Connect with us

Missouri

Missouri Senate hears bill on life imprisonment for people in U.S. without legal status

Published

on

Missouri Senate hears bill on life imprisonment for people in U.S. without legal status


Lee este reporte en Español.

A Missouri Senate committee heard hours of testimony Monday on illegal immigration legislation that includes life imprisonment for those found guilty and a bounty of $1,000 for reporting people without legal status in the U.S.

Through one of the pieces of legislation, someone who is in the country without legal status who enters Missouri and remains would be guilty of a new felony trespassing charge.

The penalty would be life imprisonment without parole, probation or conditional release except by action of the governor.

Advertisement

Those penalties would not apply if the federal government enters into a written agreement with the Missouri Department of Public Safety to take into custody and deport the person.

Sen. David Gregory, R-Chesterfield, sponsor of the legislation, said the bill’s goal is to create an equivalent of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“Much like ICE, we have to actually do an effective investigation and have enough probable cause to initiate a warrant for someone’s arrest before they can be tracked and arrested,” Gregory said.

Gregory said through his bill it would be illegal to conduct warrantless arrests, even though that is not specified in the measure.

“It is not allowed per constitutional law, which means we cannot change it here, nor can the federal government change it,” Gregory said.

Advertisement

Sen. Barbara Washington, D-Kansas City, asked Gregory for specifics on how this issue is affecting Missourians today.

“I am so sick of folks coming in here and telling me about what’s going on here, there and everywhere and not talking about the issues we have in our own state,” Washington said.

Gregory did not give specific examples in response to Washington’s question.

Gregory also referenced a substitute of his original bill that he’s building. That version has not been posted online.

A $1,000 bounty

The first version of the bill would require the state Department of Public Safety to create a system in which anyone can contact authorities and accuse someone of being here without legal documentation.

Advertisement

The system must include a telephone number, an email address and an online portal people can use.

People who would use it to report someone could remain anonymous. Within the bill language, there are no penalties if someone were to report on a person who has proper legal status.

If the accused person is in Missouri without legal status, the person who reported them would receive $1,000.

Sen. Stephen Webber, D-Columbia, asked Gregory if there were courses of action someone could take if they were incorrectly accused.

“If somebody tries to call in a tip and says, ‘I think my neighbor is undocumented’ and there’s an investigation, that person was not undocumented, do they have any kind of recourse for their troubles?” Webber said.

Advertisement

Gregory said it is currently against the law to harass or give false reports to hotlines.

The legislation also expands who can become a bounty hunter in the state in relation to the issue. It allows anyone with an unexpired valid license as a bail bond agent, general bond agent or surety recovery agent to apply to the program.

The bill also creates a fund that would provide money to implement the proposed act. The legislature would be responsible for coming up with the funding.

The committee briefly discussed a fiscal note on the cost of the bill, which amounts to roughly $4.5 million.

Only one person spoke in favor of the legislation, while over 30 spoke against it.

Advertisement

Tori Schafer with the ACLU of Missouri said the ACLU has already sued over similar laws in Iowa, Oklahoma and Texas.

“We’ve been successful in those cases because judges have agreed that we’re likely to succeed on the merits, because the federal government has an invested interest in carrying out federal law, which is exactly what we’re talking about,” Schaefer said.

Yazmin Bruno-Valdez, a recipient of the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, also spoke against the legislation. She said it would pit neighbors against one another.

“It would incentivize discrimination, foster xenophobia and perpetuate division by placing a price tag of a mere $1,000,” Bruno-Valdez said.

Hours earlier on Monday, senators heard similar legislation from Sen. Jill Carter, R-Granby.

Advertisement

The legislation makes it illegal for someone to enter Missouri if they do not have legal status in the United States.

They would be fined $10,000 and deported on the first offence. On subsequent offenses, the punishment would include prison time of one to seven years.

“It’s morally imperative to strike a balance between the unresponsive federal government and the plight of our communities and law enforcement,” Carter said.

Three people spoke in favor of the legislation, including David Parrish, a sheriff in Lewis County.

“We feel that this legislation will simply give law enforcement another tool in the tool box to help us assist any of our federal partners,” Parrish said.

Advertisement

Aura Velasquez was among the over 20 people who spoke against Carter’s legislation. Velasquez was born in Nicaragua and came to the U.S. when she was 5.

“My mom left Nicaragua to set out to find a place she was told was built by immigrants and welcomed them: the United States of America. And now, if this bill was to continue further than an idea, it would destroy the safety of anyone that looks different, my friends, my family and children could be labeled as not human enough to live in peace,” Velasquez said.

The hearings on these bills come a week into President Donald Trump’s second administration. Trump ran on a promise to enact mass deportations.

On Saturday, over 100 protesters gathered in Overland to decry the Trump administration’s immigration policy changes and deportations.

Advertisement





Source link

Missouri

Missouri’s Mitchell named to men’s basketball All-SEC second-team | Jefferson City News-Tribune

Published

on

Missouri’s Mitchell named to men’s basketball All-SEC second-team | Jefferson City News-Tribune


Missouri senior forward Mark Mitchell was recognized Monday with a second-team selection to the All-Southeastern Conference teams.

Mitchell has led the Tigers all season long and tops the team in scoring (17.9 points per game), rebounding (5.2) and assists (3.6). He would be the just the second player in program to lead all the categories in one season, joining Albert White from the 1998-99 season.

Mitchell is also on pace to become the first player in program history to average at least 17 points, five rebounds and three assists since Anthony Peeler in 1992, the year he took home the Big 8 Conference Player of the Year award.

Mitchell was the only Missouri player to be recognized in SEC postseason awards.

Advertisement

Five players were named to each of the three All-SEC teams.

Darius Acuff Jr. (Arkansas), Ja’Kobi Gillespie (Tennessee), Thomas Haugh (Florida), Labaron Philon Jr. (Alabama) and Tyler Tanner (Vanderbilt) made the first team.

Acuff was named the conference’s player of the year and freshman of the year.

Joining Mitchell on the second team were Nate Ament (Tennessee), Rueben Chinyelu (Florida), Otega Oweh (Kentucky) and Dailyn Swain (Texas), while Rashaun Agee (Texas A&M), Alex Condon (Florida), Keyshawn Hall (Auburn), Aden Holloway (Alabama) and Josh Hubbard (Mississippi State) were named to the third team.

The All-SEC defensive team consisted of Chinyelu, Somto Cyril (Georgia), Felix Okpara (Tennessee), Billy Richmond III (Arkansas) and Tanner. Chinyelu was selected as the defensive player of the year.

Advertisement

Appearing on the all-freshman team were Acuff, Amari Allen (Alabama), Ament, Malachi Moreno (Kentucky) and Meleek Thomas (Arkansas).

Swain was selected as the newcomer of the year, while Urban Klavzar of Florida was named the sixth man of the year.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Missouri

Missouri (MSHSAA) High School Girls Basketball State Playoff Brackets, Matchup, Schedule – March 9, 2026

Published

on

Missouri (MSHSAA) High School Girls Basketball State Playoff Brackets, Matchup, Schedule – March 9, 2026


The 2026 Missouri high school basketball state championship brackets continue on Monday, March 9, with eight games in the sectional and quarterfinal round of the higher classifications.

High School On SI has brackets for every classification in the Missouri high school basketball playoffs. The championship games will begin on March 19.


Missouri High School Girls Basketball 2026 Playoff Brackets, Schedule (MSHSAA) – March 9, 2026

Advertisement

Sectionals

Doniphan vs. Potosi – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

St. James vs. St. Francis Borgia – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Notre Dame de Sion vs. Oak Grove – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Smithville vs. Benton – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Cardinal Ritter College Prep vs. Clayton – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

Orchard Farm vs. Kirksville – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

Boonville vs. Strafford – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Reeds Spring vs. Nevada – 03/09, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

Quarterfinals

Festus vs. Lift for Life Academy – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

Grandview vs. Kearney – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

MICDS vs. St. Dominic – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

Helias vs. Marshfield – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT


Advertisement

Quarterfinals

Jackson vs. Marquette – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

Advertisement

Rock Bridge vs. Staley – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

Incarnate Word Academy vs. Troy-Buchanan – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT

Kickapoo vs. Lee’s Summit West – 03/13, 6:00 PM CT


Advertisement

More Coverage from High School On SI



Source link

Continue Reading

Missouri

Missouri lawmakers advance ‘A’ through ‘F’ school grading bill

Published

on

Missouri lawmakers advance ‘A’ through ‘F’ school grading bill


Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe’s request to grade public schools on an “A” through “F” scale is pushing House lawmakers to approve legislation some think isn’t quite ready.

With approval and dissent on both sides of the aisle, the House voted a bill to create a new school accountability system through to the Senate 96-53 Thursday despite concerns the letter grades could be a “scarlet letter” for underperforming schools.

“Will this labeling system actually improve schools or will it mostly brand communities, destabilize staffing and incentivize gaming rather than learning?” asked state Rep. Kem Smith, a Democrat from Florissant, during House debate Tuesday morning, March 3.

Advertisement

She said the key metrics that determine the grade, performance and growth, are volatile.

“The label itself can become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” she said. “The bill doubles down on high stakes metrics that are known to be unstable.”

The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Dane Diehl, a Republican from Butler, told lawmakers that a performance-based school report card with “A” through “F” grades is inevitable. The details, though, are negotiable.

“The governor’s executive order, it is going to happen either way,” he said. “I think we tried to make that process a little better for school districts.”

Advertisement

Kehoe’s order directs the state’s education department to draw up a plan for the report cards and present it to the State Board of Education. The board could reject the idea, but with a board with primarily new members appointed by Kehoe, lawmakers have accepted the system as fate.

State Rep. Ed Lewis, a Republican from Moberly and chair of the House’s education committee, told the committee in January that he prioritized the bill as a way to give lawmakers influence over the final outcome. He is happy with the edits the committee made, which gives the education department more leeway to determine grade thresholds and removes a provision that would raise expectations once 65% of schools achieve “A” or “B” grades.

The House also approved an amendment March 3 that would grade schools’ environment. This would be based on the rates of student suspension, seclusion and restraint incident rates and satisfaction surveys given to students, parents and teachers.

The Senate’s version, which passed out of its education committee last week, does not include those changes.

“I think (the House bill) is the best product we have in the Capitol right now,” Lewis said. “I am not saying it’s complete, but it is the best we have right now.”

Advertisement

The changes have softened some skeptics of the legislation, like state Rep. Brad Pollitt.

Pollitt, a Sedalia Republican, said he didn’t support the legislation “for a number of years.” But with the edits, he sees potential for the legislation to usher in changes to the way the state accredits public schools.

The current process, he said, “nobody seems to like,” pointing to widespread concerns with the state’s standardized test.

Some of these changes are already happening quietly. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education received a grant from the federal government to develop a state assessment based on through-year testing, which would measure student growth throughout the school year, instead of a single summative assessment.

The department is poised to pilot the new test in 14 classrooms this spring, hoping to eventually offer it statewide within a few years. But the estimated startup cost of $2 million is one of many department requests cut from the governor’s proposed budget as the state grapples with declining revenue.

Advertisement

Creating the “A” through “F” report cards is estimated to cost a similar amount, if not more, according to the state’s fiscal note. The expense is largely frontloaded, going to the programming and technology support required to create the grade cards’ interface.

When The Independent asked Kehoe’s office about the fiscal note, the governor’s communications director Gabby Picard said he would work with “associated agencies” to determine appropriate funding “while remaining mindful of the current budget constraints and maintaining fiscal responsibility.”

The House’s version of the legislation includes an incentive program for high-performing schools, giving bonuses to go toward teacher recruitment and retention, if the legislature appropriates funding for the program.

The bill originally proposed incentives of $50-100 per student to subsidize teacher pay. This had large fiscal implications, and Lewis surmised that it would violate a section of the State Constitution prohibiting bonuses for public employees.

Advertisement

Making the funding optional and directing it to the school’s teacher recruitment and retention fund remedied those concerns. The Senate Education Committee removed the incentive program in its version of the legislation.

The House’s approval Thursday does not stop discussion and possible amendments. Next, the bill will go to the Senate for consideration, and if any changes are made, it will return to the House for more discussion.

This story was first published at missouriindependent.com.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending