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota said the appropriations bill for “Homeland is obviously the hardest one,” and that flat funding, or a continuing resolution, for the agency is the likely outcome.
Members of the Progressive Caucus are pushing for reforms including a ban on federal immigration officers wearing face coverings, the requirement of a warrant for an arrest and greater oversight of private detention facilities that hold immigrants.
Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal said Congress also needs to pass legislation to roll back the billions allocated to the Department of Homeland Security last summer in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The massive GOP spending and tax cuts package provided a huge budget increase to DHS for immigration enforcement of roughly $175 billion.
“We have to urgently pass legislation to roll back the excessive funding for immigration enforcement” in the spending and tax cuts package, Jayapal said. “We cannot support additional funding for the Department of Homeland Security without seriously meaningful and significant reforms to the way that federal authorities conduct activity in our cities, our communities and our neighborhoods.”
Progressives press Jeffries
The Progressive Caucus has nearly 100 Democratic House members. Those members joining the press conference included Omar, Jayapal, Maxwell Frost of Florida, Chuy Garcia of Illinois, Delia Ramirez of Illinois and Maxine Dexter of Oregon.
Garcia, who is the whip of the Progressive Caucus, said the group has informed House Leader Hakeem Jeffries of their position, but did not say if Jeffries supported slashing DHS funds.
“They are very concerned, and they also share our sentiment that we need to do something to bring reform, to bring change to stop the lawlessness, the cruelty and the abuse of power that’s taking place within ICE and (Customs and Border Patrol) and DHS,” he said of Democratic leadership.
While Democrats do not control either chamber, one tool lawmakers have used amid the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration campaign is the power of congressional oversight of federal facilities that house immigrants and are funded by Congress.
But following the shooting in Minnesota, several lawmakers were denied an oversight visit to a federal ICE facility, a move that Democrats argue violates a court order.
There will be an emergency hearing in the District Court for the District of Columbia on Wednesday on a new Trump administration policy that argues those facilities are funded through the spending and tax cuts package and therefore exempt from unannounced oversight visits.
Jayapal called the reasoning “a B.S. argument, and hopefully the court is going to see that.”
Investigations urged
Jayapal added that there also needs to be “independent investigations of lawlessness and violence by immigration agents and border patrol agents, and meaningful consequences for those who commit these acts of violence, not a slap on the wrist.”
“One thing is absolutely clear, when any law enforcement officer fires a weapon in any community, the public must have answers to questions,” Dexter said.
Ramirez said there needs to be greater accountability beyond appropriations, and said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem should be impeached.
Illinois Democratic Rep. Robin Kelly is planning to introduce articles of impeachment for Noem on three counts: obstructing Congress, violating public trust and self-dealing. While such a move likely would be uphill in the House, Republicans at the moment control the chamber by a very narrow margin.
“DHS and ICE have been empowered through a lack of oversight and too much latitude to violate our rights under the pretense of security and safety,” Ramirez said.
Frost said that Congress needs to assert its control over appropriations as a check against the Trump administration.
“We cannot depend on this administration to police themselves and an end to the enforcement practices that are terrorizing our communities,” Frost said.
Demonstrators rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026, as justices heard two cases on state bans of trans athletes. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared likely Tuesday to keep in place laws in Idaho and West Virginia banning transgender athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams.
The outcomes from the nation’s highest court expected later this year could have sweeping implications for transgender rights more broadly as President Donald Trump’s administration’s efforts to roll back those rights have extended far beyond athletics.
In lengthy, back-to-back oral arguments, justices heard two cases — Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. — which both deal with whether those states’ bans violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The West Virginia case also calls into question whether its prohibition on transgender athletes participating in women’s and girls’ sports violates the federal civil rights law barring sex-based discrimination in education programs known as Title IX.
Rulings in lower courts have halted the two states from implementing the bans, to varying extents, leading GOP attorneys general in Idaho and West Virginia to ask the Supreme Court to step in.
Idaho and West Virginia represent just two of the nearly 30 states with laws banning transgender students’ participation in sports consistent with their gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an independent think tank.
During oral arguments in the Idaho case, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he sees the growth of women’s and girls’ sports as one of the country’s great successes over the past half-century.
He noted that some states, the federal government, the NCAA and the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee “think that allowing transgender women and girls to participate will undermine or reverse that amazing success and will create unfairness.”
Demonstrators who back state bans on trans athletes rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 13, 2026, as the justices heard arguments on two cases. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)
He added that “for the individual girl who does not make the team, or doesn’t get on the stand for the medal, or doesn’t make all league, there’s a harm there, and I think we can’t sweep that aside.”
Kavanaugh is part of the court’s conservative wing, whose members outnumber liberals 6-3.
Title IX debated
Kavanaugh’s comment seemingly endorsed West Virginia Solicitor General Michael Williams’ framing of the issue, as a protection of women and girl athletes.
Williams told the justices that “maintaining separate boys’ and girls’ sports teams ensures that girls can safely and fairly compete in school sports.”
He argued that Title IX “permits sex-separated teams,” and “it does so because biological sex matters in athletics in ways both obvious and undeniable.”
Joshua Block, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, argued on behalf of Becky Pepper-Jackson, a transgender athlete at the forefront of the West Virginia case.
Block said that though West Virginia “argues that to protect these opportunities for cisgender girls, it has to deny them” to Pepper-Jackson, “Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause protect everyone, and if the evidence shows there are no relevant physiological differences between B.P.J. and other girls, then there’s no basis to exclude her.”
Idaho case
Idaho’s solicitor general, Alan Hurst, argued that “gender identity does not matter in sports, and that’s why Idaho’s law does not classify on the basis of gender identity.”
Hurst said the law “treats all males equally and all females equally, regardless of identity.”
Kathleen Hartnett, an attorney with Cooley LLP, represented Lindsay Hecox, a transgender student in Idaho who wanted to try out for the women’s track and cross-country teams at Boise State University but would have been barred from doing so under the Idaho law because she is transgender.
A federal court in Idaho halted the law from taking effect in 2020. A federal appeals court initially upheld the ruling in 2023 but adjusted the scope of it in 2024 to only apply to Hecox, not other athletes.
Hartnett said the law ignored that trans girls who take medication to block testosterone do not have an inherent physical advantage in sports.
“Circulating testosterone after puberty is the main determinant of sex-based biological advantage that (the Idaho law) sought to address,” she said.
Demonstrators outside the U.S. Supreme Court fly the flag of the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for LGBTQ+ equality. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom)
Hecox “has mitigated that advantage because she has suppressed her testosterone for over a year and taken estrogen,” Hartnett said.
The Idaho law, Hartnett said, “thus fails heightened scrutiny as applied to Lindsay and transgender women like her who have no sex-based biological advantage as compared to birth sex females.”
Hecox has asked both an Idaho federal court and the Supreme Court to drop the case. Though a federal judge in Idaho rejected that attempt in October, the Supreme Court deferred the request until after oral arguments and could ultimately dismiss her case in the coming months.
Issue actively debated
Earlier landmark rulings involving transgender rights came up before the court Tuesday — including United States v. Skrmetti in 2025 and Bostock v. Clayton County in 2020.
In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s prohibition on gender-affirming care for minors.
The court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that LGBTQ+ employees are protected from employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Kavanaugh suggested the wide-ranging landscape of laws on the issue throughout the country meant the court should tread carefully in meddling in state laws.
“Given that half the states are allowing transgender girls and women to participate, about half are not, why would we at this point — just the role of this court — jump in and try to constitutionalize a rule for the whole country while there’s still, as you say, uncertainty and debate?” he asked Hartnett.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has taken steps at the federal level to prohibit trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports teams aligning with their gender identity, including the president signing an executive order in February 2025 that banned such participation.
He also signed executive orders regarding transgender people including orders that make it the “policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female,” restrict access to gender-affirming care for kids and aim to bar openly transgender service members from the U.S. military.
Three cars filled with federal agents stop in front of Elle Neubauer and another observer, surrounding the car and threatening arrest during an early morning watch observing ICE in South Minneapolis Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
As Elle Neubauer drove before dawn past the darkened windows of the immigrant-owned businesses on Lake Street in Minneapolis, her co-pilot and friend Patty O’Keefe scanned the passing vehicles with binoculars, searching for signs of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
As the sun rose, more community patrollers arrived on Lake Street, keeping eyes on the Ecuadorean grocery stores, Somali restaurants and Mexican taco shops that line the street. With such a high concentration of patrollers and relatively few federal agents in the area that morning, Neubauer and O’Keefe decided to head south to the suburb of Bloomington, where O’Keefe said she had encountered ICE the day prior.
The goal is to “distract them, to occupy their time,” O’Keefe said. “The more time they’re trying to get away from us, the less time they’re spending searching for people to abduct.”
The pair quickly located and started following a white Ford Explorer they suspected belonged to ICE. The driver began weaving through suburban parking lots with Neubauer close behind, seemingly trying to confirm he was being followed.
“They do and will say anything to try to intimidate and scare people,” Neubauer said that morning. “One of their favorite lines recently is, ‘This is your one and only warning.’”
The Explorer came to a stop in a hotel parking lot, and Neubauer parked nearby. The driver of the Explorer then pulled his vehicle behind Neubauer’s car, blocking the exit.
A man with a black face covering and a tactical vest peeking through his flannel shirt exited his car and approached the passenger door, gesturing for O’Keefe to roll down the window.
A masked agent with his vest partially visible through the buttons of his plainclothes shirt blocks in and approaches the car Elle Neubauer was driving on an early morning watch in Bloomington Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
“No, thank you,” Neubauer said, smiling and waving at the man.
“Stop following us,” he said, his voice muffled through the closed car window and the gaiter. “This is your first warning.”
Neubauer and O’Keefe started patrolling their south Minneapolis neighborhood recently as the Trump administration has ramped up its mass deportation campaign in Minnesota, sending in thousands of ICE and Border Patrol agents, with more on the way. They are some of the many thousands of Twin Cities residents who have come together over the past year to protest ICE and divert the agents from their mission, often resulting in tense confrontations.
Minnesota has been the focus of President Donald Trump’s deportation efforts since December, when a right-wing media outlet published unsubstantiatedallegations that Somali Minnesotans were funding terrorism with money stolen from government programs. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced “Operation Metro Surge” in December, which purported to target Somali immigrants, the vast majority of whom are citizens or legal permanent residents.
The effort to disrupt ICE operations has only grown in the days after ICE agent Jonathan Ross fatally shot Renee Good in her car in south Minneapolis, as Minnesotans look for ways to push back against what many view as an occupation of the city by unwelcome federal forces. There are now at least four times more immigration agents in the state than there are Minneapolis police officers.
Citizen observers are gathering on street corners and posting on social media to connect with each other, and immigrant rights organizations are quickly reaching capacity at training sessions for people who want to learn how to support and defend immigrants.
ICE did not respond to the Reformer’s emails for comment for this story.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Good was attempting to run over a federal agent in an act of “domestic terrorism.” Appearing on a Sunday morning Fox News show, Noem said her agency is investigating the funding behind anti-ICE operations, and claimed nonprofit organizations are training people to “distract them, assault them and do exactly what we’ve seen with these vehicle rammings.”
After the man finished talking to the patrollers and got back in the white Explorer, a second vehicle — a black GMC Yukon SUV— pulled in behind him, blocking in Neubauer’s car while the Explorer drove away.
Elle Neubauer and Patty O’Keefe are blocked in by a second layer of federal agents while on an early morning watch in Bloomington, looking for ICE vehicles to follow and observe Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
Neubauer and O’Keefe followed the black SUV out of the parking lot.
“I wonder how many first warnings we can get today,” O’Keefe said, half-jokingly.
She evidently ran out of warnings two days later, when federal agents smashed in her car window, dragged her and her co-pilot out of the car, and held them for eight hours in the belly of the Whipple Federal Building.
Neighbors join forces to track ICE, warn potential targets
When Trump assumed the presidency for the second time, immigrant rights activists landed on a strategy to respond to the coming increase in immigrant arrests: rapid response networks. Grouped by geographic proximity, they would quickly arrive at the scene of an ICE raid to protest, warn nearby neighbors, tell detainees about their rights and convince agents to leave. A common tactic is pointing out that agents can’t enter private property without permission or a judicial warrant.
Around the country, as ICE deployments escalated in cities like Chicago and Los Angeles, anti-ICE protesters have adopted and spread the tactics of honking horns and blowing whistles to alert entire city blocks to agents’ presence. The practice has become common in the Twin Cities, especially since “Operation Metro Surge” began in December.
Over the past year, immigrant rights groups have hosted “know your rights” trainings for immigrants and rapid responders, outlining the laws governing ICE and the protocols observers should follow to avoid arrest. At these trainings, neighbors meet each other and plug into their local rapid response networks.
Following cars, making noise and filming law enforcement operations is legal, according to Tracy Roy of the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota. Physically blocking ICE agents from making an arrest is not. (And getting arrested, Neubauer said, takes resources away from the movement, in addition to the high personal cost.)
Rapid responders have gathered en masse at protracted federal raids in Minneapolis and St. Paul in the past year, resulting in standoffs between protesters and ICE, in which ICE agents used physical force, pepper spray and tear gas on the demonstrators.
But with the explosion in new agents arriving to the state, federal tactics seem to have shifted: ICE agents are conducting arrests quickly, in smaller groups than those that have provoked mass protest. By the time rapid responders arrive at the scene of a reported immigration raid or arrest — even if it only takes a few minutes — the ICE agents are often long gone.
So, the rapid responders have gotten more proactive, setting off on neighborhood patrols, finding and following ICE agents to try to discourage them from making arrests. They also film the agents in action to document potential violations of the law.
“If they know that somebody is watching, they’re significantly less likely to stop somebody,” Neubauer said. “Often when they pull over and people hop on a whistle or on their horn, they’ll just leave.”
Elle Neubauer drives with Patty O’Keefe through South Minneapolis on an early morning watch, looking for ICE vehicles to follow and observe Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
In group chats, neighbors using anonymous nicknames volunteer to assist with various aspects of the operation. No one assigns shifts or jobs; group members take on a needed role when they’re available, alert the group to their activities and let everyone know when they’re done.
The system is both highly organized and decentralized, with no clear leaders — just longer-time members of the network helping newcomers learn the communication style and security practices of the group.
As Neubauer drove on Friday morning’s patrol, O’Keefe monitored their local chat and listened to a group call. Both looked for what they’d learned were the hallmarks of ICE vehicles: out-of-state license plates, tinted windows, at least two people in the car — usually male, almost always masked.
Elle Neubauer drives while Patty O’Keefe monitors a rapid response group as they drive through South Minneapolis on an early morning watch, looking for ICE vehicles to follow and observe Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
When they spotted a suspicious vehicle in Bloomington, Neubauer maneuvered into position to follow it. An immediate giveaway that the vehicle belongs to federal agents, the patrollers said, is that the drivers quickly realize they’re being followed and start driving erratically. Early Friday morning, O’Keefe and Neubauer suspected a vehicle carried ICE officers; it aggressively accelerated towards Neubauer’s car while she made a U-turn at an intersection. Another vehicle they were following ran a red light, leaving the patrollers’ car behind.
An unmarked SUV that observers identified as a vehicle of federal agents accelerates toward Elle Neubauer as she makes a U-turn while she and Patty O’Keefe drive through South Minneapolis on an early morning watch, looking for ICE vehicles to follow and observe Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
“Well, if my plate wasn’t in their database, it is now,” Neubauer said Friday as she and O’Keefe followed the black SUV that had just boxed them in.
O’Keefe shared a description of the car and its license plate number so it could be added to the observers’ crowdsourced list.
As a countermeasure to the activists’ license plate tracking, ICE agents have been frequently switching license plates, drawing a warning from state regulators.
Even after they lost the SUV — the driver cut abruptly across several lanes of traffic — the encounter was a successful waste of ICE resources, in the patrollers’ eyes. ICE had dedicated an entire vehicle to impeding the observers for several minutes, rather than conducting arrests.
“Deep breaths,” Neubauer said, reaching over to pat O’Keefe on the leg.
Elle Neubauer and Patty O’Keefe check in with each other after being blocked in by federal agents as they drive through Bloomington on an early morning watch, looking for ICE vehicles to follow and observe Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
Managing one’s own emotions and staying calm is key to patrolling, because ICE agents are “emotional and not well-trained,” Neubauer said.
‘I feel changed’
Neubauer and a different observer were following three apparent federal vehicles Monday when the convoy pulled onto a side street and came to a stop. Five agents hopped out of their vehicles, and one wearing a face covering and ICE vest approached the drivers’ side window as the others surrounded the car.
As he approached the window, he greeted the driver with Neubauer’s wife’s legal name — the name on the car’s registration.
“If you keep following us…we’ll have to pull you out and arrest you,” the agent said. Neubauer and her co-pilot decided to keep following them — after all, they figured, they weren’t doing anything illegal.
A masked ICE agent knocks on the window and tells Elle Neubauer and the other observer she was riding with to stop following ICE vehicles while on an early morning watch Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
The convoy took them straight to Neubauer’s house, where they stopped and idled for a few minutes before moving on.
According to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, ICE agents have routinely identified the drivers following them, then led them to the observers’ home — apparently using a law enforcement database to connect license plate numbers to drivers’ home addresses in an effort to intimidate observers.
On Monday, they took the intimidation tactics one step further.
Two cars split off from the group, and Neubauer and her partner for the day decided to follow the third vehicle, a grey pickup truck. They stayed close behind for several minutes until they realized the truck was leading them towards the Whipple Federal Building.
As Neubauer and her co-pilot followed the truck, agents returned to Neubauer’s house and banged on the front door. Her wife, who asked the Reformer not to publish her name out of fear of ICE, pretended she wasn’t home. The agents left after several neighbors stepped out of their houses and started blowing whistles.
When Neubauer realized what had happened, she called off the patrol and headed home.
“I feel changed, and afraid,” Neubauer’s wife said, looking at Neubauer. “I was very fearful — not for me, but for what could have happened to you.”
They set out on another patrol that afternoon, together.
Elle Neubauer holds her wife’s hand after coming home from and early morning watch observing ICE in South Minneapolis Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. While following a convoy of agents, agents drove to Neubauer’s home and idled for a bit. Agents then led Neubauer away while others circled back around to pound on her door. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
Killed in the act
Since Ross shot and killed Good, immigrant rights activists and elected officials have referred to her as an “observer.”
When Neubauer saw video of the shooting, however, she noticed something that suggested Good may not have been trained, or experienced, in interacting with ICE: Her window was rolled down, and she was speaking to the agents, against the advice of many immigrant rights activists.
“The shooting on Wednesday was 1000% not Renee’s fault. It was an ICE officer panicking and shooting into her car,” Neubauer said. “If we can manage the emotions of ICE officers so they’re not panicking … they’re less likely to f*ck up and make a mistake and hurt someone.”
Several leaders of immigrant rights groups and members of Good’s local neighborhood rapid response network told the Reformer they did not know Good.
Even if Good were in the group chat, the people interviewed by the Reformer may not have known, because they use code names and generally do not know each other’s real identities.
Friday morning, one patroller spoke up in the group call to say their car had been boxed in and ICE agents were approaching.
Another group member repeated the collective mantra: Lock your doors, roll up the windows, do not engage.
Elle Neubauer and another observer drive past wheat-pasted posters of Renee Good while on an early morning watch observing ICE in South Minneapolis Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
Broken glass
Sunday morning, O’Keefe was patrolling south Minneapolis with her friend Brandon Sigüenza when they heard ICE agents had surrounded another patroller’s car and were deploying pepper spray. When they arrived at the scene, they saw two federal vehicles surrounded by people blowing whistles and honking horns, O’Keefe said.
The agents got back in their cars and drove away. O’Keefe and Sigüenza followed them down a residential street until the vehicles stopped in the middle of the road and agents came up to the car — again giving them a “final warning” to stop following the officers, O’Keefe said.
O’Keefe shouted through the closed windows that she wasn’t obstructing them and that they could move forward if they wanted to, she said.
Sigüenza, for his part, said he kept repeating Renee Good’s name.
As the agents were walking back to their cars, one turned around and sprayed pepper spray into the car’s intake vent, Sigüenza said.
The pair continued following the convoy, O’Keefe honking her horn, until the agents stopped and got out of their cars again.
This time, they shattered both front windows and dragged Sigüenza and O’Keefe from the car, according to video captured by observers. Sigüenza said both of their phones flew from his hands, his landing in the frozen street. Agents handcuffed both activists and placed them in separate unmarked vehicles bound for the Whipple Federal Building, they said.
O’Keefe said the agents ridiculed her while she was in the backseat of the car.
“You guys gotta stop obstructing us,” O’Keefe recalls one agent saying. Then, referring to Renee Good: “That’s why that lesbian b*tch is dead.”
O’Keefe became enraged, calling the agent a “f*cking bigot.” She committed his comment to memory and quoted it to everyone she could inside the Whipple Building, she said.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment Monday.
O’Keefe’s partner, Mitch Ditlefsen, called her as he was leaving his job as a prep cook at around 9:45 a.m.
Brandon Sigüenza, who was detained alongside Patty O’Keefe the previous day, talks about his experience alongside O’Keefe’s partner, Mitch Ditlefsen Monday, Jan. 12, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
“Someone picked up and said, ‘The owner of this phone has been abducted by ICE,’” Ditlefsen said.
“I showed up, and there was just shattered windows and pepper spray, and no indication of where Patty and Brandon were,” Ditlefsen said.
The pair said they spent eight hours in custody, mostly in holding cells with other U.S. citizens who said they were also arrested while protesting ICE. O’Keefe said she was never provided a phone call; Sigüenza was able to call his wife.
While in custody, Sigüenza said, agents suggested they would pay him or expedite immigration proceedings for his relatives if he provided the agents with names of undocumented immigrants or protest organizers. Both were released without charges.
Sigüenza said he’ll take a short break from patrolling for his wife’s sake — she feared for his safety long before his arrest — but he’s ready to get back out there.
O’Keefe said the experience has strengthened her resolve, but also ratcheted up her fear.
“They don’t realize this is coming from a deep place of love and empathy and care for my community,” O’Keefe said. “And that is a stronger feeling that I have in me than fear.”
Feeling besieged, a neighborhood fights back
When thousands of people showed up to mourn Good at a vigil the night she was killed, organizers urged attendees to get connected to their local immigrant defense networks in whatever role they are comfortable with.
Everyone has different skills and risk tolerances, Neubauer said, so there’s a role for everyone. For example, going door to door to meet one’s neighbors is one important way to increase safety and support people who may be staying home for fear of ICE, Neubauer said.
“But honestly, I have too much social anxiety,” she said. “It was just too much for me to do that. And for whatever reason, my brain works in such a way where (patrolling) is less anxiety-inducing than talking to my neighbors door-to-door.”
She wouldn’t be able to deal with the emotional toll of patrolling without support from her wife, she said. The movement needs all kinds of help; whistles and volunteers to distribute them; plate checkers and people to coordinate among different networks in various languages; food delivery for immigrants sheltering in place.
And, more people in more neighborhoods who are ready to jump into action when ICE shows up next door.
Thousands gathered at Portland Avenue near 34th Street in south Minneapolis to honor the life of Renee Good, who was killed by an ICE officer that morning Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)
This story was originally produced by Minnesota Reformer, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
Interior of a modern data center. (Stock photo by Imaginima/Getty Images)
Dozens of data centers have been built in communities across Wisconsin, with more planned or in process. In many of these communities, the proposed data centers have sparked significant local opposition.
Both Democrats and Republicans in the Legislature have proposed bills to regulate the growth of data centers as community leaders across the state have asked for more direction from the state government on the approval of what are often massive facilities.
So far, the state has had little input on data center construction outside of a provision in the 2023-25 state budget which exempted data center construction projects from paying sales taxes.
The Democratic bill, introduced last year by Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) and Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland), would require data centers to report the level of energy and water they’re using, fund the development of renewable energy projects and ensure the cost of increased energy demands aren’t passed on to regular consumers.
The Republican bill, introduced this month, also requires the Public Service Commission to prevent energy use and infrastructure costs from being passed on to consumers, requires the data center to use a closed-loop water cooling system to limit the amount of water needed and includes provisions that would require the data center company to cover the cost of restoring the land it’s built on if the data center is closed or unfinished. The bill also includes a provision that requires any renewable energy created to power the data center be sourced on site.
Last year, the issue of data centers was a common theme on the campaign trail in Virginia’s gubernatorial race, as voters respond to the effects of hosting more of the centers than any other state.
Here in Wisconsin, communities are grappling with how to make agreements with the big tech companies hoping to build the data centers, how to avoid the broken promises at the top of mind of many Wisconsinites after the Foxconn development in Mount Pleasant failed to live up to its lofty initial projections and how to manage the often huge demands the data centers make on local water supplies and energy.
Despite those challenges, the construction of a data center can offer benefits to local governments — mostly by boosting property tax revenue from a development that won’t consume many local government services.
Unlike many other issues, the question of data center development has not become politically polarized, with a range of positions among candidates of both parties.
“Data centers are a new issue that has not taken on a partisan edge in the public mind,” Barry Burden, a political science professor at UW-Madison, said. “This is likely to change because among politicians Democrats are more skeptical about data centers and Republicans are more enthusiastic about them. If this partisan divide continues or even becomes sharper, the public is likely to begin mimicking the positions taken by party leaders. But at least for a while the issue is likely to cut across party lines.”
In Wisconsin’s crowded open race for governor, most of the candidates told the Wisconsin Examiner they were supportive of some level of statewide regulation on data centers.
Democrat Missy Hughes’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment for this article. Her public comments on the issue are included below.
Mandela Barnes
The former lieutenant governor said in a statement to the Examiner that it’s important that data center construction not increase utility rates, not damage the environment and use Wisconsin union labor. He also said the companies developing the centers need to meaningfully work with the communities they’re trying to build in.
“A lot of communities feel left out of conversations about what is going on in their own backyard and that is not fair,” Barnes said. “Any development of this scale must meaningfully engage local communities and address their concerns and input throughout their proposal. We must also ensure that data center projects do not drive up utility rates for Wisconsinites or contribute to harmful pollution, and that they invest in training and hiring Wisconsin workers to staff these facilities.”
Joel Brennan
The former secretary of the Department of Administration said in a statement from his campaign that the desire of tech companies to move fast is in opposition to the government’s need to engage the public transparently.
“Wisconsinites shouldn’t have to foot the bill for AI or data center projects, period. At a time when affordability is a challenge in every community, taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for construction, operations, or higher utility costs. No one should have to worry about affording their heating bill because a data center has driven up energy prices,” he said. “It’s reasonable for people to have concerns about AI, and I share those concerns. The technology is moving fast, and companies often prioritize speed. Government’s responsibility is different: transparency, accountability, community engagement, and coordination with local communities who stand to be impacted by these projects. Data centers can create jobs and support local economies, but only if they’re done right — protecting taxpayers and our natural resources, and ensuring that the benefits truly serve Wisconsin communities.”
David Crowley
At a gubernatorial candidate forum in November, Crowley was mostly supportive of data center development, saying the government shouldn’t be picking “winners and losers” and instead “make sure that this is fertile ground for entrepreneurs and businesses to either stay or move right here to the state of Wisconsin.”
In a statement to the Examiner, a campaign spokesperson said Crowley wants to encourage investment in Wisconsin’s economy while enforcing stringent environmental regulations, making sure companies pay the cost of increased energy use and giving local governments the power to say no to a data center project.
“Growth that drives up rates or drains local resources is not innovation. It’s a bad deal,” the spokesperson said. “Communities will have clear authority to condition or deny projects based on energy and water use, demand transparency, and community benefit agreements, because the people who live with these projects deserve the final say. Crowley’s approach is simple: Wisconsin will lead in technology and economic growth without raising utility bills, without sacrificing our natural resources, and without letting Big Tech write the rules. Development will be transparent, accountable, and judged by whether or not it delivers real benefits to the people who live in Wisconsin.”
Francesca Hong
In a policy framework released last week, the Madison-area representative to the state Assembly called for a moratorium on the construction of new data centers while the state works out how to responsibly manage their effects. Hong also wants to end sales tax and use tax exemptions for data centers, require the construction of more renewable energy sources and increase environmental protections on data centers. She is also a co-sponsor on the Democrats’ data center bill in the Legislature.
In an interview with the Examiner, Hong said Wisconsin’s political leaders have a responsibility to listen to local opposition to data centers.
“Our communities deserve long-term investments and contributions to their local communities,” she said. “The bipartisan opposition that is building coalitions against AI data centers means that elected officials have a responsibility to get more data on data centers, which is what informed our decision to support a moratorium on the construction of new data centers.”
Hong said that on the campaign trail she has heard from voters who want Wisconsin to be “a hostile environment for AI data centers.” She added that it’s a bipartisan issue, which presents an opportunity to her as a Democratic socialist running for governor.
“I think there’s an opportunity here, not only for us to engage the left and bring them into electoral politics here in Wisconsin, but actually build that coalition amongst voters who are across the political spectrum and recognizing that as working class people, they’re getting screwed and they’re stressed, and they’re right to demand that their government do more to hold corporate power accountable,” she said.
Missy Hughes
At the November forum hosted by the Wisconsin Technology Council, Hughes, who as the former head of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation was involved in efforts to build the Microsoft data center at the former Foxconn site, promoted their positive potential for the state.
“To have some of these data centers land here in Wisconsin, provide incredible property tax and revenue for the communities that are really determining how to pay their bills, how to build new schools, how to build new fire departments, it’s an opportunity for those communities to access some of that investment and to benefit from it,” she said, adding that a data center isn’t right for every community and local pushback should be considered.
Sara Rodriguez
A spokesperson for the current lieutenant governor said that she would issue an executive order to freeze utility rates while state officials develop a long-term data center plan.
That long-term plan would include ways to prevent energy costs from increasing while making sure local residents get a say.
“Sara strongly believes data center projects should be developed collaboratively with local communities. That means early community input, clear communication, and transparent planning to reduce misinformation and ensure projects make sense locally,” the spokesperson said. “Data centers aren’t the right fit for every community, but when done right they can bring real benefits — including jobs, redevelopment of otherwise unusable land, and new revenue that can help local governments lower taxes for residents, as we’ve seen in places like Janesville.”
The campaign added that agreements with local governments must include provisions to prevent developers from bailing out and abandoning communities.
“Sara also believes all details must be negotiated up front in binding agreements. If utilities make grid investments or communities commit resources, developers must be on the hook if a project is delayed or canceled,” the spokesperson said. “Families and local governments shouldn’t be left holding the bag. Wisconsin can support growth and innovation, but only if it’s fair, transparent, and doesn’t raise costs for working families.”
Kelda Roys
The Madison-area state senator is a co-sponsor of the Democrats’ data center bill and in an interview with the Examiner, said that as governor she’d support regulation that follows a similar framework to the legislation.
“I think there needs to be a statewide strategy with guardrails that protect our workers, our environment and our consumers from massive price increases,” she said. “I’m very skeptical of this idea that the biggest and richest and most powerful companies in the world should get to just come in and pick off local communities and local elected leaders one by one and make these sweetheart deals in the dark that screw over the public. And I think in the absence of statewide standards and transparency, that is what is happening.”
She said the state should use its sway to insert itself as a negotiating party in agreements with data center developers in an effort to keep energy costs low, reduce environmental impact and protect Wisconsin workers.
She also said that the state government doing something to ease the budget crunch facing local governments will put those local officials in a better position when deciding whether or not to allow a data center to be constructed.
“Part of the reason that we’re having this problem is that we have put local governments in an impossible situation because of the fiscal mismanagement and the harm of Republican politicians,” she said. “Communities will have more bargaining power when they don’t feel like, ‘Gosh, we’re desperate for more revenue, and our hands are really tied by the state. This is the only option,’ right? They will be in a stronger negotiating position if this is a nice to have, but not a necessary to have. And that’s the position that we want communities to be in. I want Wisconsinites to be able to have a say in our communities’ future, to be able to have an open and transparent process where we can say, ‘actually, we don’t think that this site is an appropriate one for a data center.’”
Josh Schoemann
The Washington County executive said at the November candidate forum there is an “abundance of opportunity” with data centers but that the state needs to be “very, very strategic and smart about where” data centers are built. In a statement from his campaign, he said the state needs to prioritize developing nuclear power to provide enough energy for data centers and everyday Wisconsinites.
“I have great optimism about the potential for data centers and AI for Wisconsin, but it must be people focused,” he said. “Our lack of sufficient energy supply and distribution is a real threat to strategic growth and personal property rights. Growing up in Kewaunee, we had clean and efficient nuclear power right in our community. We need to get back to nuclear energy as a large part of a diverse energy portfolio — not just for data centers, but for the multitude of new homes we need for people, as well as more innovation and industry.”
Tom Tiffany
The Republican congressman and frontrunner in the party’s primary has often opposed the development of large solar farms in and around his northern Wisconsin district, arguing they’ve taken too much of the region’s farmland out of commission.
In a statement from his campaign, Tiffany said the development of data centers should be handled “responsibly.”
“As demand for internet infrastructure continues to grow, data centers present new opportunities for economic development, but like any innovation, they must be developed responsibly,” he said. “Wisconsin families and small businesses should not be left footing the bill for increased electricity demand, local residents deserve a seat at the table when decisions are made about these projects, and taxpayer subsidies should not be used to build data centers on productive farmland. Growth should be responsible and transparent, without shifting costs onto existing ratepayers.”
Login
