Connect with us

News

One voted Biden. One picked Trump. It's a tale of two counties in pivotal Wisconsin

Published

on

One voted Biden. One picked Trump. It's a tale of two counties in pivotal Wisconsin

Located less than an hour outside Madison, Wisc., Columbia county has both city commuters and people in more rural, small towns. Portage, with a population of around 10,000, is the largest town in the county.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


Located less than an hour outside Madison, Wisc., Columbia county has both city commuters and people in more rural, small towns. Portage, with a population of around 10,000, is the largest town in the county.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

On a recent Tuesday morning in Portage, Wis., Sharon Wade tended to her craft and antique furnishing shop. Standing in front of a wall lined with color-coded paints, she helped a friend find the correct tools to spruce up an old dresser.

“You’re going to be fine, Sandy! I promise you,” Wade laughed, as she unwrapped a new paintbrush. “You know you can call me if you need to.”

Advertisement

Her store sits within Columbia County, a county less than an hour outside of Madison. Despite some loyal customers, Wade said business has slowed over the past year.

“It’s been difficult to see people come in, that were regulars before that bought, and now they just come in to look,” she said, addressing rising prices in town. “I don’t blame them, you get in that situation where you have to buy things that you need, not necessarily what you want.”

Protecting her business drives her vote. After supporting former President Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012, she then backed former President Donald Trump twice in 2016 and 2020. Now, she plans to vote for President Biden, arguing Trump’s legal woes are a deal breaker for her.

Sharon Wade runs a store in downtown Portage, Wisc., that specializes in antique and vintage furnishings, and handcrafted gifts.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


Sharon Wade runs a store in downtown Portage, Wisc., that specializes in antique and vintage furnishings, and handcrafted gifts.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

Advertisement

“I just feel like there’s so much going on with his life that how can he focus on our country,” she said. “We need someone who’s going to be dedicated to what’s happening for us.”

Wade’s voting history mirrors Columbia County – known as a pivot county – one of several in the state that voted twice for Obama and then flipped to Trump in 2016.

In 2020, Trump won Columbia by just under two percentage points. But in neighboring Sauk County, he lost by about the same margin.

Both counties – made up of mid-size towns and rural areas outside the capital city – may be potential indicators of which candidate could win the state this year. But less than six months out, many voters remain divided and polarized, leaving little room for outliers to make up their minds.

Advertisement

Jen Gamblethomas sat in a coffee shop in Baraboo, the largest town in Sauk County.

“I think that everybody that I know knows who they’re voting for,” said Gamblethomas, a Democrat who works with a local veterinarian in town.

“People have solidified what their values are and what they’d like to see happen,” she added. “I think everybody’s holding true to where they stand.”

Mark Kolloway sat a few tables away from Gamblethomas. The real estate investor supports Trump and actually moved from Illinois to Wisconsin in part because of the split nature of the state.

“I like the fairness of it,” he said. “At least here, it’s a flip of a coin.”

Advertisement

A statewide ground game

Both the Biden and Trump teams are working alongside the state-wide parties to put staff on the ground in Wisconsin. But in a state that Biden won by just under 21,000 votes four years ago and Trump carried in 2016 by nearly the same margin, its political nature is not lost on either party.

“Wisconsin is the land of the nail-biter,” explained Ben Wikler, the chair of the state’s Democratic Party.

Wikler has seen the state through a series of major wins, including Biden’s victory in 2020. And he’s keen on delivering Biden’s message this year with what he’s calling “surround sound,” with both in-person and online outreach.

“Regardless of who’s going to win in a county and by how much, the real question is how many voters are out there that we have not connected with yet,” he said. “That is work that we can only really do by showing up and talking to people and meeting them where they are and listening to them. And you have to do that far out from Election Day.”

Brian Schimming, the chair of the Wisconsin Republican Party, said pivot counties like Columbia and Sauk are his party’s targets this year. Like Democrats, he’s keen on reaching out to new and nonvoters who could make a difference in a competitive county and state. That said, first-time voters in Wisconsin overwhelmingly voted for Biden four years ago – aligning with national trends.

Advertisement

“It’s a major – if not the major opportunity for us,” he explained. “If I can get them to vote early, that is also good. So we’re trying some things around here that might not necessarily be expected of Republicans.”

Schimming’s emphasis on early voting is a shift that the RNC has taken over the past year, a notable move given Trump’s previous comments disparaging it, though Trump has recently pivoted on the subject and begun promoting early voting on social media.

“If I’m able to go talk… five, eight, 10% of Republicans in this state [into] voting early – like up to two weeks early,” Schimming explained, “I can then take the resources I save because I got those people to go vote and spend them on those swing voters or the new voters.”

Local organizers are pushing the issues

A plastic Christmas tree standing at least 10 feet tall and decked out with red, white and blue ornaments graces the front entrance of a repurposed bank in Rock Springs, Wisc., population 300. The walls are lined with campaign posters, and a sign reading “God Bless America” is hung on the original, heavy bank vault door.

The bank serves as the headquarters for the Republican Party of Sauk County, which has made it a tradition to gather every Thursday at 9 am for coffee.

Advertisement

A family member of the Republican Party of Sauk County offered up the refurbished bank in Rock Springs to serve as the group’s headquarters.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

Advertisement


A family member of the Republican Party of Sauk County offered up the refurbished bank in Rock Springs to serve as the group’s headquarters.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

“Sauk County is a national bellwether,” said County Chairman Jerry Helmer as a dozen people sat around tables in the bank. “It’s not red, it’s not blue, it’s purple.”

Sauk has been somewhat of a bellwether since 2008, correctly voting for the winning presidential candidate since President Obama’s first run.

“I see that the Republicans are more excited and more wound up than I have ever seen them,” he added.

Advertisement

Members of the group said the election is in part a referendum on Biden’s policies, notably his handling of issues like immigration and the economy, topics the county party brings up with voters.

“People now have seen the alternative. They’ve seen what Biden has done. They’ve seen what the Democrats are doing. They’ve seen the impact,” said member Gordon Statz.

“To me, Joe Biden is doing more campaigning for Trump than Trump is for himself,” he added.

Gordon Statz, a retired quality manager at an automotive company, is the treasurer of the Republican Party of Sauk County. He said he feels optimistic about former President Trump’s chances this fall.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


Gordon Statz, a retired quality manager at an automotive company, is the treasurer of the Republican Party of Sauk County. He said he feels optimistic about former President Trump’s chances this fall.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

Advertisement

Democrats in the county say they too know the stakes. When organizer Judy Brey goes out canvassing, she hears many of the same issues from voters that the Republican organizers also raised.

“The border and immigration and cost of living. Over and over and over again,” she said, sipping coffee around a table with a few members of the Sauk County Democrats. “They say our president is doing nothing about it. I’m not going to vote for him.”

“But that’s what our job is,” Susan Knower, the chair of the group, cut in. “Those low-information voters, those are the ones that we have to make sure that we’re contacting,” she added.

The group said they’re hoping to engage with voters over a handful of top issues, notably protecting access to abortion — a topic that Knower argued can bring in more women and younger voters.

Democrats have been successful in highlighting the issue in recent off-year elections. Just last spring Wisconsin voters turned out in record numbers for a state supreme court race where safeguarding reproductive rights was a top priority of the winning candidate.

Advertisement

That said, Knower is worried about low levels of Democratic enthusiasm. Though she doesn’t expect large swaths of Sauk voters to flip to Trump, she’s concerned that Biden’s record has not resonated with his potential supporters.

Susan Knower, the chair of the Democratic Party of Sauk County, said the party needs to engage with voters around protecting abortion access and make a concerted effort to highlight President Biden’s policy wins.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


Susan Knower, the chair of the Democratic Party of Sauk County, said the party needs to engage with voters around protecting abortion access and make a concerted effort to highlight President Biden’s policy wins.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

“People don’t know that,” she explained, pointing to the president’s infrastructure bill and his work capping drug prices.

“Also if you’re not thrilled about Biden, you will be way less thrilled about another Trump administration,” she added. “And so you cannot sit home. And that’s got to be our message.”

Advertisement

Uncertain voters in an uncertain county

Politics was not on Marissa Flick’s mind while she ate lunch with her family at a diner in Baraboo. Sitting there with her 18-month-old son, she laughed off the idea of another Biden-Trump rematch.

“I’m not voting for that reason alone,” Flick said, who also works as a caretaker for her sister. “I feel like there shouldn’t be 80-year-old men running our country.”

Flick explained her mother advised her to vote for Biden in the 2020 race. This time, despite taking issue with some of Trump’s rhetoric, particularly on immigration, she feels disconnected from the whole race.

“I don’t really know what to look for,” she said. “Every time you see a video of someone, they’re always just bashing the other side, not saying … what they’re going to do to make the country better.”

The door isn’t fully closed, Flick said, explaining if someone provided her with good enough reasons, she would consider backing Biden again.

Advertisement

Kathleen Jahn, an artist in Portage who specializes in watercolor and pastel painting, said she’s not sure who she’ll vote for this election cycle.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

Advertisement


Kathleen Jahn, an artist in Portage who specializes in watercolor and pastel painting, said she’s not sure who she’ll vote for this election cycle.

Jeongyoon Han/NPR

Back in Columbia County, local artist Kathleen Jahn is manning an art market in downtown Portage.

“Nobody’s grabbing my heart,” she said, standing near her section of the store which featured knitted items and framed watercolor paintings.

Despite supporting some of Trump’s policies, Jahn doesn’t trust him anymore. At the same time, she isn’t fully sold on Biden.

Advertisement

“He’s got a lot of good ideas. And he wants to help a lot of the people. But I think sometimes he’s not doing it in the correct way,” she said.

As a swing voter in a swing county in a swing state, she has a rule.

“I personally, when I get together with people, say we’re here to enjoy ourselves. We will not talk about politics or religion,” she explained, letting out a laugh as she added, “Sorry!”

News

Video: Senators Question Kristi Noem on ICE Immigration Tactics

Published

on

Video: Senators Question Kristi Noem on ICE Immigration Tactics

new video loaded: Senators Question Kristi Noem on ICE Immigration Tactics

transcript

transcript

Senators Question Kristi Noem on ICE Immigration Tactics

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem repeatedly refused to apologize for suggesting that Alex Pretti and Renee Good, two U.S. citizens shot and killed by agents, were domestic terrorists.

What we’ve seen is a disaster under your leadership, Ms. Noem. A disaster. What we’ve seen is innocent people getting detained that turn out are American citizens. I could talk about the culture that’s been created here. After the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, when I spoke to Alex’s parents, they told me that you calling him a domestic terrorist — this was directly from them — the day after he was killed, a nurse in our V.A., Alex — one of the most hurtful things they could ever imagine was said by you about their son. Do you have anything you want to say to Alex Pretti’s parents? Ma’am, I did not call him a domestic terrorist. I said It appeared to be an incident of — I think the parents saw it for what it was. In a hearing — recent hearing before the HSGAC committee, C.B.P. and ICE officials testified under oath that their agencies did not inform you that Pretti was a domestic terrorist — during that hearing, stated during that hearing, I was getting reports from the ground, from agents at the scene, and I would say that it was a chaotic scene. How did you think that calling them domestic terrorists at that scene was somehow going to calm the situation? The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake, which looks like under investigation, it’s going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.

Advertisement
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem repeatedly refused to apologize for suggesting that Alex Pretti and Renee Good, two U.S. citizens shot and killed by agents, were domestic terrorists.

By Christina Kelso and Jackeline Luna

March 3, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Pregnant migrant girls are being sent to a Texas shelter flagged as medically risky

Published

on

Pregnant migrant girls are being sent to a Texas shelter flagged as medically risky

The Trump administration is sending pregnant unaccompanied minors to a South Texas shelter (above) flagged as medically inadequate by officials from the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The facility is run by a for-profit contractor called Urban Strategies.

Patricia Lim/KUT News


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Patricia Lim/KUT News

The Trump administration is sending all pregnant unaccompanied minors apprehended by immigration enforcement to a single group shelter in South Texas. The decision was made over urgent objections from some of the administration’s own health and child welfare officials, who say both the facility and the region lack the specialized care the girls need.

That’s according to seven officials who work at the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which takes custody of children who cross the border without a parent or legal guardian, or are separated from family by immigration authorities. The children remain in ORR’s care until they can be released to an adult or deported, or turn 18.

All of the officials asked not to be named for fear of retaliation.

Advertisement

Since late July, more than a dozen pregnant minors have been placed at the Texas facility, which is in the small border city of San Benito. Some were as young as 13, and at least half of those taken in so far became pregnant as a result of rape, the officials said. Their pregnancies are considered high risk by definition, particularly for the youngest girls.

“This group of kids is clearly recognized as our most vulnerable,” one of the officials said. Rank-and-file staff, the official said, are “losing sleep over it, wondering if kids are going to be placed in programs where they’re not going to have access to the care they need.”

The move marks a sharp departure from longstanding federal practice, which placed pregnant, unaccompanied migrant children in ORR shelters or foster homes around the country that are equipped to handle high-risk pregnancies.

The ORR officials said they were never told why the girls are being concentrated in a single location, let alone in this particular shelter in Texas. But they — along with more than a dozen former government officials, health care professionals, migrant advocates and civil rights attorneys — worry the Trump administration is knowingly putting the children at risk to advance an ideological goal: denying them access to abortion by placing them in a state where it’s virtually banned.

“This is 100% and exclusively about abortion,” said Jonathan White, a longtime federal health official who ran ORR’s unaccompanied children program for part of President Trump’s first term. White, who recently retired from the government, said the administration tried and failed to restrict abortion access for unaccompanied minors in 2017. “Now they casually roll out what they brutally fought to accomplish last time and didn’t.”

Advertisement

Asked if the administration is sending pregnant children to San Benito to restrict their access to abortion, HHS said in a statement that the allegation was “completely inaccurate.”

In an earlier statement, the department said that “ORR’s placement decisions are guided by child welfare best practices and are designed to ensure each child is housed in the safest, most developmentally appropriate setting, including for children who are pregnant or parenting.”

But several of the ORR officials took issue with the department’s statement. “ORR is supposed to be a child welfare organization,” one of them said. “Putting pregnant kids in San Benito is not a decision you make when you care about children’s safety.”

ORR’s acting director, Angie Salazar, instructed agency staff to send “any pregnant children” to San Benito beginning July 22, 2025, according to an internal email obtained as part of a six-month investigation by The California Newsroom and The Texas Newsroom, public media collaboratives that worked together to produce this story.

A copy of the July 22, 2025, email notifying ORR supervisors of the directive to send pregnant unaccompanied minors to a single shelter in San Benito, Texas. The move comes over objections from the government’s own health and child welfare officials.

A copy of the July 22, 2025, email notifying ORR supervisors of the directive to send pregnant unaccompanied minors to a single shelter in San Benito, Texas. The move comes over objections from the government’s own health and child welfare officials.
hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Several of the officials said a handful of pregnant girls have mistakenly been placed in other shelters because immigration authorities didn’t know they were pregnant when they were transferred to ORR custody.

Since the July order, none of the pregnant girls at the San Benito facility have experienced major medical problems, according to the ORR officials and Aimee Korolev, deputy director of ProBAR, an organization that provides legal services to children there. They said several of the girls have given birth and are detained with their infants.

But ORR officials interviewed for this story said they worry the shelter is only one high-risk pregnancy away from catastrophe.

“I feel like we’re just waiting for something terrible to happen,” one of the officials said.

‘Blown away by the level of risk’

Advertisement

There are dozens of ORR shelters or foster homes across the country that are designated to care for pregnant unaccompanied children, according to several of the ORR officials, with 12 in Texas alone. None of them could recall a time when all of the pregnant minors in the agency’s custody were concentrated in one shelter.

Detaining them in San Benito, Texas, doctors and public health experts said, is a dangerous gambit.

“It’s not good to be a pregnant person in Texas, no matter who you are,” said Annie Leone, a nurse midwife who recently spent five years caring for pregnant and postpartum migrant women and girls at a large family shelter not far from San Benito. “So, to put pregnant migrant kids in Texas, and then in one of the worst health care regions of Texas, is not good at all.”

The specialized obstetric care that exists in Texas is mostly available in its larger cities, hours from San Benito. And several factors, including the high number of uninsured patients, have eroded the availability of health care across the state.

Furthermore, Texas’ near-ban on abortion has been especially devastating to obstetric care. The law allows an exception in cases where the pregnant person’s life is in danger or one of her bodily functions is at risk, but doctors have been confused as to what that means.

Advertisement

Many doctors have left to practice elsewhere, and those who’ve stayed are often scared to perform procedures they worry could come with criminal charges. While Texas passed a law clarifying the exceptions last year, experts have said it may not be enough to assuage doctors’ fears.

Several maternal health experts listed the potential dangers for the girls at the San Benito shelter: If one of them develops an ectopic pregnancy (where the fertilized egg implants outside the uterus), if she miscarries or if her water breaks too early and she gets an infection, the emergency care she needs could be delayed or denied by doctors wary of the abortion ban.

Getting the care that is available could take too long to save her life or the baby’s, they added.

Adolescents are also more likely to give birth early, which can be life-threatening for both mother and baby. The youngest face complications during labor and delivery because their pelvises aren’t fully developed, said Dr. Anne-Marie Amies Oelschlager, an obstetrician in Washington state who specializes in adolescent pregnancy.

“These are young adolescents who are still going through puberty,” she said. “Their bodies are still changing.”

Advertisement

Pregnant girls who recently endured the often harrowing journey to the U.S. face even more risk, obstetrics experts said. Experts who work with migrant children say many are raped along the way and contract sexually transmitted infections that can be dangerous during pregnancy. Add to that little to no access to prenatal care or proper nourishment, and then the trauma of being detained.

“You couldn’t set up a worse scenario,” said Dr. Blair Cushing, who runs a women’s health clinic in McAllen, about 45 minutes from San Benito. “I’m kind of blown away by the level of risk that they’re concentrating in this facility.”

A history of problems

The San Benito shelter is owned and operated by Urban Strategies, a for-profit company that has contracted with the federal government to care for unaccompanied children for more than a decade, according to USAspending.gov.

Meliza Fonseca lives across the street from the San Benito shelter. She said she occasionally sees kids in the yard on weekends, “but for the most part, you don’t see them.”

Meliza Fonseca lives across the street from the San Benito shelter. She said she occasionally sees kids in the yard on weekends, “but for the most part, you don’t see them.”

Patricia Lim/KUT

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Patricia Lim/KUT

Advertisement

The main building, an old tan brick Baptist Church, occupies a city block in downtown San Benito, a quiet town of about 25,000. The church was converted to a migrant shelter in 2015 and was managed by two other contractors before Urban Strategies took it over in 2021.

On a fall day last year, there were no signs of activity at the facility, though children’s lawn toys and playground equipment were visible behind a wooden fence. A guard was stationed at one of the entrances.

“It’s pretty quiet, just like it is today,” said Meliza Fonseca, who lives nearby. “That’s the way it is every day.”

She said she occasionally sees kids playing in the yard on weekends, “but for the most part, you don’t see them.”

Reached by email, the founder and president of Urban Strategies, Lisa Cummins, wrote that the company is “deeply committed to the care and well-being of the children we serve,” and directed any questions about ORR-contracted shelters to the federal government.

Advertisement

When asked about the San Benito facility, HHS wrote that “Urban Strategies has a long-standing record of delivering high-quality care to pregnant unaccompanied minors, with a consistently low staff turnover.”

But the ORR officials who spoke with the newsrooms said that as recently as 2024, staff members at the shelter failed to arrange timely medical appointments for pregnant girls or immediately share critical health information with the federal agency and discharged some of them without arrangements to continue their medical care.

ORR barred the shelter from receiving pregnant girls from September to December of 2024 while Urban Strategies implemented a remediation plan, but the plan did not add staff or enhance their qualifications, the officials said.

Some of the officials said ORR’s leadership was provided with a list of shelters that are better prepared to handle children with high-risk pregnancies. All of those shelters are outside Texas, in regions where the full range of necessary medical care is available. Yet the directive to place them at San Benito remains in place.

“It’s cruel, it’s just cruel,” one of the officials said. “They don’t care about any of these kids. They’re playing politics with children’s health.”

Advertisement

‘A dress rehearsal’

Jonathan White, who ran ORR’s unaccompanied children program from January of 2017 to March of 2018, said he wasn’t surprised to learn that the new administration is moving pregnant unaccompanied children to Texas.

“I’ve been expecting this since Trump returned to office,” White said in an interview.

He said he views the San Benito order as a continuation of an anti-abortion policy shift that began in 2017, which “ultimately proved to be a dress rehearsal for the current administration.”

Scott Lloyd, the agency’s director at the time, denied girls in ORR custody permission to end their pregnancies, court records show. Lloyd also required the girls to get counseling about the benefits of motherhood and the harms of abortion and personally pleaded with some of them to reconsider.

Advertisement

“I worked to treat all of the children in ORR care with dignity, including the unborn children,” Lloyd told the newsrooms in an email.

In the fall of 2017, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a class action lawsuit against Lloyd and the Trump administration on behalf of pregnant girls in ORR custody. The ACLU argued that denying the girls abortions violated their constitutional rights, established by the Supreme Court in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

Not long after the lawsuit was filed, White said, he received a late-night phone call from Lloyd, who had a request. He wanted White to transfer an unaccompanied pregnant girl who was seeking an abortion to a migrant shelter in Texas, where, under state law, it would have been too late for her to terminate her pregnancy. White said that he believed following the order would have been unlawful because it might have denied the girl access to legal relief under the lawsuit, so he refused. The girl was not transferred.

Lloyd, who has since left the government, acknowledged making the request but said he didn’t think it was illegal.

The lawsuit was settled in 2020; the first Trump administration agreed not to impede abortion access for migrant youth in federal custody going forward. Four years later, the Biden administration cemented the deal in official regulations: If a child who wanted to terminate her pregnancy was detained in a state where it was not legal, ORR had to move them to a state where it was.

Advertisement

That rule remains in place, and the agency appears to be following it: ORR has transferred two pregnant girls out of Texas since July, though the agency officials said one of the girls chose not to terminate her pregnancy.

But now that Trump is back in office, his administration is working to end the policy.

‘Elegant and simple’

Even before Trump won reelection, policymakers in his circle were planning a renewed attempt to restrict abortion rights for unaccompanied minors.

Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a politically conservative overhaul of the federal government, called for ORR to stop facilitating abortions for children in its care. The plan advised the government not to detain unaccompanied children in states where abortion is available.

Advertisement

Such a change is now possible, Project 2025 argued, because Roe v. Wade is no longer an obstacle. Since the Supreme Court overturned the landmark decision in 2022, there is no longer a federal right to abortion.

Upon returning to office, Trump signed an executive order “to end the forced use of Federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion.”

Then, in early July, the Department of Justice reconsidered a longstanding federal law, known as the Hyde Amendment, that governs the use of taxpayer money for abortion. The DOJ concluded that the government cannot pay to transport detainees from one state to another to facilitate abortion access, except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.

And now, ORR is working to rescind the Biden-era requirement that pregnant girls requesting an abortion be moved to states where it’s available. On Jan. 23, the agency submitted the proposed change for government approval, though it has not yet published the details.

Several of the ORR officials who spoke with the newsrooms said it’s unclear whether children in the agency’s custody who have been raped or need emergency medical care will still be allowed to get abortions.

Advertisement

“HHS does not comment on pending or pre-decisional rulemaking,” the department wrote when asked for details of the regulatory change. “ORR will continue to comply with all applicable federal laws, including requirements for providing necessary medical care to children in ORR custody.”

The day the change was submitted, an unnamed Health and Human Services spokesperson told The Daily Signal, a conservative news site, “Our goal is to save lives both for these young children that are coming across the border, that are pregnant, and to save the lives of their unborn babies.”

Experts who spoke with the newsrooms said it’s unclear why the government would concentrate pregnant children in one Texas shelter, rather than disperse them at shelters throughout the state. But they said they’re convinced that the San Benito directive and the anti-abortion rule change are meant to work hand in hand: Once pregnant children are placed at the San Benito shelter, the new regulations could mean they cannot be moved out of Texas to get abortions — even if keeping them there puts them at risk.

“It’s so elegant and simple,” said White, the former head of the unaccompanied children program. “All they have to do is send them to Texas.”

Mark Betancourt is a freelance journalist and regular contributor to The California Newsroom.

Advertisement

Mose Buchele with The Texas Newsroom contributed reporting.

This story was produced by The California Newsroom and The Texas Newsroom. The California Newsroom is a collaboration of public media outlets that includes NPR, CalMatters, KQED (San Francisco), LAist and KCRW (Los Angeles), KPBS (San Diego) and other stations across the state. The Texas Newsroom is a public radio journalism collaboration that includes NPR, KERA (North Texas), Houston Public Media, KUT (Austin), Texas Public Radio (San Antonio) and other stations across the state.

Continue Reading

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

Trending