This story was produced by Grist and co-published with States Newsroom. It is  part of the Grist series Vital Signs, exploring the ways climate change affects your health. This reporting initiative is made possible thanks to support from the Wellcome Trust.

Bailey Magers and Sunil Kumar cut strange figures on Pensacola Beach. Bags of disinfectant solution surrounded them on the white sand; their gloved hands juggled test tubes while layers of rubber and plastic shielded their skin from the elements. As the two organized their seawater samples on the popular Florida beach last August, an older woman wearing a swimsuit walked over to ask what they were doing.

“We’re just actively monitoring water quality,” they told her, but she pressed on.

“Are you looking for that flesh-eating bacteria?”

“We’re looking into it,” they replied, hoping not to frighten her. The woman turned back toward the ocean, her curiosity satisfied. As she walked away, Kumar noticed that she had scrapes and bruises on her body. A few minutes later, he watched her step into the waves. He shook off a chill and returned to the task at hand. 

Magers and Kumar study a bacteria called Vibrio, part of a lineage of ancient marine species that likely emerged sometime around the Paleozoic Era. Enormous, shallow seas flooded the massive, interconnected supercontinents that constituted the Earth’s landmass at the time, and complex marine ecosystems developed that thrived in these temperate, freshly-formed bodies of water. Researchers think there are more than 70 Vibrio species in the environment today, hundreds of millions of years later. The organisms float in warm, brackish water, attaching themselves to plankton and algae and accumulating in prolific water-filtering species like clams and oysters. 

A small number of Vibrio species can sicken and even kill. In worst-case scenarios, a person who has been exposed to the most dangerous of them — by swimming in brackish water with an open wound or ingesting a piece of raw shellfish that is contaminated with the tasteless and odorless toxin — may find themselves with only hours before the flesh on one or more extremities starts to bruise, swell, and decay. Without the quick aid of powerful antibiotics, septic shock can set in and lead to death. Anyone can get infected, though it is much more likely in people who have liver disease or are immunocompromised, elderly, or diabetic.

Climate change is making the world’s oceans, which have absorbed more than 90 percent of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions, more hospitable to Vibrio. Research shows that temperature and salinity are the largest predictors of how widespread Vibrio bacteria are. As water temperatures rise, so does the concentration of Vibrio in seawater — boosting the risk of infection for beachgoers and shellfish consumers. The bacteria start getting active in water temperatures above 60 degrees Fahrenheit and multiply rapidly as coastal waters warm throughout the summer. In recent years, scientists have documented Vibrio expanding into places that were once too cold to support the bacteria, pushing as far north along the U.S. East Coast as Maine and appearing with more prevalence in temperate seas around the world. 

Vibriosis infections in general are the leading cause of shellfish-related illness in the U.S. They have increased “more than any other illness caused by a pathogen in the U.S. food supply” since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, started keeping tabs on such illnesses in 1996, according to a 2019 analysis by the International Association for Food Protection. The report attributed the precipitous rise to a “perfect storm” of factors that include climate change, food handling practices, expanding globalization, a patchwork of regulatory oversight, and improved diagnosis. 

On their conspicuous expeditions to Pensacola and other Sunshine State beaches, Magers and Kumar are trying to understand where, and when, harmful Vibrio species are present across the state. The research they’re doing is part of an ongoing effort by a laboratory at the University of Florida to create a Vibrio early warning system for the eastern United States — a program that can alert public health departments to high Vibrio concentrations in any given area a month in advance. How many limbs would be saved, Magers wonders, if doctors and nurses could be warned ahead of time that their emergency rooms would soon see an uptick in these chronically underdiagnosed infections? 

The work serves more than one purpose: As Vibrio bacteria spread north into cooler waters, they serve as a first warning signal of changing marine conditions — giving researchers a heads-up that the familiar composition of marine species in their local waters may be starting to shift. In Europe’s Baltic Sea, for example, a spike in Vibrio infections in July 2014 closely mirrored a heatwave that rapidly warmed the shallow sea. The incident showed researchers that Vibrio spikes herald unusually warm marine conditions — and they have since been utilized as barometers for ocean heatwaves and sea-surface warming patterns, not just food safety.

“We see Vibrio as the indicator for climate change,” said Kyle Brumfield, a microbiologist at the University of Maryland who has been studying the bacteria for a decade. “We can use the presence of Vibrio and Vibrio cases as a proxy for water health in general.”

The CDC estimates that about 80,000 cases of vibriosis occur in the U.S. every year, resulting in about 100 deaths. Of those 80,000 cases, most are caused by a Vibrio called parahaemolyticus, which most commonly results in gastroenteritis, or food poisoning. The vast majority of the deaths, however, are caused by a type of Vibrio called vulnificus — the Latin word for “wound-making.”

Vulnificus is so potent it can squeeze through a pinhole-sized cut in the skin and lead to death in just 24 hours. In the last five years, the CDC registered 429 such vulnificus cases, plus 136 foodborne cases. But even though foodborne cases are less numerous, the patients that contract vulnificus by eating contaminated shellfish are more likely to die than those infected via open wounds. Thirteen percent of those nonfoodborne cases died, compared to 32 percent of people who got the infection from eating seafood. Most cases occur in the Gulf and Atlantic coastal regions.

As far as infectious diseases go, vulnificus is exceedingly rare: The CDC reports between 150 and 200 cases a year. The sexually-transmitted disease chlamydia, by comparison, one of the most common bacterial infections in the U.S., infects northward of 1.5 million Americans annually. But vulnificus’ astonishing speed and high fatality rate — 15 to 50 percent, depending on the health of the person exposed and the route of infection — makes it a unique public health threat, particularly as climate change grows its pathways of exposure. 

Vulnificus is not the kind of pathogen you’d want behaving erratically, but that’s exactly what it’s been doing since the late 2010s. Across the Eastern Seaboard, local and federal health officials have been reporting “unusual increases” in vulnificus prevalence — jagged spikes in infections that appear to correspond to extreme weather events like hurricanes and marine heatwaves.

In 2022 and 2024, years when the brackish water that Vibrio bacteria thrive in was pushed inland by major hurricanes, Florida’s public health department reported 17 and 19 deaths, respectively, linked to vulnificus exposure via open wounds. North Carolina, New York, and Connecticut also saw small clusters of infections during a record-breaking heatwave in the summer of 2023. “As coastal water temperatures increase,” the CDC warned in its investigation of those outbreaks, “V. vulnificus infections are expected to become more common.”

A 2023 study that analyzed a 30-year database of confirmed vulnificus infections from outdoor recreation along the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic coasts found the northern boundary of infections has moved north by a rate of 30 miles per year since 1998. The study noted that “V. vulnificus infections may expand their current range to encompass major population centers around New York,” and that annual case numbers may double as temperatures rise and America’s elderly population grows. 

“In the 1980s, Vibrio abundance would increase in the late spring and stay high through the summer and drop in the middle of October,” Brumfield, who conducts research on Vibrio in Maryland, said. “Now … we can pretty much find them almost year-round.”

Two ways to get infected

Just how worried we should be about the changing dynamics of Vibrio bacteria depends on who you ask and what you read. The gruesome and fast-acting nature of the vulnificus infection makes it enticing fodder for local and national news media, fueling a spree of terrifying reports every time a new severe infection or death surfaces. “Virginia dad wades in calf-high water, dies 2 weeks later of flesh-eating bacteria that ‘ravaged’ his legs,” read a recent headline in People magazine. “2 dead after eating oysters, contracting flesh-eating bacteria, officials say,” per a 2025 web story about two deaths linked to oyster consumption in Louisiana and Florida. Like many others in their mold, neither story mentions how rare the bacteria are. 

The press is bad news for some in the seafood industry, which does not welcome a national conversation about the rise in vibriosis cases, vulnificus in particular. Shellfish farmers and industry representatives that Grist spoke to in Florida and New York argued media attention on the safety of their products is unwarranted. “‘Flesh-eating bacteria,’” said Leslie Sturmer, a researcher who works for the University of Florida’s shellfish aquaculture extension program and consults with the shellfish industry on research and regulation — “the media loves it.”

Paul McCormick, an oyster farmer in Long Island who sells 750,000 oysters a year, thinks all press is bad press. “Even if the title of your article says ‘New York oysters are the safest oysters in the universe,’” he told me on the phone from his office in East Moriches in January, “you’ve already created a problem.”

In unrefrigerated oysters left out in warm conditions, Vibrio bacteria reproduce every 20 minutes. But in 2010, states began deploying strict protocols known as “Vibrio control plans,” which require harvesters to rapidly cool their catch onboard and then refrigerate it at a shellfish processing facility within a set number of hours. The measures have proven effective at stopping the growth of Vibrio in harvested shellfish and preventing disease.  

The fact that infections can happen in one of two ways — shellfish consumption and seawater exposure — makes it easy to shift blame and point fingers. Consumers have more control over how much exposure they have to Vibrio than they have with E. coli, for example. A person with a kidney condition can choose not to eat oysters on the half shell. E. Coli, often found in raw vegetables, is far tricker to avoid. Likewise, someone with an open wound can opt not to bathe in brackish waters if they are aware of the risks lurking in the surf.

For shellfish industry representatives, personal responsibility is the primary way to bring caseloads down. “The person is the risk,” said Sturmer. “Not the climate, not the water, not the bacteria.” Implicitly, this appears to be the government’s position as well: There is currently no numerical threshold at which state public health agencies will “shut down” a beach for outdoor recreation, though states will issue public advisories and, very rarely, close beaches if they happen to find high levels of Vibrio in the water.

But that perspective doesn’t account for the rapid marine changes brought on by climate change, the patchiness of vibriosis awareness, and the fact that Americans often make personal decisions that are at odds with their own health and safety.

The shellfishers Grist spoke to fully acknowledged the research underpinning Vibrio’s spread. McCormick studied environmental science in college, and Sturmer is running her own climate experiments in a laboratory in the fishing town of Cedar Key, Florida, putting different kinds of clams and oysters through heat stress tests to determine which species are best equipped to weather the decades ahead. Marine mollusks are uniquely threatened by rising ocean temperatures, ocean acidification, and sea level rise, issues that can lead to thin shells, low crop yields, and mass die-offs on farms. A detailed understanding of climate science, in other words, is good business for those who make their living fishing.

The problem, according to Sturmer, is that shellfishers have been unfairly singled out for a health issue that doesn’t affect most consumers and is more often contracted by ocean bathing rather than raw oyster consumption. While beaches stay open even when Vibrio bacteria are present in the water and lead to infections, a small number of foodborne vibriosis cases can trigger state closures of shellfish harvesting areas and product recalls. The National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science noted that these precautions “erode consumer confidence and likely decrease sales.” 

The panic that ensues after media reports of Vibrio infections has a similar effect: A 2024 study asked more than 350 shellfish consumers in Rhode Island — a state that relies heavily on its shellfish industry, particularly in summer months when people vacation along the coastline — to bid on entrees of raw oysters and clams. After showing study participants a real newspaper article about a 2015 Vibrio outbreak linked to an oyster farm in Massachusetts, the researchers reported that the news had a “significant negative impact” on participants’ willingness to bid on oysters. It had a depressive effect on clam sales, too.

“You should really be out there beating the drum on botulism or salmonella or E. Coli,” Sturmer told me on a recent visit to her lab in Cedar Key. “Why worry about [vulnificus] when the number of cases are so minimal?” Sturmer is quick to point out that even the term “flesh-eating bacteria” is a misnomer. She’s right, in a sense: The bacteria doesn’t “eat” tissue; it destroys it. But it’s hard to say whether someone who has survived a bout of necrotizing fasciitis, the medical term for what vulnificus does to the flesh, would care to dispute the difference.

Protecting consumers from being sickened by the deadly bacteria isn’t as simple as trusting people with underlying medical conditions not to eat shellfish. Americans consume 2.5 billion oysters every year, half of which are eaten raw. Vibrio infections, which most often resemble food poisoning, are still underreported and underrecognized, even among individuals who are most at risk of developing a severe infection. Vulnificus infections are also underreported, but much less so than other Vibrio-related infections because they often require a hospital or emergency room visit. 

“I’ve cared for many people with salmonella infections and water-borne infectious processes, but this is the one that is likely the most serious,” said Norman Beatty, an associate professor at the University of Florida College of Medicine who is also a practicing infectious disease doctor in Gainesville, and has seen limbs and lives lost to vulnificus. 

Identifying coastal areas most at risk

When it comes to preventing Vibrio infections, the work Magers and Kumar are doing could take some of the onus off of individual responsibility. The researchers are identifying which parts of the eastern U.S. coastline will be most risky for overall vibriosis infections, and vulnificus specifically, as waters warm. Alongside a group of microbiologists from the University of Maryland, including Brumfield, the scientists have developed a computer model that can predict how high the vibriosis risk will be in any given coastal county on the Gulf or East coasts a month in advance. The team trained their model by pairing the CDC’s count of Vibrio-related foodborne and waterborne illnesses from 1997 to 2019 with satellite data that measures the conditions that fuel Vibrio growth, such as water temperature and salinity. 

The system is far from perfect. When the model was first trained and evaluated, it was only 23 percent precise in pinpointing high-risk counties, meaning just one in four of the counties the program labeled as high-risk actually ended up seeing a vibriosis case in a given month. But it was very good at determining which counties were low-risk, capturing those regions with 99 percent precision. And it improved over time as the quality of the data they fed it got better. When they had the model do a test run on data collected by the Florida Department of Public Health from 2020 to 2024, 72 percent of total cases occurred in counties the tool flagged as high-risk for vibriosis. 

Perhaps most significantly, the model was especially adept at predicting high-risk counties ahead of Hurricanes Helene and Milton in 2024 — more than 80 percent of the vibriosis cases that occurred in Florida in the aftermath of those hurricanes were reported in counties the model had already flagged as high-risk. 

The tool is geared toward predicting water-borne infections, but it may also provide useful information to the shellfishing industry, though the system isn’t a replacement for the established protocols farmers already use — protocols that have proven to be effective, particularly in states that are aggressive about enforcing them. What the new tool could do, however, is supplement those Vibrio control plans, especially when an upcoming weather pattern deviates from the historical norm — something that has been happening a lot lately.

States currently use a rolling five-year average illness rate to calculate how many minutes or hours harvested shellfish can stay on a boat before moving into indoor refrigeration. In February, for example, Florida shellfishers have to get their oysters into refrigeration by 5 p.m. on the day of harvest. In July, they have no more than two hours, or they have to cool their catch in ice slurries on board. But these timetables don’t account for sudden temperature anomalies.

“It’s going to be 80 degrees this week in Alabama,” Andy DePaola, a Gulf Coast oyster farmer, told me in February. “Yet I can keep my oysters out for, like, 14 hours, because the rolling five-year average is 20 degrees less than that anomaly.” (DePaola is also a microbiologist who worked on Vibrio at the FDA for the better part of 40 years, and is the author of the 2019 analysis that diagnosed the “perfect storm” for Vibrio spread.)

But the shellfish industry doesn’t appear enthusiastic about the idea of assigning counties a risk category based on Vibrio prevalence. Vibrio researchers, by their own admission, haven’t done a good job of reaching out to shellfishers to find out how such a tool would work best for them. At an August meeting of the Delaware Bay Section of the ​​New Jersey Shellfisheries Council last year, the director of a shellfish research laboratory brought up the idea of using Vibrio predictive models to “determine optimal days to harvest to reduce the transfer of infection to humans.” A lengthy discussion ensued. The consensus, ultimately, was that the model was a bad idea, and could be “used against the industry.”

Not all shellfishers are dead set against the kind of work Magers and Kumar are doing. “If Vibrio is an indicator of global warming, then that’s just an unfortunate bad luck scene for us,” McCormick, the Long Island oysterman, said. But it’s hard for him to see what relevance that research has to an industry that already has its own methods of controlling Vibrio. “In my mind that exists in one realm and the safety of our oysters is a whole different thing.”

As we move deeper into the 21st century, however, those two realms will have more overlap. If countries keep up their current pace of greenhouse gas emissions, most coastal communities along the East Coast will be environmentally primed for vibriosis outbreaks during peak summer months by midcentury. It won’t be a question of if there will be more vibriosis cases — it will be a matter of how to manage them. That’s the scenario Magers and Kumar are preparing for.

“In 30, 40, 100 years, these models won’t even matter because the risk is so high,” said Magers, the lead author of the predictive modeling study. “When it gets to that point, it would probably be a different kind of modeling strategy where we’d be modeling case numbers instead of infection risk.” 

---

Know the facts about Vibrio, a bacteria found in coastal waters and raw oysters

Stay informed about your risk level as you enjoy fresh shellfish and beach trips this summer. 

By Lyndsey Gilpin

This story was produced by Grist and co-published with States Newsroom.

What is Vibrio? 

Vibrio is a type of bacteria that has been around for hundreds of millions of years; researchers have identified more than 70 species. These species are mostly harmless, but some can cause infection. The bacteria thrive in warm, brackish (slightly salty) water such as estuaries and bays, attaching themselves to plankton and algae and accumulating in prolific water-filtering species like clams and oysters. Serious infections typically happen either through exposure to an open wound in saltwater or, more rarely, ingestion of raw shellfish that contain the bacteria. 

The concentration of Vibrio in coastal waterways is higher from May through October, when temperatures are warmer. Most U.S. cases are in the Gulf and Atlantic coastal regions. Vibrio is tasteless and odorless. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, estimates that about 80,000 cases of vibriosis (an infection caused by the Vibrio bacteria) occur in the U.S. every year, resulting in about 100 deaths. Florida has the highest number of cases, with about 20 percent reported from the Indian River Lagoon region, a popular recreation destination on the Atlantic Coast. 

What happens if you come into contact with Vibrio?

Most people are not at risk of developing illness, or they may have only mild symptoms. However, those with compromised immune systems can develop life-threatening infections. 

The majority of the 80,000 annual U.S. cases are caused by a Vibrio called parahaemolyticus, which most often infects people via the raw seafood they eat and usually leads to gastroenteritis, or food poisoning. The symptoms may include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach cramps, fever and chills, weakness, fatigue, and headache. 

A different type of Vibrio, vulnificus, is much less common, but can cause severe illness. The infected wound may be red, swollen, and painful, or you may develop mild gastrointestinal issues such as watery diarrhea, stomach cramps, or vomiting. Symptoms typically appear within 12 to 24 hours and can last up to seven days. Healthy people tend to fight off the infection on their own. But if flesh on one or more extremities to bruise, swell, and decay, or symptoms of sepsis occur, it is a medical emergency. Vulnificus can squeeze through a pinhole-sized cut in the skin and lead to death in just 24 hours. This severe infection is rare, but it has a 15 to 50 percent fatality rate; the vast majority of the 100 annual deaths are from this strain. A severe vulnificus infection is much more likely in people who have liver disease or are immunocompromised, elderly, or diabetic.

How concerned should I be — and how do I stay safe? 

You don’t necessarily need to avoid oyster bars or cancel your beach trip, but you should know how to stay informed and take precautions. Here are a few ways to do so:

• Be aware that there are many fearmongering headlines about flesh-eating bacteria, despite vulnificus being one of the rarest forms of Vibrio exposure. Vibrio doesn’t attack random healthy flesh — there must be exposure through an open wound (a break in the skin) or it must be ingested, most often through raw shellfish. People who get sick often have underlying health conditions. 
• If you don’t feel well after eating raw seafood or swimming in brackish water, don’t wait — go to the doctor. Some medical professionals, particularly those in areas where the bacteria hasn’t historically infected people, don’t know what vibriosis is. Advocate for yourself — ask for a test. 
• If you have liver disease, your risk is much higher than the general population’s. Keep an eye out for public health advisories from state and local health officials and avoid swimming in ocean water with an open wound or consuming raw shellfish in warm months. Note that ocean temperatures, especially along the lower Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, have been elevated outside the typical seasonal range in some recent years.
• Be aware when eating raw shellfish, particularly raw oysters. It’s best to be confident that the shellfish was refrigerated and stored in compliance with government standards. The vast majority of foodborne Vibrio cases lead to food poisoning. (Food poisoning from bacteria is always a risk when eating uncooked shellfish and many other foods like salads or deli meat.)

How is climate change affecting Vibrio?

Climate change is making the world’s oceans, which have absorbed more than 90 percent of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions, more hospitable to Vibrio. The bacteria start getting active in temperatures above 60 degrees Fahrenheit and multiply rapidly as waters warm throughout the summer. Vibrio is expanding into places that were once too cold to support it, farther north on the U.S. East coast and in other temperate seas around the world. As it spreads, it serves as a first warning signal of changing marine conditions.

What’s being done to address Vibrio?

There’s a lot of research happening to better understand the risks these bacteria pose under changing environmental conditions: A group of microbiologists at the University of Maryland, alongside other scientists, have developed a computer model that can predict how high the risk of vibriosis will be in any given coastal county in the eastern U.S. a month in advance. The team trained its model, which is still under development, by pairing the CDC’s count of Vibrio-related foodborne and waterborne illnesses from 1997 to 2019 with satellite data that measures the conditions that fuel Vibrio growth, such as water temperature and salinity. It’s far from perfect, but it’s improving. And it was especially adept at predicting high-risk counties ahead of hurricanes Helene and Milton in 2024 — more than 80 percent of the vibriosis cases that occurred in Florida in the aftermath of those hurricanes were reported in counties the model had already flagged as high-risk. 

Employees of two Wisconsin clinics operated by Rogers Behavioral Health voted by large majorities in favor of union representation Wednesday after more than two months in which the mental health nonprofit had campaigned heavily against the union.

In West Allis, employees voted 53-4 in favor of joining the National Union of Healthcare Workers. In Madison, the vote to join the union was 26-4. 

The Oconomowoc-based Rogers has not commented on the outcome.

The next step will be for the National Labor Relations Board to certify the results. But a federal lawsuit challenging the agency is still pending. In addition, Rogers said in public statements as well as in communications to the workers before the vote that the company would not begin bargaining with the union until all its appeals have been exhausted. 

The nonprofit campaigned actively against unionization, telling employees that a union would not have been in the interests of the staff, the patients or the organization. In a final letter distributed on Monday, Rogers urged employees to vote no and made statements that the organization had made mistakes and wanted to be given another chance to improve relationships with the staff without a union.

Union supporters welcomed the outcome of Wednesday’s votes.

“We are thrilled with the overwhelming victory,” said Stephani Lohman, a nurse practitioner who was among those active in the union organizing campaign. “Over the last few weeks Rogers has shown us exactly why we need a union by running an aggressive anti-worker campaign, trying everything in their toolbox to intimidate and demoralize us, but it failed spectacularly because it was so cruel and wicked that it drove everyone to support the union.”

Lohman was one of three employees fired shortly after workers announced their petition for a union. The union has filed unfair labor practice charges over the terminations, claiming that the three were fired in retaliation for their support for unionization, which is illegal under federal law.

Rogers has declined to explain the firings, citing employment confidentiality, but said that it has not violated any laws.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans, and one Democrat, maintained their support for President Donald Trump’s war in Iran, after blocking for the fifth time a resolution that would force the president to seek congressional authorization for further action in the Middle East.

The vote failed 46-51, largely following the same split as previous failed measures. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., opposed the resolution to rein in Trump, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted in favor, just as they have in the four times prior. 

Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, David McCormick, R-Pa., and Mark Warner, D-Va. were absent.

Thirteen U.S. service members and thousands of civilians across the Middle East have died in the war, which the Trump administration has claimed is about regime change and stopping Iran’s nuclear program.

As of Wednesday, the Pentagon updated the number of American troops injured in the conflict to 400.

Fetterman and all but one Senate Republican blocked the measure one day after Trump extended a ceasefire with Iran after the prospects of a second round of peace talks fell through. Trump did not specify an end date to the ceasefire extension but announced the United States would not back down on its blockade of ships traveling to and from Iranian ports.

Trump claimed late Tuesday night that Iran is “collapsing financially!” 

“They want the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately- Starving for cash! Losing 500 Million Dollars a day. Military and Police complaining that they are not getting paid. SOS!!!” he wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social.

U.S. military forces fired on and seized a sanctioned Iranian cargo ship Sunday.

Iran’s foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, wrote Tuesday on X that the seizure was “an act of war and thus a violation of the ceasefire.” 

Early Wednesday, Iran claimed responsibility for attacking two commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, a key narrow maritime passage where a fifth of the world’s petroleum flowed prior to the war. Iranian parliament representative Ebrahim Rezaei declared on X, “an eye for an eye, an oil tanker for an oil tanker.” 

Baldwin leads opposition to war

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., lead sponsor of Wednesday’s War Powers Resolution, said on the floor ahead of the vote that Trump sold Americans “a bad bill of goods” when he campaigned on lowering costs and not starting any new foreign wars.

“This war has taken us backwards and created more problems for the people that I work for,” she said, citing increasing fuel and fertilizer costs as a result of a standstill in the Strait of Hormuz.

The latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation numbers reflected a 21% increase in the cost of fuel from February to March.

A gallon of regular gas remained on average just north of $4 across the country, according to AAA.

United Airlines announced Wednesday it plans to raise airfare as much as 20% to offset the cost of jet fuel, according to multiple media reports.

Brent crude oil, the global oil market’s standard, spiked above $100 a barrel Wednesday, as it has numerous times since the beginning of the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran.

“Less than two months ago, oil prices were normal, the Straits of Hormuz was open, commerce was happening,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., ahead of the vote. 

“And then President Trump made the decision without a rationale, without a plan, without consulting with allies, without consulting or seeking a vote of Congress to enter the nation into yet another war in the Middle East. And the entire world is suffering,” Kaine said.

Trump entered the joint war on Iran alongside Israel on Feb. 28.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said passing the resolution would be “unwise.”

“We’ve been through these votes recently, and nothing has occurred in the makeup of this body or in the situation in Iran or the Middle East to materially change since the last time we voted on this matter,” the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee said on the floor ahead of the vote. 

Wicker was the only Republican to speak out against the resolution during Wednesday afternoon’s debate.

Earlier vote

Senate Democrats last forced a vote to stop Trump’s actions in Iran on April 15, just days after the president threatened on social media to wipe out Iran’s “whole civilization” and to bomb its power plants and bridges.

Senate Democrats say they have no plans to stop introducing War Powers Resolutions and speaking out against the war.

Several sent a letter Sunday to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth demanding answers about “troubling allegations of civilian harm incidents,” including a strike on an elementary school that killed more than 160 children on the war’s opening day.

“We are concerned that these were all preventable tragedies. The high human toll of this war reflects the administration’s broader disregard for the strategic, legal, and moral imperative to minimize civilian harm,” the senators wrote.

The letter, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., was also signed by Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M; Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii; Tina Smith, D-Minn.; Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.; Raphael Warnock, D-Ga.; Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.; Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.; Peter Welch, D-Vt. and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. 

The 11 senators who joined Baldwin in sponsoring Wednesday’s War Powers Resolution, a vestige of Congress’ efforts to rein in President Richard Nixon during the Vietnam War, included Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sens. Gillibrand, Kaine, Merkley and Van Hollen, as well as Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; Chris Murphy, D-Conn.; Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.; Andy Kim, D-N.J.; Cory Booker, D-N.J.; and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday handed Michigan’s Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel a victory, offering a unanimous decision that laid to rest a yearslong debate over whether her case to shut down Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline should be heard in state or federal court. 

In an 14-page opinion penned by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court held that Enbridge had missed its 30-day window to have the case removed to federal court, with the Canadian energy company making its request 887 days after receiving Nessel’s initial complaint. 

The company’s Line 5 pipeline has been a long-running concern for tribal nations and environmentalists in the region, with Nessel calling it a “ticking time bomb” for the Great Lakes.

Running from northwestern Wisconsin into Sarnia, Ontario, the 645-mile long pipeline passes through Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, with a four-mile segment of dual pipelines running through the Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Huron and Lake Michigan meet. The pipeline carries up to 23 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids through the straits each day.

“Today’s decision honors the truth that the Straits of Mackinac are not a bargaining chip and reaffirms what Tribal Nations have always known – we have the right and the responsibility to protect the Great Lakes,” Bay Mills Indian Community President Whitney Gravelle said in a statement. “The Supreme Court saw through Enbridge’s delay tactics and upheld the rule of law. This is a victory for our waters, our treaty rights, and the next seven generations who depend on the Great Lakes for life itself.”

In an emailed statement, Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy noted that Nessel’s case has been stayed, awaiting the results of an appeal in another court case, which Enbridge filed against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and the director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources after they revoked the company’s easement to operate Line 5 in the Straits of Mackinac.

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan in December ruled that the move was unenforceable, with the Pipeline Safety Act of 1992 preempting states from placing safety regulations on interstate pipelines. Whitmer has appealed the decision.

“Setting aside the procedural decision, the fact remains that the safety of Line 5 is regulated exclusively by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,” Duffy said, noting that the agency has not identified any safety issues that would warrant its shutdown.

A grand jury indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on charges of wire fraud, bank fraud and money laundering brought by the U.S. Department of Justice, which alleges payments the organization made to informants in extremist groups functioned as financial support for them.

Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday that a federal grand jury in the Middle District of Alabama returned an 11-count indictment against the SPLC, a civil rights nonprofit based in Montgomery, Alabama, that helped take down some of the most prominent white supremacist groups in the country.

“As the indictment describes, the SPLC was not dismantling these groups,” Blanche said. “It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred.”

SPLC interim CEO Bryan Fair said in a statement Tuesday evening that the organization was “outraged by the false allegations levied against SPLC — an organization that for 55 years has stood as a beacon of hope fighting white supremacy and various forms of injustice to create a multi-racial democracy where we can all live and thrive.” 

“Taking on violent hate and extremist groups is among the most dangerous work there is, and we believe it is also among the most important work we do,” Fair said. “To be clear, this program saved lives.”

Fair said in a video released earlier on Tuesday that SPLC was the subject of a criminal probe and that he believed it was connected with a now-discontinued paid informant program, which Fair said provided information and intelligence on extremist groups that was passed to law enforcement.

The indictment characterizes those payments, dating back to the 1980s, as funding for leaders and organizers of racist groups including the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Nation and the National Alliance.

No individuals were named in the indictment, but Blanche at the news conference, referred to one individual who was paid $270,000 over eight years. In total, according to the indictment, between 2014 and 2023, SPLC paid at least $3 million to eight people.

The indictment also pointed to an imperial wizard of the United Klans of America, as well as an alleged member of the online leadership chat group that planned the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017.

Additionally, the indictment accuses the organization of funneling money to violent extremist groups by using the informants SPLC recruited.

FBI Director Kash Patel said at the news conference that SPLC tried to hide criminal activity from banks.

“They set up shell companies and entities around America so that the financial institutions that we rely on as everyday Americans were deceived in believing that the money was not coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center in perpetuation of this scheme and fraud, but rather fictitious entities they stood up to perpetuate this ongoing fraud,” Patel said.

The indictment includes  six counts of wire fraud, alleging SPLC defrauded donors; three counts of making false statements to a federally insured bank and one count of money laundering.

Fair said earlier on Tuesday that the paid informant program operated “in the shadow of the height of the Civil Rights Movement, which had seen bombings at churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system.”

The interim CEO said that SPLC did not “share our use of informants broadly with anyone to protect the identity and safety of the informants and their families.”

“And while we no longer work with paid informants, we continue to take their safety seriously,” he said.  

A spokesperson for the organization said Tuesday that the program “predates me and a lot of people here. Most people who were involved are not even with the organization, because it has been a very long time since it has ended.”

Fair accused President Donald Trump and the DOJ of targeting SPLC for political purposes.

“Today, the federal government has been weaponized to dismantle the rights of our nation’s most vulnerable people, and any organization like ours that stands in the breach,” Fair said. “We stood in the vanguard then, and we stand in the vanguard today. We will not be intimidated into silence or contrition, and we will not abandon our mission or the communities we serve.”

The SPLC, founded in 1971, rose to prominence by bringing lawsuits against the Klan and other organizations that forced them to declare bankruptcy. Members of the Klan bombed the organization’s headquarters in Montgomery, Alabama, in July 1983. The group has also done work on voting rights, immigration and labor issues.

The group has often been outspoken and critical of Trump, and Republicans and conservatives have made it a target for years, saying it lumps right-wing groups in with extremist organizations. The Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the SPLC in December.

Updated at 6:37 p.m. with details of indictment, comments from DOJ press conference and reaction from SPLC.

WASHINGTON — Nearly all Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee failed to show up for a Wednesday hearing convened by Democrats to highlight President Donald Trump’s aggressive tactics in his mass deportation campaign that have ensnared U.S. citizens. 

It marked a rare full committee hearing that Democrats were allowed to conduct because of Minority Day in the House. 

Democrats used the opportunity to call witnesses who are U.S. citizens and were harmed, in some cases shot, by federal immigration officers. Lawmakers also focused on two U.S. citizens killed by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis, Renee Good and Alex Pretti. 

Following the deadly shootings in January, Democrats refused to approve any more funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, which has led to a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security since mid-February.  

“Under President Trump, ICE and CBP have killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti in cold blood, and shot, beat, harassed, arrested, or locked up countless more innocent people,” the top Democrat on the committee, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, said. “Congress cannot stand idly by while Americans are hurt and killed by their own government.”

Democrats also invited Trump officials tasked with crafting and carrying out the president’s immigration agenda: White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Homeland Security advisor Stephen Miller and Tom Homan, the border czar. 

Neither Miller nor Homan showed up. The White House did not answer questions from States Newsroom regarding Miller or Homan’s absence from the hearing. 

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson blamed Democrats for keeping “the Department of Homeland Security shuttered, not caring about vital services – like TSA, FEMA, and ICE – going unfunded.” 

“Instead of lying about President Trump’s extremely successful deportation operations of criminal illegal aliens, House Democrats should fully reopen the Department of Homeland Security and stop putting illegal aliens before American citizens,”Jackson said.

The chair of the committee, Andrew Garbarino, called Wednesday’s hearing “a distraction from the fact that DHS has been shut down for over 65 days and the security impacts of that (are) real.”

Garbarino, a New York Republican, and the other GOP lawmakers on the committee did not ask any of the witnesses any questions. 

Americans under fire

The Americans harmed by federal immigration officials include:

• Marimar Martinez, a Chicago preschool worker whom Border Patrol officers shot five times.
• Rev. David Black, whom ICE officials shot in the face with pepper-ball rounds while he protested outside an Illinois detention facility.
• George Retes Jr., an Army veteran in California whom immigration agents apprehended on his way to work, tear-gassed and kept detained for three days.
• Ryan Ecklund, a real estate agent in Minnesota whom federal agents detained after he filmed them while at a grocery store. 

Martinez has appeared in the past before Congress in unofficial Democratic events to share her story about how on Oct. 4, she was shot five times by Border Patrol agent Charles Exum. 

DHS shared her photo online, falsely claimed she rammed into Border Patrol with her car and labeled her a domestic terrorist. The Trump administration tried to indict her on federal charges, but eventually dismissed the case against her.

“On Friday I was teaching the young children at the Montessori school and we were singing and dancing and getting ready for spooky season preparing fall activities to do the following week and on Saturday my own government was calling me a ‘domestic terrorist’ and I was in a federal detention center with bullet holes all over my body,” she told the committee. “There were times where I did not believe this was all real and then I would touch my bullet wounds and knew it was certainly real.”

She said she was concerned other people would be shot and killed by federal immigration agents, as Pretti and Good were.

“It’s bound to happen sooner or later if we don’t hold these agents accountable for their actions,” she said.

No apologies

Following the two deadly shootings by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis, the leaders of ICE and CBP appeared before the Senate and House committees that have jurisdiction over DHS. 

While there, CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott and ICE acting head Todd Lyons refused to apologize to the families of Good and Pretti. Lyons has announced he will resign at the end of May, saying he wants to spend more time with his family. 

The aggressive immigration deportation campaign in Minneapolis, which has a high Somalian refugee population, also spurred calls from Republicans to push then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign. She stepped down last month after Senate Republicans grilled her over an ad campaign and slow response to providing disaster relief. 

The president tapped former Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin to steer the department. The Senate last month confirmed Mullin. 

One of the witnesses, Retes, said his goal is for Congress to pass legislation in order to hold federal immigration agents accountable.

“Federal officials are basically impossible to sue,” Retes said. “Federal agents basically have immunity.” 

He added that he wants Congress to do something, and expressed his frustration that “change doesn’t move fast enough.” 

Ecklund criticized federal agents within DHS, and pointed out the irony of the department’s unofficial slogan of going after “the worst of the worst” in conducting immigration enforcement. 

“‘Your best’ and the ‘best of DHS’ is the least that the American public deserve,” he said. “You have not given us your best.”

Martinez said agents are not held accountable. 

“I’ve been through hell and back,” she said. “These agents — Charles Exum — have not even been held accountable for their actions.” 

She added that she doesn’t even know if Exum is still working for CBP.

Texas Democratic Rep. Al Green asked Martinez if she would feel comfortable showing lawmakers where she was shot. She agreed and rolled up her sleeve, showing a dark scar on her upper arm, and pulled up her pants to show another wound across her upper thigh. 

“It’s hard to manage all this, to even process what happened,” she said. “Being shot for protecting your community. I want the world to see my pain, my trauma. This is not something to joke about. This is my life.”

Green thanked her and told her that “you deserve justice.” 

Minister shot with pepper balls

Black told the committee that he was “horrified by the radical evil being perpetrated by my government.”

He said he was outside a detention facility in Chicago and was in the middle of praying when he was shot by federal agents with pepper balls. 

“I am outraged by the blasphemy of those who support brutal ICE and CBP tactics yet call themselves Christians,” he said. “They make a mockery of the sacrifice of God’s love on behalf of the world. 

“Yet instead of living into Christ’s rich promise of a Kingdom of peace, freedom, and prosperity, many of those calling themselves Christian are blindly supporting institutions like ICE and CBP, even as they dominate, coerce, and terrorize American communities,” he continued. 

The only path forward, he argued to lawmakers, is to dismantle ICE and CBP, and redirect that funding to “support programs that feed the hungry, sate the thirsty, welcome strangers, clothe the naked, and care for the sick — for in the words of Jesus, ‘just as you did it to one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did it to me.’”

WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats, advocates, students and leaders on Wednesday blasted attempts by President Donald Trump’s administration to do away with funding for minority-serving institutions in higher education.  

U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono led a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol that called on the administration to fully fund and protect the more than 800 minority-serving institutions, or MSIs, which enroll millions of students of color. Many are from low-income households or are the first in their families to attend college.

“Donald Trump is doing all he can basically to dismantle support for education in this country, and what is happening to minority-serving institutions is part of this all-out attack,” the Hawaii Democrat said. 

“Under the false pretense of addressing discrimination, this regime is limiting access to higher education for underserved and underrepresented groups, and there are millions of students who are being served by these programs,” she added. 

Along with advocates, leaders and students, Hirono was joined by fellow Democrats: Sen. Alex Padilla, chair of the Senate Hispanic-Serving Institutions Caucus; Rep. Mark Takano, first vice chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; Rep. Juan Vargas of California, of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; and Rep. Danny Davis of Illinois, of the Congressional Black Caucus. 

Padilla, of California, said MSIs are “better training the future leaders, entrepreneurs (and) servants” that communities need. 

“That’s what we’re standing up for. That’s what we’re fighting for, and that’s (why) we’re calling on Republican colleagues to join us, to push back on the threats of this administration and maintain our decades-long steadfast support of minority-serving institutions for the interest of these young people, their families, their communities and our country.” 

Takano, also of California, said “Congress funded these programs, and we will fight for them, and they cannot impound the funds.” 

He added that “Congress has the power of the purse, and we will make sure we hold this administration accountable.” 

Programs called ‘racially discriminatory’

Trump — who has sought to end diversity, equity and inclusion policies in schools — has proposed eliminating funding for minority-serving institutions, totaling $354 million, as part of his fiscal 2027 budget request.  

The U.S. Department of Education in September gutted and reprogrammed $350 million in discretionary funds that support MSIs, over claims that the programs for Black, Asian, Indigenous and Hispanic students and more are “racially discriminatory.”

The agency soon after moved to redirect $495 million in additional funding to historically Black colleges and universities, along with tribal colleges.

The Justice Department in December issued an opinion finding several grant programs for minority-serving institutions to be “unconstitutional.”

U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon concurred with the opinion, and the agency said later that month it was “currently evaluating the full impact” of the opinion on affected programs.

The president signed into law in February a spending package that funds the Education Department at $79 billion this fiscal year and also “increases funding for all Title III and V programs that support HBCUs, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Tribal colleges, and other minority-serving institutions,” per Senate Appropriations Committee Democrats’ summary. 

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republican leaders Tuesday defended the secretive process used in that chamber to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, though they did confirm referring a complaint made against Arizona Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego to the Ethics Committee.

“At the beginning, we always start very, very privately to protect members because we don’t want to facilitate frivolous accusations,” said Senate Ethics Committee Chairman James Lankford, R-Okla. “We want to facilitate accurate accusations. And actually work through to be able to hold each other to account.”

The comments came just a few hours after Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said he would lead the effort on that side of the Capitol to improve the process for filing an ethics complaint, especially those that have to do with sexual harassment.  

“You may know this, I have two daughters who work on Capitol Hill on committee staff. (This is) very serious to me. I’m a father. I’m not just the speaker of the House,” he said. “For that very reason we have to protect women and anyone who feels like there is any inappropriate behavior whatsoever. So if there are ways to tighten the rules, suggestions, we’re seeking that from all members. We’re open to that.”

Johnson said he hoped that any votes to change House rules would be bipartisan, if not unanimously adopted. He also reflected on a long history of misconduct by members of Congress. 

“There’s always been untoward activity among political figures. I mean going back to time immemorial. There’s always been marital infidelity. There’s always been despicable behaviors,” he said. “It occurs to us that it may not have been exposed and as transparent as it is today because of the very active press corps and 24-hour news cycle and smartphones and everything being recorded.”

Discussions around whether to keep ethics rules and investigations as they are now or overhaul the process began last week after California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell and Texas Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales both resigned amid sexual misconduct allegations. 

Florida Democratic Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick then resigned Tuesday just before the House Ethics Committee could recommend what repercussions she should face after the panel found her guilty on more than two dozen violations. 

GOP accusation on social media

Swalwell’s resignation may not be the end of that scandal, however. 

Florida Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna wrote in a social media post on April 15 that it “seems like the Senate has its own trash to take out. @LeaderJohnThune You need to look into the allegations against one of your Senators, it’s very disturbing. My chief will be contacting your chief.”

Her comments apparently referred to Arizona’s Gallego, who was friends with Swalwell, but has sought to distance himself from the former congressman since news of the allegations by multiple women broke earlier this month. 

Thune said during Tuesday’s press conference that “specific matter” has been referred to the Senate Ethics Committee and that he didn’t “know the particulars of the allegation.”

“The Ethics Committee in the Senate is designed to ensure that this institution and its members conduct themselves in a way befitting of the office and that we’re doing things in an ethical manner,” Thune said.  

Gallego’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

‘A quiet manner’

Lankford said Senate Ethics Committee members are “extremely serious about taking on allegations, especially allegations like sexual harassment, all the different things that are out there … But we do function in a quiet manner.”

The committee, he said, gets “hundreds of different allegations” that its members then work through to determine if they should proceed. 

“As you know, in the political world that we live in, a lot of allegations come to us that they’re unfounded at the end of it,” Lankford said. 

The Senate Ethics Committee, he said, is unlikely to move to a model similar to that of the House Ethics Committee, which releases statements when it begins investigations into members, sometimes detailing the allegations. 

“There’s a lot more public that comes out on it and they find out at the end of it that it becomes the theater of the allegation,” Lankford said. “So it facilitates more allegations because it creates more theater.”

The Senate panel hasn’t published a press release since August 2024 and its two-page report for 2025 disclosed the committee dismissed 160 of 181 alleged violations due to “lack of subject matter jurisdiction” or because “they failed to provide sufficient facts as to any material violation of the Senate rules beyond mere allegation or assertion.”

The annual report adds the Senate panel issued zero “private or public letters of admonition” and had no “matters resulting in a disciplinary sanction.”

The last time the committee issued a public letter was in March 2023, after South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham solicited “campaign contributions in a federal building” for Georgia senatorial candidate Herschel Walker. 

Lankford later expanded during the afternoon press conference on his belief that some ethics allegations are more political than genuine. 

“Our focus is all folks have to be heard on this but we live in a political world. In a political world if every ethics charge goes out there, everyone then grabs that ethics charge, uses it in a campaign and says ‘There’s been an ethics charge out there, the Ethics Committee is talking about it.’ And suddenly it becomes drama and facilitates more things coming at us,” he said. “We want to take seriously every victim, every accusation. But we also understand the environment that we work in.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that Democrats will use the unlimited number of amendment votes they are allowed on Republicans’ budget resolution to illustrate policy differences on cost-of-living issues and immigration activities. 

“We are for reducing costs for the American people, whether it’s housing or whether it’s health care or whether it’s electric costs or whether it’s groceries or whether it’s child care,” he said. “And they are funding a rogue police force that is not even popular with the American people.”

Republicans voted Tuesday to begin debate on their budget resolution, which holds instructions that would allow the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee as well as the Judiciary Committee to each write a bill that spends up to $70 billion on immigration enforcement. 

Amendment debate could begin Wednesday or Thursday, followed by a simple majority vote to approve the budget resolution, sending it to the House.  

GOP leaders are using the same complex budget reconciliation process they used last year to enact their “big, beautiful” law to approve three years of funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol. The earlier bill, enacted last July, included $170 billion to bolster the administration’s immigration activities. 

The House and Senate must vote to adopt the budget resolution before they can use the reconciliation process to approve a bill without having to garner 60 votes in the Senate to end debate.

Spending on those two agencies would normally run through the annual Homeland Security government funding bill. But that process stalled earlier this year when Democrats demanded new constraints on immigration activities after federal officers shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. 

Negotiations between Republicans and Democrats moved rather slowly and contributed to a record-setting shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security, which began in mid-February. 

President Donald Trump urged GOP lawmakers to vote against any Democratic amendments in a social media post.

“The Radical Left Democrats, and their so-called ‘Leader,’ Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, one of the most incompetent Senators in American History, will try to offer ‘Amendments’ during this process to divide Republicans,” he wrote. “Republicans must stick together and UNIFY to get this done, and to keep America safe — something which the Democrats don’t care about. Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

‘Glaring contrast’ to be highlighted

Democrats said during their press conference they plan to use the marathon amendment voting session on the budget resolution that sets up the reconciliation process to force Republicans to take votes on several issues. 

“We are ready with our amendments to show the glaring contrast between the parties in terms of who’s for reducing your costs and who’s not,” Schumer said. 

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said that instead of working on legislation to bring down costs for everyday Americans, Republicans in Congress are focused on providing tens of billions in additional funding for immigration enforcement. 

“Gas prices have surged. Health care premiums have doubled or tripled, or worse, pricing millions out of their coverage. So what are Republicans doing about all of that? Nothing,” she said. “Their urgent top priority this week is shoveling at least $70 billion at ICE and Border Patrol with zero accountability, zero reforms and zero strings attached.”

Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz said Republicans are sending a clear message about their policy goals and priorities by using the reconciliation process to provide the administration with another significant boost for immigration and deportation activities. 

“When you’re in the majority in the Senate, you get limited opportunities to use this unusual tool of reconciliation — once, maybe twice, in a year,” he said. “And so it’s pretty significant that using this tool, they have decided to do exactly nothing about the cost of living.”

Klobuchar decries $70 billion for immigration enforcement

Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar said that $70 billion in federal spending could go toward addressing many of the other challenges facing the country. 

Instead of giving it to ICE and the Border Patrol, she said, Congress could bolster the number of local police officers, or help people afford the cost of their health insurance premiums, or have Medicare cover dental and vision and hearing care, or build hundreds of thousands of new homes, or help lower the cost of child care for millions. 

Republicans, she said, also know there is a need to place limits on federal immigration agents after events like those in her home state and throughout the country. 

“They know there are serious problems. Why? A number of them joined with us at that Judiciary hearing to call for Kristi Noem to leave,” Klobuchar said, referring to the early March hearing that took place just days before the former DHS secretary was removed. “They asked just as tough questions, some of them, as we did.”

A dozen Republican state attorneys general are moving to defend President Donald Trump’s executive order on mail ballots from legal challenges mounted by Democrats.

The GOP officials, led by Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, argued in multiple court filings Monday and Tuesday in response to Democratic lawsuits that the March 31 order provides states with “optional resources” to help secure their elections and doesn’t endanger voting rights.

The states “would like to access this resource so they may verify the accuracy of their own voter-registration lists. This flow of information between federal and state agencies is a common and critical feature of our federal system,” the Republican officials wrote in a court document.

The attorneys general of Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas joined Hanaway in the effort.

The order directs the postmaster general to put forward rules that would block the U.S. Postal Service from delivering ballots to or from voters not on lists of approved mail voters provided by states. Democrats and postal law experts have said the Postal Service has no authority over elections.

“The Constitution and multiple court rulings put it in stark terms: the President does not have the authority to issue an executive order that attempts to undermine the ability of states to run their own elections,” more than 100 U.S. House Democrats wrote in a letter to Trump on Monday.

Trump’s order also directs the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of voting-age U.S. citizens in each state. Democrats allege the Trump administration is building an unauthorized national voter list, despite the U.S. Constitution giving states the responsibility of running federal elections.

The Democratic National Committee, top Democratic lawmakers and Democratic state attorneys general and secretaries of state have all sued to block the order, as have voting rights groups. The Republican state attorneys general are seeking to intervene in those lawsuits.

The GOP officials argue the Democrats lack standing to challenge the Postal Service provisions of the order and that their objections are premature because the Postal Service hasn’t finalized any new rules on mail ballots.

The order “simply directs” the Postal Service “to initiate rulemaking—it does not regulate the States directly and it does not directly inhibit anyone’s voting rights,” a court filing by the state attorneys general says.

The executive order marked Trump’s latest attempt to assert power over federal elections. A previous order that sought to require voters to prove their citizenship was blocked in court. Legislation to impose such a requirement is stalled in the U.S. Senate.

The Department of Justice has also sued 30 states and the District of Columbia for access to unredacted state voter lists containing sensitive personal information, including driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers. While federal courts have so far rebuffed those lawsuits, at least a dozen states have voluntarily turned over the data. 

DOJ plans to share the information with Homeland Security, which will use a computer program to look for possible noncitizen voters.

Earth Day 2026 arrives less than a week after Wisconsin was battered by a succession of unseasonably severe thunderstorms, hail and tornadoes. A lack of snow in the West this winter has raised fears of an especially difficult wildfire season — raising air quality concerns across the Upper Midwest this summer. The administration of President Donald Trump has made drastic changes to the budget and structure of agencies such as the EPA and U.S. Forest Service, reducing staff at agencies that manage air and water quality and protect public lands. 

Nearly 60 years after Earth Day was founded by Wisconsin Gov. Gaylord Nelson, environmental advocates and elected officials celebrated the holiday noting the state, often labeled a “climate haven” for its easy access to fresh water and northern location, is not immune from the damaging effects of climate change. Still, they said, there are small victories happening every day across the state. 

Gov. Tony Evers spent the week on a statewide tour touting efforts to plant more trees, conserve more land and use more sustainable sources of energy. 

In 2021, Evers signed a pledge that Wisconsin would plant 75 million trees and conserve 125,000 acres of forestland by the end of 2030. In a Tuesday news release, Evers’ office announced that in 2025 the state planted nearly 12 million trees and conserved more than 7,800 acres of forestland in the state in 2025 — bringing the total to more than 54 million trees planted in five years. 

“Conservation and protecting our natural resources are core to who we are as a people and as a state — it’s in our DNA, and here in Wisconsin, our work to conserve and protect our lands, waters, and air and respond to an ever-changing climate has never been more important,” Evers said in a statement. “From flooding and severe weather events to unseasonable snow droughts and everything in between, it’s clear that climate change is an imminent threat to our state, economy, and our kids’ future. That’s why, since Day One, my administration and I have been working to conserve our natural resources and tackle the climate crisis head-on, but there’s always more we can do.” 

While Evers touts the work his administration has done to protect the state’s environment, the main tool the state has used to conserve public land for the last four decades — the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program — is set to expire this summer due to Republican opposition to land conservation and the Legislature’s inability to reach a deal to reauthorize the program before adjourning for the year. 

Howard Lerner, president of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, said at an online news conference Tuesday that there are still wins happening for the climate. 

“We are getting things done in the Midwest, even while the Trump administration maintains its assault on core environmental values and rolls back years and years of federal progress,” he said. 

He noted that a variety of groups across the Midwest worked together to protect the funding in the federal Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. He  added, however, that more work will have to be done to protect Great Lakes shoreline communities from the effects of an increasingly fluctuating water level. 

“When all is said and done, the impacts of climate change are leading to much greater fluctuations in Great Lakes water levels, and they’re leading to more intensive storms, high winds, heavy waves that batter the shoreline,” he said. “That puts a heavy impact and burden on our shoreline communities and on the shoreline infrastructure, and that’s infrastructure that we’ve got to protect and find ways of doing that.”

But the Great Lakes are also struggling with water quality, he said, largely in the form of contamination from factory farms that can lead to toxic events such as algae blooms. He said that in the wake of the federal government stepping back from its role protecting wetlands and waterways from runoff, Midwest states need to do more. 

“We need to get policies in the states that reduce the amount of phosphorus, nitrates that flow into the water supply,” he said. “I think you’re going to see that [concentrated animal feeding operations] are going to be a bigger story going forward. Communities don’t want them, and E. coli and local water supplies and more toxic algae blooms in the Great Lakes is something that the public, I just don’t think is willing to tolerate.”

A federal judge in Milwaukee rejected a bid from Rogers Behavioral Health Tuesday to block a pair of union elections scheduled for Wednesday at Rogers mental health clinics in West Allis and Madison.

The decision sets the stage for votes to go forward at both clinics. About 35 employees at Rogers’ Madison clinic and about 68 at the West Allis clinic will vote Wednesday on whether to be represented by the National Union of Healthcare Workers.

Rogers, based in Oconomowoc, had argued that the union election should cover all 13 Rogers facilities in Wisconsin — not just the two where employees had actively organized. But in a direction of election issued April 14, the NLRB regional director whose jurisdiction includes Wisconsin said those two clinics alone were each appropriate bargaining units.

On Monday, Rogers lawyers filed a lawsuit to block both elections. U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman denied the mental health nonprofit’s petition for a temporary restraining order Tuesday after an online hearing that ran a little more than 40 minutes.

“I don’t think that they’ve established unconstitutional irreparable harm,” Adelman said of Rogers’ lawyers.

The Rogers lawsuit echoed a recent line of legal challenges that have sought to unravel the National Labor Relations Board — the 91-year-old agency created under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt as part of his administration’s New Deal to secure rights for workers and help the U.S. recover from the Great Depression.

One of Rogers’ lawyers, Aron Karabel, argued that the members of the NLRB itself as well as the regional director who issued the union election order are unconstitutional because they aren’t subject to dismissal by the president, violating the separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution.

Similar arguments have been made by other businesses, including Amazon and SpaceX, but the U.S. Supreme Court has not endorsed the claim.

Karabel’s colleague, Hannah Fitzgerald, argued that under Wisconsin law, the NLRB regional director had engaged in “tortious interference” with existing employment contracts for some of the Rogers employees who would be included in the union election bargaining unit. For that reason as well as other reasons, the election could cause “irreparable harm” to Rogers, Fitzgerald asserted.

Representing the NLRB, lawyer Craig Ewasiuk said that a Supreme Court ruling 82 years ago established that individual contracts “may not be availed of or to defeat or delay the procedures prescribed by the National Labor Relations Act” to further collective bargaining.

“The Supreme Court has spoken unambiguously on this question, and you simply can’t bring tortious interference acts against the NLRB for running elections,” Ewasiuk said.

Karabel argued that Rogers’ case was not about collective bargaining — which would prevent the federal court from acting until after final action by the NLRB — and for that reason, the court was an immediately appropriate venue.

The NLRB lawyer rejected that argument. ‘’The employer is essentially trying to stop the board’s proceedings from resolving this underlying labor dispute,” Ewasiuk said.

Staunch resistance to the union

Rogers Behavioral Health has mental health clinics and hospitals in 10 states. Employees are already represented by the National Union of Healthcare Workers at four clinics — three in California and one in Philadelphia, Pa. — and at three of those, the union was recognized voluntarily.

But in its home state of Wisconsin, Rogers has taken a much different posture.

Three employees were fired shortly after the union campaigns went public, according to the union, and the NUHW has filed unfair labor practice charges claiming the firings were illegal retaliation for union support.

Rogers has declined to discuss the firings as confidential personnel decisions but has stated they were not in violation of any laws.

From when employees first notified Rogers management of their desire for union representation, however, Rogers has posted notices and issued statements declaring that the mental health nonprofit doesn’t want  union representation for the West Allis and Madison employees.

“Many of your colleagues, your leaders, and I strongly believe that this union is not in the best interests of you, your family or our patients,” said one notice, stating it was from clinic leaders but without a name attached, that was shared with the Wisconsin Examiner. “We believe you should vote no and allow our team the opportunity for positive and direct collaborations.”

In March, Rogers’ executive director of marketing and communications, Maureen Remmel, responded to a question from the Examiner about the difference between Rogers’ responses at its California and Pennsylvania clinics and its handling of the union campaigns in Wisconsin

“While we work in good faith with the NUHW in California and Pennsylvania, our integrated system in Wisconsin is different,” Remmel said in an email message  March 17. “A direct relationship with our Wisconsin team members best serves employees, patients, and the company.”

At an NLRB hearing in February to establish the appropriate bargaining units for the Wisconsin clinics, Rogers’ lawyer argued that flexibility across multiple facilities was important and necessitated allowing all 13 Wisconsin locations to vote on union membership.

A statement attributed to the organization as a whole that Remmel sent April 16, after the election order was issued, asserted, “A union is not right for Rogers Behavioral Health in Wisconsin because it jeopardizes our ability to work together to solve problems quickly and flexibly.”

Jennifer Hadsall, the NLRB regional director, wrote in her analysis that there was little evidence of “functional integration” across the system to overcome the presumption that the two facilities where employees had organized were by themselves appropriate bargaining units.

Hadsall also rejected Rogers’ argument that certain employees were supervisors and therefore not eligible to be part of their facility’s bargaining unit.

Professional consultants

Starting in early February, Rogers has hired consultants to assist in managing its response to the union campaigns, according to LaborLab, a nonprofit based in Helena, Montana. LaborLab monitors the industry of consultants who advise and assist employers in responding to union drives.

Under the federal Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, employers and the consultants they hire to persuade employees “directly or indirectly” about unionizing must regularly file reports with the federal government. Employers file LM-10 reports and consultants file LM-20 reports as well as LM-21 annual financial reports.

While advocates for greater disclosure complain that those reports are often late or incomplete, they offer some information about those businesses.

LaborLab has identified three consultants working for Rogers since early February, when pro-union employees in Madison and West Allis petitioned for voluntary recognition. Two were identified through their LM-20 reports and one was named by union supporters during a radio interview with WORT-FM, the listener-sponsored community radio station in Madison.

LaborLab has estimated the consultants’ fees total about $50,000 a week, or more than $325,000 through April 1. Those don’t include the cost of attorneys representing the business on legal matters connected with the union campaign or “internal costs” that LaborLab’s calculations impute to employees assigned to directly address the union organizing effort.

“It’s hard to be precise because there are a lot of variables in these campaigns,” said Teke Wiggin, LaborLab’s strategic coordinator. “But we think that workers should have some general sense of how much is being invested in these campaigns.”

Wiggin said in an interview that some consultants interact only with corporate managers and executives, while others hold meetings with employees themselves, an action that requires disclosure in federal reports.

“They take arguments that have been crafted by industrial psychologists to sow as much fear and doubt about the value of unionization as possible,” Wiggin said.

In a letter sent to Rogers Feb. 25, 20 local and state elected officials criticized the organization for having “hired union busters” and urged the organization’s CEO to “immediately stop wasting patient care dollars on union busters paid to try to intimidate workers from organizing.”

Rogers did not respond to a question from the Examiner about its use of consultants in the organizing campaign.

In a response to the elected officials that was signed by “Rogers Behavioral Health,” the organization said it has “retained consultants to better understand and address the concerns shared by our employees and to raise awareness about their rights and the election process.”

Messages to employees

In a media statement April 16 after the election was scheduled, Rogers reiterated the organization’s position that a union was not the right choice for its employees and its intention to appeal the regional director’s finding after the election.

The day before, Rogers management emailed employees with a similar message, stating, “We are disappointed and disagree with this decision and are appealing to the full NLRB in Washington, D.C.”

The final line of the message was, “Regardless of the election outcome, bargaining will not start with the union until all appeals have been exhausted.”

The Wisconsin Examiner was provided screenshots of the message.

Employees involved in the union campaigns said that shortly after it landed in their inboxes, that message was remotely deleted, possibly because it was recalled.

On Monday, Rogers distributed another letter at both the West Allis and Madison locations that took up about a page and a half.

“We want to be direct with you today: change is coming to Rogers,” states the letter, photos of which were shared with the Examiner. “You will see it. We are working on it. That is why we are asking you to vote no on Wednesday and allow leadership 12 months to demonstrate to you, your colleagues, patients and families our commitment to making Rogers better than ever.”

Under federal labor law, if a majority of employees vote against a union in a representation election, the employees must wait at least 12 months before seeking a union again.

The members of Rogers’ leadership team “have heard you,” the letter states. “We know that there are things we can do and must do better.”

The letter’s final paragraphs reiterated both the vow to improve relations and a plea to vote against the union.

“The leadership team is committed to doing better. Today we are asking you to please give us 12 months. Vote ‘no’ in the upcoming election and give us a chance to show our commitment in action. If we do not come through for you, the law gives you the right to hold another election. Rogers will honor your choice in that election.

“Please vote ‘no’ on April 22. Vote to hold Rogers leadership accountable.”

Federal court records show Rogers filed its lawsuit to block the vote the same day that employees received that letter.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The darkened sky in the early afternoon, the tornado sirens wailing as baseball-sized hail shattered windows and dented car roofs, sounding like a series of explosions as drivers hurried home at 4 p.m. last week — all of it felt like the eerie first scene in an apocalyptic movie. 

This is not a drill, I thought, watching the clouds tumbling and boiling overhead as my car radio and my phone began shrieking in unison and a robotic voice informed me that I should take shelter immediately from a tornado that was moving at 20 miles per hour directly toward my neighborhood. 

We’ve all grown accustomed to the low background hum of climate anxiety. Suddenly it’s as loud and immediate as the crack of a giant hailstone on the windshield. 

The changes to the planet we’ve been warned about for decades are suddenly hitting too close to home to ignore. Over the last year in Wisconsin we’ve endured smoke-filled skies from summer forest fires, massive floods, wild temperature swings and scarier, more serious storms. 

This should be a wakeup call. But instead of accelerating efforts to head off climate catastrophe, our federal government is canceling renewable energy contracts and pushing for more coal plants, more oil drilling, more toxic mining on public lands, undoing protections for clean air and water, and accelerating the destruction of our shared environment in order to extract resources and build more wealth for a handful of people in the short term. 

The price of this heedlessness is so enormous it hurts just to think about it. 

Two days after the hail storm and tornado warnings sent me and my neighbors scrambling for cover, the U.S. Senate passed a bill to allow sulfide mining in the Superior National Forest, on the edge of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness — an inexpressibly beautiful place that is precious to my family, the scene of some of the most formative experiences of our girls’ childhood, and the most visited wilderness area in the U.S. The Forest Service spent years studying how acid mine drainage — the toxic byproduct of sulfide-ore mining — could contaminate the interconnected lakes and streams that make up the Boundary Waters. Once that contamination starts, there is no way to reverse it, which is why an overwhelming majority of Minnesotans weighed in against the mine, and the federal government blocked it. Until that protection was overturned last week.

Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith took a heroic stand on the Senate floor last Wednesday, arguing late into the night, trying to persuade her colleagues not just to hold off on destroying this pristine place, but to forgo using an obscure maneuver that, in a 50-49 vote, redefined land management and knocked down longstanding protections for every piece of national forest in the country. 

My colleague J. Patrick Coolican, editor of the Minnesota Reformer, described Smith pleading to an empty chamber, “I dearly hope the members of this body will think about their legacy in protecting the great places in this country.”

No future president can reinstate the mining ban that protected the Boundary Waters now that Congress used the obscure Congressional Review Act to strike it down. And it’s bigger than that. With their vote to open up mining near the Boundary Waters, “lawmakers have called into question the validity of every management plan issued by the U.S. Forest Service over the past several decades,” Alex Brown of Stateline reports. “That could result in legal chaos for thousands of permits covering logging, grazing, mining and outdoor recreation.” As Smith warned her Republican colleagues who want to protect the public lands they cherish in their home states, their vote means it’s now open season on those lands, too.

I couldn’t bear to talk with my daughters, who have spent every summer they can remember in the Boundary Waters, about the vote last week. 

But this week, Earth Week, it’s time to confront it. All is not lost. Just as they stood up to the masked federal agents who descended on Minneapolis to tear immigrant families apart, Minnesotans are organizing to fight Twin Metals, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Chilean mining company Antofagasta, as it seeks state permits to open up its toxic mine. While mining proponents tout the mine as a job creator (ignoring the economic costs of destroying the nation’s most-visited wilderness), the Senate’s action mostly benefits a foreign mining company, which has a history of flouting environmental regulations and creating toxic spills in other countries, and which will likely sell the copper it extracts from Minnesota to China.

The least we Wisconsinites can do is to help our neighbors as they try to repel this deadly invasion and seizure of a priceless natural resource.

Friends of the Boundary Waters, based in Minnesota, is filing a lawsuit arguing that the congressional maneuver that opened up the mine is illegal. The group and its allies are also urging the Minnesota DNR to cancel Twin Metals’ leases for the mine, and pushing the Minnesota state legislature to ban mining in this sensitive area.

As Wisconsin Sen. Gaylor Nelson, the founder of Earth Day put it in his 1970 speech kicking off the modern environmental movement, protecting the environment is “not just an issue of survival, but an issue of how we survive.” 

“Our goal is not just an environment of clean air and water and scenic beauty,” he said. “….Our goal is an environment of decency, quality and mutual respect for all human beings and all other living creatures. An environment without ugliness, without ghettos, without poverty, without discrimination, without hunger and without war.”

We need to protect that vision of life from the forces of greed and destruction that are engulfing us. We can’t let them write the end of the story.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Elected leaders and public health officials in Milwaukee gathered at the Marcia P. Coggs Center for Health & Human Services building to announce that opioid overdose deaths in Wisconsin’s most populous county have declined for the fourth straight year in a row. 

According to data provided through the county’s overdose dashboard, there has been a 17.7% decrease in fatal overdoses and a 22.7% decrease in fatal opioid overdoses since 2024. There has been a 42.6% decline since 2022 in all forms of overdose death, with a 54.6% decline in opioid-related overdose deaths specifically.

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley praised the use of opioid settlement funds to expand  treatment and harm reduction strategies. The funds originate from lawsuits against the producers and distributors of pain killers that triggered the opioid crisis. The nationwide epidemic of addiction and overdoses is also tied to the powerful synthetic opioid fentanyl which began spreading in  the mid-2010s, causing deaths on an unseen scale.

“As we acknowledge the progress we have made, we must also remember those we have lost,” said Crowley. “Their lives matter, and their stories remind us why this work is so critical. I am committed to continuing this work until every person in Milwaukee County has access to the care, support and second chances they deserve.” 

The latest data shows that 387 people in Milwaukee County still lost their lives to an overdose last year. “These are our neighbors, these are our loved ones, these are our family members,” said Crowley, “people who we care about that live in our own communities.” At a press conference Tuesday, Crowley said he has seen family and neighbors struggle with addiction as he grew up. “And I saw firsthand the barriers that they faced when trying to access treatment, but also continue to take those steps towards healing,” said Crowley. “Healing is a lifelong journey. So to me these aren’t just numbers on a dashboard. They’re people, and even one overdose death is one too many.” 

Milwaukee County will receive $111 million over the next 18 years through the opioid settlements. This represents the largest amount recovered by a local government in Wisconsin history, a county press release states. 

“Three years ago, we were losing a life to opioid overdose every 16 hours,” said Chief Health Policy Advisor Dr. Ben Weston, praising the sharp decline in deaths since then.

Weston recalled an April weekend three years ago when there were 16 overdose deaths in Milwaukee County. The scale of the epidemic was “unimaginable” Weston said, and it forced emergency management staff, firefighters, police and community members  to “say enough,” said Weston. 

Over the  last several years Milwaukee County adopted multiple harm reduction strategies. Narcan — the nasal spray used to revive someone from an opioid overdose — has been distributed in vast quantities to emergency responders and average citizens. There are also 27 free-to-use harm reduction vending machines around the county providing narcan, fentanyl testing strips and even gun locks. 

The vending machines were launched through a Department of Health and Human Services program called Harm Reduction MKE. Another program called Pull Up & Pick Up offers residents the opportunity to order free supplies and pick them up at the Coakley Brothers building (400 S. 5th St) on the third Friday every month. Vivent Health Depot has also partnered with Milwaukee County to provide free harm reduction supplies delivered right to people’s homes. 

“We’ve expanded community paramedicine programs and peer support to close the gaps in care and reach people who might never otherwise have entered into the system,” said Weston. “And we’ve partnered with the state using real-time overdose data and predictive learning and modeling to better understand who is at highest risk, and be able to intervene early.” 

Treatment centers have also worked to overcome zoning restrictions and stigma to open in new parts of Milwaukee. Treatment access has also been expanded for people both entering and leaving incarceration, a particularly dangerous time when people are more likely to overdose, Weston said. 

“At the Medical Examiner’s Office, we see firsthand the human toll of this crisis, and while the data shows progress, it also reminds us that this work is far from over,” said Dr. Wieslawa Tlomak, Chief Medical Examiner of Milwaukee County. ”

Tlomak said that it should concern everyone that every third or fourth death in Milwaukee County is due to drug overdose. She noted that usually overdose deaths are caused by multiple drugs. While Narcan can reverse an opioid overdose from fentanyl, there is no equivalent medication to reverse the effects of stimulants like cocaine or meth. “In other words, the landscape of overdose deaths has changed,” said Tlomak. “It is more complex, more unpredictable, and more difficult to treat.”

Tlomak said that of the 387 people who died of fatal drug overdoses last year, 263 involved opioids. 

Jeremey Triblett, Prevention Integration Manager at the Department of Health and Human Services, highlighted the importance of new campaigns in Milwaukee to continue to reduce overdose deaths. One program, dubbed “Better Ways To Cope,” provides residents with strategies to deal with life problems. 

On June 12, recognized as National Harm Reduction Day, the Department of Health and Human Services is inviting residents to participate in the 1,000 Doors Challenge, a neighborhood canvassing project aimed at spreading information and supplies to the people who need it. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The U.S. Forest Service’s plan to close scores of research stations could threaten the nation’s wildfire readiness, many foresters fear, and erode decades of work to understand timber production, soil health, pests and diseases, watersheds and wildlife.

Late last month, the Forest Service announced plans to close 57 of its 77 research stations, located across 31 states, merging them into a single organization in Fort Collins, Colorado.

The agency described the move as a way to consolidate, not cut, the agency’s scientific work, and “unify research priorities.”

It’s unclear how many scientists will be affected by the transition, but it comes as part of a larger agency reorganization that is expected to move roughly 5,000 employees to new outposts. Forest Service leaders have framed the closures as a way to reduce the agency’s real estate footprint, citing a facilities budget Congress has shrunk, as opposed to curtailing its scientific work.

But many longtime foresters fear the closures will threaten vital research that has been the backbone of forest management for state agencies, timber companies and tribes. Many of the research stations slated for closure study fire behavior, forecast smoke dispersal and help inform evacuation decisions.

“The research arm of the Forest Service is one of the unsung heroes in forest management around the world,” said Mike Dombeck, who served as chief of the Forest Service under President Bill Clinton and remains a vocal conservation advocate. “It is the premier forest research entity in the world, on everything from invasive species to wildland fire risk, watershed protection, basic silviculture and harvest methods.”

The Forest Service’s revamp also will relocate the agency’s headquarters from Washington, D.C., to Salt Lake City and restructure its regional management system.

The Forest Service did not grant a Stateline interview request. The agency has not said how much money it expects to save by closing the research stations.

Many Western leaders are skeptical that the consolidated operation will be able to replicate the work of the existing research stations. State officials said they’ve been given few details about how the transition will play out and whether existing research will continue.

In Washington state, the Forest Service plans to close research stations in Seattle and Wenatchee, while maintaining a facility in Olympia.

“The station in Seattle does some of the most practical-based research that we use for fire and forest management,” said Washington State Forester George Geissler. “We don’t want to lose that work. They’ve said they’ll keep Olympia open, but we don’t know what that looks like. Are they making sure we don’t lose the ongoing research?”

Forestry veterans say it’s important for the agency to continue its scientific work across a wide variety of forests and climates.

“This is research that’s been going on for decades or even a century or more,” said Kevin Hood, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, a nonprofit that advocates for agency workers. “They’re able to see how climate change impacts are playing out in a dry ponderosa forest or a humid hardwood forest. There are research plots and experimental forests that have been diligently studied for decades. This could be a loss of a lot of knowledge.”

The Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory, for instance, plays a crucial role in issuing wildfire smoke forecasts that are relied on throughout the Northwest. After a hot, dry winter, that work could be critical as a dangerous wildfire season approaches.

In Vermont, the Burlington research station slated for closure studied maple syrup production and the effects of acid rain on different tree species, according to VTDigger.

And in Mississippi, the Southern Institute of Forest Genetics, also on the chopping block, has guided tree improvement programs that improved growth and pest resistance in Southern timber forests.

Some conservation advocates are concerned that the research station closures are aimed at suppressing studies that might show the environmental harms of logging or mining. President Donald Trump has pledged to increase timber production on federal lands. He has moved to limit environmental reviews and protections for endangered species to speed up logging projects.

In an interview with the Deseret News, Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz said that the move was designed to ensure that the Forest Service’s research “will better align with the priorities of the administration” — minerals, recreation, fire management and “active management” of forests, which can include timber harvests and thinning projects. He said the research would support not just forests but also private landowners.

“It’s not streamlining, it’s dismantling,” said Chandra Rosenthal, Western lands and Rocky Mountain advocate with Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a group that defends whistleblowers in the federal service. “It’s going to really impact how the Forest Service makes decisions on the ground. The way the Trump administration is trying to make a lot of decisions is gut feelings.”

In a webpage set up to respond to news coverage of the move, the Forest Service said it is a “myth” that the station closures will eliminate scientific positions or cancel research programs. But many forestry veterans said that attrition is inevitable, as researchers are asked to move their families across the country to work under a new model with few details.

“There’s concern that we’re going to see a lot of really good individuals who cannot uproot their families that we’ll lose,” said Geissler, the Washington state forester. “It’s taken a long time to develop that kind of expertise. It’s scary.”

Foresters in both conservative and liberal states said they rely heavily on the research the Forest Service provides. Most were unwilling to comment extensively about the closures without seeing more details.

“That work is absolutely important, and I sure hope it continues,” said Wyoming State Forester Kelly Norris. “I don’t think research should stop. It may need to look a little different.”

Some leaders said there may be opportunities for states, through forestry agencies and universities, to pick up the slack and ensure research continues, even if the Forest Service is no longer playing a lead role.

“This is still a little bit of an unknown area, but we’ll have to make sure that if there’s a gap there, that we’re working with our universities and (state) research centers to make sure that is still being provided,” said Utah State Forester Jamie Barnes.

Nick Smith, public affairs director with the American Forest Resource Council, a timber industry group, expressed support for the agency’s effort to consolidate its work, saying he’d had “limited interaction” with the research stations.

While some of the Forest Service’s work is controversial, agency veterans say its research program is valued by loggers and tree-huggers alike.

“Nobody was asking for this,” said Robert Bonnie, who served as undersecretary of agriculture for natural resources and environment during the Obama administration. “There was no call to do anything like this.”

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org. 

An ordinance that prohibits local or federal law enforcement officers from wearing face masks, except in dangerously cold weather, passed the Milwaukee Common Council Tuesday. The measure is part of a package the council considered under the heading “ICE Out Milwaukee”. 

CBS 58 reported that there was support for the policy change even from the police union. This comes in response to the recent federal immigration crackdown in Democratic-led cities including Minneapolis and Chicago, where agents dressed in military-style tactical gear and wearing masks made arrests or used force against immigrants, protesters and bystanders. In Minneapolis, two U.S. citizens were killed by federal immigration agents during confrontations. Agents who shot another man in the leg were later found to have lied about the events leading up to the non-fatal shooting. 

The ICE Out Milwaukee package was pushed by a group of Milwaukee alders after these events raised anxieties among area residents. Ald. Alex Brower told the Wisconsin Examiner that after a huge crowd attended a town hall on immigration, he realized Milwaukeeans wanted to see local government do something, anything, to protect residents from immigration enforcement. 

WISN 12 News reported that the vote on the mask ordinance was delayed last month because of City Attorney Evan Goyke’s concerns that it might not be enforceable. But last week, Goyke sent a letter to the council saying it was legal.

“I do want to thank City Attorney Evan Goyke, who he and his team, worked very hard, very diligently. They were committed to getting to yes, in my opinion,” alder JoCasta Zamarripa told WISN-12.

Alds. Brower, Marina Dimitrijevic, Zamarripa and José Perez, who is the common council president, all supported the measure.  

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Fallout from a weekend attempt by animal rights activists to breach the Ridglan Farms Biomedical Research Facility and rescue beagles bred inside continues. On Tuesday, four of the activists were charged in Dane County with felony burglary. Meanwhile, Ridglan Farms has been cited for filling a trench around its facility with manure — an environmental hazard for which it lacked a permit — in an effort to prevent the activists from entering over the weekend.  Calls for an investigation into the farm and  police use of force  against them continue. 

Wayne Hsiung, Aditya Aswani, Michelle Lunsky, and Dean Wyrzykowski were all charged with felony burglary. Hsiung was noted as among the first people arrested within minutes after arriving at the farm. Although the activists had publicly advertised the rescue — which included hundreds of participants — as  planned for Sunday, the activists hit the farm a day early. Images captured on Saturday showed the air thick with tear gas, and witnesses  reported that rubber bullets and pepper balls had been used. Injuries were also reported, including one man who reportedly lost multiple teeth after being beaten by officers. 

The action Saturday was the second one since March, when activists successfully breached fences and doors at Ridglan and carried over 20 dogs away. Some of the dogs were adopted, while others were intercepted by police and returned to Ridglan. Although the activists were  arrested during the April 18 action, the charges against them stem from the first raid in March. 

Thousands of dogs are kept and bred at Ridglan Farms. The facility has been accused of subjecting beagles to cruel and inhumane conditions by enclosing them in gated cages, not allowing them outside or play time, and removing parts of their bodies or subjecting them to experiments without anesthesia. Ridglan has denied some of the allegations.

Last year, a special prosecutor made a deal with the farm to discontinue its beagle breeding operations by July or face penalties. Animal rights activists, elected officials, and others have called for the dogs to be adopted  before that deadline. 

The plight of the Ridglan beagles has gained national attention. During hearings in Washington D.C. last week, Democratic Congressman Mark Pocan asked Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. why the National Institutes for Health continue to provide grants to groups that use Ridglan beagles for experiments, Democracy Now reported. 

Pocan highlighted that Ridglan has had 311 code violations, stating that the institute has policies about beagle testing prohibiting animals from being tortured. “And that’s part of what’s happening with this facility,” said Pocan. “So grants are still, in the last month, going to groups that are getting beagles from Ridglan Farms.” Pocan asked Kennedy to look into grants provided to the facility, adding that if Ridglan doesn’t get rid of the beagles then they’ll likely be euthanized. Kennedy said “I believe you but I have a hard time believing that. I need to look into this…Because we’re trying to end…We’ve done more than any administration in history to end animal testing.”

Following the attempted rescue on Saturday, animal rights activists and community members held vigils near the Ridglan property as well as a rally at the Capitol. Activists and supporters also visited the office of Gov. Tony Evers, calling on him and Attorney General Josh Kaul to shut down the facility. 

Meanwhile, Ridglan was cited for constructing or altering a manure storage facility without a permit, Channel3000 reported. Ahead of the weekend, Ridglan erected barriers around its facility to prevent the activists from entering as they had in March. Reports have also circulated describing masked armed men believed to be security guards discouraging people from being nearby, but Ridglan denied those claims. In a statement to Channel3000, Ridglan denied constructing a manure facility, but said  it took “reasonable measures” to protect the facility “from the announced unlawful invasion.” The facility acknowledged that it dug a trench around Ridglan Farms. The trench was filled with manure. 

Two elected members of the Dane County Board of Supervisors have also said they’re initiating the steps needed to begin an independent investigation into the force used by the Dane County Sheriff on activists and protesters Saturday. Sheriff Kalvin Barrett has said that the actions of his deputies was proportionate and appropriate to the situation they faced Saturday.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Virginia voters on Tuesday approved a constitutional amendment allowing mid-decade congressional redistricting, a move expected to dramatically reshape the state’s political map and potentially shift its congressional delegation from a closely divided 6-5 split to a heavily Democratic-leaning 10-1 advantage.

By 8:50 p.m., the measure passed by a vote of 50.7-49.3% out of 2.5 million ballots cast, according to unofficial results from the Virginia Department of Elections, clearing the way for lawmakers to redraw district lines outside the traditional once-a-decade census cycle. The winning margin continued to increase throughout the night as more votes were tallied. 

Supporters argued the amendment gives Virginia flexibility to respond to aggressive redistricting efforts in several Republican-led states at the urging of President Donald Trump, while critics warned it opens the door to partisan gerrymandering and undermines long-standing constitutional guardrails.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger said in a statement Tuesday evening that voters “approved a temporary measure to push back against a president who claims he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress,” adding that Virginians “responded the right way: at the ballot box.” 

She said she plans to campaign with candidates across the commonwealth ahead of the midterms and emphasized her commitment to restoring the state’s bipartisan redistricting commission after the 2030 census.

Virginia Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, said the results reflect what he described as a reaffirmation of democratic principles, arguing that voters “answered a question about the nature of our democracy … in favor of the people.” 

He said Virginians acted in response to what he called “unprecedented gerrymandering in other states,” adding that “fairness won” and “accountability won,” and that the outcome shows “the people will decide.”

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, said the outcome sends a national signal, arguing that voters rejected efforts to “rig our democracy” and instead affirmed that “power belongs to the people.” He said the vote could shape the 2026 midterms, adding that Virginians “stepped up and leveled the playing field for the entire country” and that “when the stakes are highest, we lead.”

Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, said the vote delivers “a massive blow to the GOP plot to rig control of Congress,” praising Virginia voters for what she described as answering a national call to protect democracy. 

At the same time, she cautioned that “the fight is far from over,” arguing that redistricting battles will continue to play out in state legislatures and that upcoming elections will be critical in determining who draws maps and holds power in the years ahead.

Virginia House GOP Leader Terry Kilgore, R-Scott, said Tuesday’s outcome was “not unexpected,” arguing the process was “tilted” by what he described as “misleading ballot language and a massive spending advantage.” 

He said legal challenges will continue, adding that “the ballot box was never the final word here” and that Republicans will keep pushing for “fair maps, transparent process, and equal representation for every Virginian.”

Special session sparks fast-moving redistricting push 

The effort to change Virginia’s redistricting rules began abruptly in late October, during a special legislative session that had been called to address budget matters but quickly veered into a broader political fight.

On Oct. 27 — days before the Nov. 4 statewide elections — Democratic lawmakers unveiled plans to pursue a constitutional amendment allowing congressional maps to be redrawn outside the traditional post-census cycle. 

Within hours, the proposal ignited a sharp debate over timing, process and political intent.

Scott framed the move as a response to national redistricting battles, saying at the time, “I think we have an opportunity now to send a message to the rest of the country that we’re not going to stand by while you rig this election. We will do everything in our power to level the playing field we were talking about.”

Republicans, meanwhile, questioned both the substance and the setting. Del. Michael Webert, R-Fauquier, said the special session had been called for budget work, not constitutional changes.

“We went into a special session to solve a very specific problem. It was not meant to be used as a tool to continuously identify issues and keep what they’re doing,” Webert said. “We shouldn’t (have been) in two sessions at the same time (and) because of that confusion, I believe … it delegitimizes specific legislative processes.”

The session’s temperature rose further when Senate Democrats blocked the reading of a communication from then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who had sharply criticized the effort.

“I am disappointed to see the General Assembly reconvening this week to ram through a constitutional amendment on redistricting only seven days before the close of our 2025 statewide and House of Delegates election and with over one million voters already casting their ballot,” Youngkin wrote.

On the Senate floor, Sen. Bill Stanley, R-Franklin, appealed to what he described as Virginia’s past bipartisan approach to redistricting reform.

“Sometimes we must overcome our partisan desires and do what is right for the commonwealth as a whole,” Stanley said. “We looked Virginia voters in the eye, and promised them something fundamental, that Virginia would pick their representatives, and not the other way around. What message do we send to them if we walk away now?”

Despite the divisions, lawmakers moved quickly. On the same day, Democrats released the amendment’s language, outlining a framework for mid-cycle redistricting subject to voter approval. 

The House advanced the measure the following day, and the Senate approved it on Oct. 31 in a party-line vote, sending it forward in the multi-step constitutional process. That process required the amendment to pass again in a subsequent legislative session. 

When lawmakers reconvened in January, the proposal moved forward — but soon became entangled in a series of legal challenges.

Legal battles complicate road to the ballot 

In late January, a Virginia court struck down the amendment that had been slated for the April ballot, casting uncertainty over whether voters would ultimately weigh in.

In a 22-page ruling, Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack C. Hurley found that the legislature acted unlawfully in approving the redistricting amendment during a special session just days before the Nov. 4 election. Hurley concluded that lawmakers exceeded the scope of that session, violated their own procedural rules and failed to comply with constitutional and statutory requirements governing amendments to the Virginia Constitution.

The state’s highest court soon reversed that trajectory. In February, the Supreme Court of Virginia allowed the referendum to proceed, clearing the way for the issue to appear on the ballot.

“Certainly the General Assembly was clear with the amendment process they put forward, and now it’s up to voters,” Spanberger said at the time, mere weeks after taking her oath of office.  

At the same time, Democrats began outlining what new congressional lines could look like.

A proposed map released in early February would significantly reshape district boundaries and was widely seen as favoring Democrats across most of the state’s 11 congressional districts.

Republicans escalated their opposition later that month, filing an emergency lawsuit seeking to block the vote and challenging the amendment process itself — a move that the same Tazewell County judge granted but that only applied to his jurisdiction. 

Once again, the Supreme Court of Virginia stepped in, granting a petition for review of the case and staying the temporary restraining order, which allowed the election to move forward statewide. 

However, the justices emphasized their decision does not resolve the underlying legal claims about whether the General Assembly followed proper procedures in advancing the amendment.

Meanwhile, the referendum drew national attention, with prominent Democrats — including former President Barack Obama — voicing support while Virginia Republicans intensified their warnings as the campaign entered its final stretch.

On Tuesday evening, Obama praised the outcome on X, writing, “Congratulations, Virginia! Republicans are trying to tilt the midterm elections in their favor, but they haven’t done it yet,” and thanking voters for “showing us what it looks like to stand up for our democracy and fight back.”

Campaign messaging grew increasingly contentious in March, particularly after mailers opposing the amendment invoked civil rights era imagery, prompting backlash and public criticism. 

Some Republicans defended the mailers, adding to the broader political dispute surrounding the vote.

Early voting data added another layer of uncertainty, with turnout showing strength in Republican-leaning areas even as both parties ramped up efforts to mobilize voters statewide.

In the final weeks, Spanberger balanced her governing responsibilities with public support for the amendment, while Youngkin returned to the campaign trail urging voters to reject it and continued to press for court intervention.

In her statement Tuesday, Spanberger said that she remained “committed to ensuring Virginia’s bipartisan redistricting commission gets back to work after the 2030 census, and to protecting the process Virginians voted to create.”

FULL COVERAGE: Virginia redistricting referendum

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, vowed Tuesday the central bank would remain “strictly independent” if he’s confirmed to the top spot, even as the president has broadcast his demand for the new Fed chair to lower interest rates.

Warsh, a former Fed board governor, faced questions during his confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, as the clock winds down on the term of current Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who is in Trump’s crosshairs.

Trump’s criminal probe into Powell, over a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Fed’s offices, stands in the way of Warsh’s confirmation on the closely divided committee. 

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., maintains he will vote against Warsh’s nomination until Trump directs federal prosecutors to halt their “bogus” investigation into one of his most high-profile political foes.

The Senate Banking Committee is made up of 13 Republicans in the majority, and 11 Democrats in the minority. All Democrats plan to oppose the nomination, and with Tillis, a tied vote means Warsh’s nomination would not advance to the full Senate.

The committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, alleged Trump wants to install a “sock puppet” and “use monetary policies to artificially juice the economy in the short term, and this is his last chance to do that before the November elections.”

Instead of questioning Warsh, Tillis displayed a series of images and figures illustrating the “unfortunate, but legitimate” cost overruns at the Federal Reserve’s Washington, D.C., headquarters. 

“If we put everybody in prison in federal government that had had a budget go over, we’d have to reserve an area roughly the size of Texas for a penal colony,” Tillis said. “… Let’s get rid of this investigation so that I can support your nomination.”

Court action

U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, for the District of Columbia, last month blocked the administration’s subpoenas to probe the central bank and Powell, pointing to “a mountain of evidence” that Trump is using the investigation to force Powell to lower interest rates, or resign.

Still, the president has not backed down. One week before Tuesday’s hearing, two investigators from the office of Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, showed up unannounced at the Fed’s construction site, according to details reported by the New York Times.

On more than 100 occasions, according to Boasberg’s order, Trump and his allies have made public statements ridiculing Powell and threatening to fire him if interest rates were not lowered.

Powell’s term expires May 15. During a recent press conference, Powell said he plans to stay on, as permitted by Fed regulations, as chair pro tempore until his successor is confirmed.

If Powell stays on, “well then, I’ll have to fire him,” Trump told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo on April 15. 

A ‘battle-tested’ pick

While Trump’s clash with Powell overshadowed Warsh’s nomination hearing, Republicans largely praised the former board governor, who served from 2006 to 2011.

Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott, R-S.C., said Warsh is “battle-tested” after helping to steer the central bank during the 2008 financial crisis.

“During his first term as governor, he helped our economy through the crisis and restored faith in the economy,”Scott said.

But Democrats questioned Warsh’s ability to remain independent of Trump’s demands, particularly as the president must justify higher costs from tariffs and the Iran war ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, when voters are expected to focus heavily on affordability issues.

Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., asked Warsh, “Do you agree that the American families are struggling right now with affordability?”

Largely laying the blame on post-COVID-19 monetary policy decisions under President Joe Biden, Warsh said the Fed bears “some responsibility for the things that you’ve described, and that the legacy of inflation, what I think is the biggest economic policy error in 40 or 50 years, happened just a few years ago, and we’re still living with the with the remnants of it. I think inflation is less problematic than it was a couple of years ago.”

When Kim pressed whether the Fed should be concerned about spiking fuel and fertilizer costs amid Trump’s continuing war in Iran, Warsh said, “Senator, if my reform agenda, if confirmed, stands for anything, it’s for the central bank, especially the Fed chairman, to stay in its lane.”

Lisa Cook firing

Warren and Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, D-Md., also invoked Trump’s contested August 2025 firing of Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook, currently under review in the U.S. Supreme Court. 

The high court’s oral arguments in January drew a high-profile appearance from Powell. Trump alleged Cook committed financial fraud, but even conservative Supreme Court justices questioned his argument for her firing.

“Will you commit to defending Governor Cook’s tenure as Chairman Powell has done?” Alsobrooks asked.

“Senator, it was a pleasure to meet you in your office, and spend time with you. As I said to you then, I’ll repeat here to the broader committee: If I stand for anything, it’s the Fed should stay in its lane. As I understand that matter, it’s pending before the United States Supreme Court,” Warsh said.

In his opening statement, Warsh defended a president’s right to share opinions on interest rates but told Democratic lawmakers multiple times Tuesday that Trump has not asked him for a commitment.

Following up on an answer Warsh provided earlier during the hearing, Alsobrooks asked, “You said he never — ‘specifically’ is the word you used — demanded that you decrease interest rates. Well, did the president generally suggest this to you as well?”

“I wasn’t trying to be clever. The president never generally or specifically instructed me, or suggested I should commit to any interest rate path whatsoever,” Warsh said.

Congress’ move to allow mining in a national forest near a wilderness area may have broad ramifications across the country.

The U.S. Senate voted Thursday to overturn a mining ban in Minnesota’s Superior National Forest, the headwaters of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

By using an obscure tool known as the Congressional Review Act to open the national forest for mining, lawmakers have called into question the validity of every management plan issued by the U.S. Forest Service over the past several decades. That could result in legal chaos for thousands of permits covering logging, grazing, mining and outdoor recreation. 

Over the past year, Congress for the first time has used the Congressional Review Act to revoke management plans for regions managed by the Bureau of Land Management, seeking to allow more mining and drilling. Such plans had not previously been considered “rules” subject to lawmakers’ review. 

Under the act, federal agencies must submit new regulations to Congress before they can take effect. Because management plans, which function as high-level guidance documents, were never considered rules, federal agencies did not submit them to Congress for review. 

Using a new legal theory, Republicans in Congress have opened reviews and revoked several specific plans that limited resource extraction in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming. But those actions call into question whether more than 100 other such plans are legally in effect, since they are now considered rules that were not sent to Congress as the law requires.

Public lands experts say the new interpretation could create legal jeopardy across hundreds of millions of acres managed by the Bureau of Land Management, threatening any permit issued under a management plan drafted after the passage of the Congressional Review Act in 1996.

Now, for the first time, Congress has used the review tool to overturn a management decision on Forest Service land. 

“There’s a huge playing field of actions that would be forbidden if none of these management plans are lawfully in place,” Robert Anderson, who served as solicitor for the Department of the Interior during the Biden administration, told Stateline earlier this year. “This could bring things to a screeching halt.”

Longtime outdoors writer Wes Siler, who has written extensively about the Boundary Waters review battle, said in a post Thursday that the vote will “destroy the Forest Service’s ability to conduct regular business for the foreseeable future.” If the agency’s management plans suddenly become invalid, he wrote, “not only could this grind industrial operations on (Forest Service) land to a halt as all of this winds its way through federal court, but it could also set (the Forest Service) the task of re-doing 30 years of work.”

On Thursday, the Senate voted 50-49 to revoke a Biden-era plan that banned mining on land in the Superior National Forest. The resolution will now go to President Donald Trump for his signature.

A Chilean mining company has proposed to mine for copper, nickel and cobalt along Birch Lake in Minnesota. The planned mine would sit at the headwaters of the wilderness area’s watershed. The Boundary Waters is the most popular wilderness in the country, and advocates say the water is so pristine that many visitors fill their bottles straight from the surface of its lakes.

Wilderness proponents say such mines have a long track record of pollution, and leaks from the proposed site would flow downstream and irreversibly contaminate the treasured Boundary Waters.

U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber, the Minnesota Republican who sponsored the review action, has said the mine would bring jobs to the region. Opponents have argued that the tourism economy centered on the Boundary Waters is a larger economic driver, and noted that the mine will be run by a foreign company that will likely export the copper to China. 

U.S. Sen. Tina Smith, a Minnesota Democrat, led the effort to uphold the mining ban on the Senate floor. Following the vote, she said that supporters of the Boundary Waters would likely mount a legal challenge, questioning the use of the Congressional Review Act to revoke a public land order from the Forest Service. 

“I question the legality of what Congress did,” Smith said, according to the Minnesota Reformer.  

Two Republican senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, also voted against the measure. Tillus also questioned the use of the Congressional Review Act.

“It’s a precedent that I think our Republican colleagues are going to regret,” he told The Minnesota Star Tribune. 

The Forest Service oversees nearly 200 million acres of land, managed for multiple uses, including timber harvests, grazing, outdoor recreation and wildlife habitat. Some legal experts fear the management plans governing those activities are now in legal jeopardy. 

“That right there is chaos,” Peter Van Tuyn, a longtime environmental lawyer and managing partner at Bessenyey & Van Tuyn LLC, told Stateline earlier this year. 

“Those (plans) go across the full spectrum of what land managers do: conservation and preservation, mining approvals, oil and gas drilling, resource exploitation, public access and recreation,” he added. “There’s a very real chance that a court could say that a resource management plan was never in effect and all the implementation actions under the umbrella of that plan are invalid.”

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.