Connect with us

Wisconsin

DOJ weighs in on Line 5 trespass on tribal land in Wisconsin

Published

on

DOJ weighs in on Line 5 trespass on tribal land in Wisconsin



Federal government finds trespass is illegal, makes no move to remove pipeline

UPPER PENINSULA — The Enbridge Line 5 pipeline has been found to be illegally trespassing on tribal land in Wisconsin, but will not be moved any time soon.

After years of court arguments, lawsuits and delays, the federal government announced this week that Enbridge is in fact trespassing on land owned by the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, but made no move to force the pipeline off the land.

Tribal groups in the Great Lakes region expressed relief that Enbridge’s trespassing is being viewed as a crime after more than 10 years, but are still angry that no move is being made to remove the pipeline.

Advertisement

The Department of Justice announcement urged the courts to penalize Enbridge for its continued trespassing but also suggested the courts could allow Enbridge to continue trespassing illegally.

“Today, the United States agreed that Enbridge’s ongoing occupation of our land is illegal. We are grateful the U.S. urged the court not to let Enbridge profit from its unlawful trespass,” said Bad River Band Chairman Robert Blanchard in a statement. “But we are disappointed that the U.S. has not unequivocally called for an immediate end to Enbridge’s ongoing trespass, as justice and the law demand. Enbridge should be required to promptly leave our reservation, just like other companies that have trespassed on tribal land. We are hopeful that the appeals court will put an end to Enbridge’s shameful decade of trespass and not condone its exploitation of our land and sovereign rights.”

Built in 1953, Enbridge Energy’s Line 5 spans 645 miles from Superior, Wisconsin to Sarnia, Ontario. The line transports light crude oil and natural gas liquids. Four miles of the pipeline — consisting of two, 20-inch pipelines — crosses through the Straits of Mackinac. 

Line 5’s continued presence in the Straits of Mackinac has sparked serious concern from environmental groups and other advocates about the devastating risk of rupture. On the other side, proponents of the pipeline point to the economic impact and need for fuel transportation.

Advertisement

More: As legal sparring continues, Army Corps pushes Line 5 permit timeline to 2025

All 12 of Michigan’s federally recognized tribes, as well as tribes in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Canada, have passed resolutions calling for the decommissioning of Line 5.

While tribal communities express concerns about a possible oil spill and potential ecological harm, the Great Lakes are also significant in the creation stories of the Anishinaabe tribes.

On March 21, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel delivered oral arguments at the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in an attempt to bring the Line 5 decommission lawsuit back to the state of Michigan.

Advertisement

The Nessel vs. Enbridge lawsuit was originally filed in 2019 in Michigan, arguing that the 1836 Treaty of Washington guarantees these tribes the right to maintain their way of life in the ceded territory — a right, they claim, that will be destroyed if an oil spill from the pipeline contaminates the waters.

“We expect a fair trial that upholds the promises the United States government made to our ancestors,” said Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Chairman Austin Lowes. “We are going to present the facts behind our case and will never stop standing up for our rights as Indigenous people and the sovereignty of our nation.”

Enbridge has successfully delayed the case multiple times and had it removed from state to federal court.

“If the United States supports Enbridge, it would destroy not only both tribal sovereignty but also state sovereignty with respect to the ability to manage land, resources and water for their citizens,” said Bay Mills Indian Community President Whitney Gravelle.

Lowes added that “Our treaty with the United States government predates any treaty that Enbridge is using in an attempt to justify its illegal pipeline operations.”

Advertisement

“Our case isn’t just about whether Enbridge can continue operating Line 5, but it could impact every federally recognized tribe’s right to control what happens on their land,” he said.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals requested federal input in December 2023. After this, in early March, leaders of 30 Tribal Nations in the Great Lakes region sent a letter to President Joe Biden urging the United States to take action against Line 5’s trespass on the Bad River Band’s sovereign territories.

The Biden Administration has not responded to either request.

Subscribe: Get unlimited access to our coverage

Advertisement

More than 60 Tribal Nations supported Nessel in a motion to bring the case back to state court. The arguments for keeping the case in federal court or moving it back to state court were heard during the March 21 hearings at the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.

Nessel maintains that this case belongs in state court based on Michigan’s sovereign responsibility to protect the public trust in the waters of the Great Lakes. She argued to the court that taking the case out of state court because Enbridge prefers a federal forum violates Michigan’s right to have state claims resolved in state court.

“The case law regarding a Tribal Nation’s sovereign right to maintain their homelands and thus their reservations is a core aspect of tribal sovereignty and any position to the contrary would be unexpected and shocking,” said Gravelle.

Assistant Attorney General Dan Bock argued to the Sixth Circuit that by waiting more than two years to move the case to federal court, Enbridge’s removal was untimely and must be rejected. Bock also argued that, timing issues aside, the federal court misapplied the law when it ruled that the case belongs in federal court rather than state court.

Advertisement

Enbridge’s attorney Alice Loughran argued that the removal to federal court was timely, and it should remain in federal court because federal issues dominate the case. Those issues include the impact of the 1977 U.S.-Canada transnational pipelines treaty, the federal Submerged Lands Act and the extensive federal regulation of oil pipelines.

Enbridge argued that the state’s rights to protect the waters of the Great Lakes and the company’s right to protect commerce profits are federal issues.

The arguments were presented to a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal: Judges Richard Griffin, Amul Thapar and John Nalbandian.

On April 9, the Department of Justice weighed in on the appeal and came to a final decision that Enbridge is illegally trespassing. Though it acknowledges the trespassing, it does not call for immediate removal and even suggested the courts could allow the trespassing to continue indefinitely.

Many tribal groups spoke out about the dangers of such a decision, as it continues to threaten both environmental safety in the area and tribal sovereignty.

Advertisement

“The filing leaves more questions than answers. It also leaves Bad River, other Tribal Nations throughout the region, and the 40 million people that rely on the Great Lakes at risk of a catastrophic spill. We fear it will take Line 5 failing again, and the disaster of an oil spill for our position to be taken seriously. This isn’t just about tribes, it is about clean water, it is about life. It is about every U.S. citizen and preserving our natural resources for generations to come,” said Gravelle.

Requests for comment from Enbridge were not returned.

— Contact Brendan Wiesner: BWiesner@Sooeveningnews.com



Source link

Advertisement

Wisconsin

Wisconsin judge found guilty of obstruction for helping an immigrant evade federal agents | CNN Politics

Published

on

Wisconsin judge found guilty of obstruction for helping an immigrant evade federal agents | CNN Politics




AP
 — 

A jury found a Wisconsin judge – accused of helping an undocumented immigrant dodge federal authorities – guilty of obstruction Thursday, marking a victory for President Donald Trump as he continues his sweeping immigration crackdown across the country.

Federal prosecutors charged Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan with obstruction, a felony, and concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor, in April. The jury acquitted her on the concealment count, but she still faces up to five years in prison on the obstruction count.

The jury returned the verdicts after deliberating for six hours. Dugan faces up to five years in prison when she’s sentenced, but no date had been set as of late Thursday evening.

Advertisement

Dugan and her attorneys left the courtroom Thursday, ducked into a side conference room and closed the door without speaking to reporters. Steve Biskupic, her lead attorney, later told reporters that he was disappointed with the ruling and didn’t understand how the jury could have reached a split verdict since the elements of both charges were virtually the same.

US Attorney Brad Schimel denied the case was political and urged people to accept the verdict peacefully. He said courthouse arrests are safer because people are screened for weapons and it isn’t unfair for law enforcement to arrest wanted people in courthouses.

“Some have sought to make this about a larger political battle,” Schimel said. “While this case is serious for all involved, it is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day, in a public courthouse. The defendant is certainly not evil. Nor is she a martyr for some greater cause.”

According to court filings that include an FBI affidavit and a federal grand jury indictment, immigration authorities traveled to the Milwaukee County courthouse on April 18 after learning 31-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz had reentered the country illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.

Dugan learned that agents were in the corridor outside her courtroom waiting for Flores-Ruiz. She left the courtroom to confront them, falsely telling that their administrative warrant for Flores-Ruiz wasn’t sufficient grounds to arrest him and directing them to go to the chief judge’s office.

Advertisement

While the agents were gone, she addressed Flores-Ruiz’s case off the record, told his attorney that he could attend his next hearing via Zoom and led Flores-Ruiz and the attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside and arrested him after a foot chase. The US Department of Homeland Security announced in November he had been deported.

The case inflamed tensions over Trump’s immigration crackdown, with his administration branding Dugan an activist judge and Democrats countering that the administration was trying to make an example of Dugan to blunt judicial opposition to the operation.

Prosecutors worked during Dugan’s trial to show that she directed agents to the chief judge’s office to create an opening for Flores-Ruiz to escape.

Prosecutors also played audio recordings from her courtroom in which she can be heard telling her court reporter that she’d take “the heat” for leading Flores-Ruiz out the back.

Her attorneys countered that she was trying to follow courthouse protocols that called for court employees to report any immigration agents to their supervisors and she didn’t intentionally try to obstruct the arrest team.

Advertisement

This story has been updated with additional details.



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Wisconsin students can soon use Pell Grants to enroll in short-term programs

Published

on

Wisconsin students can soon use Pell Grants to enroll in short-term programs


Wisconsin students enrolled in short-term, workforce training programs will soon be able to use federal grants to pay their tuition.

Millions of low-income students rely on Pell Grants to pay for college, including more than 70,000 in Wisconsin. The awards have long been limited to courses that span a minimum of 15 weeks or 600 “clock hours.”

The Trump administration’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” signed into law this summer will extend Pell Grant eligiblity to include short-term nondegree programs as short as eight weeks beginning July 1, 2026. The expansion is the largest in decades, making programs previously paid out of pocket – from truck drivers to machinists to nursing assistants – more affordable to students.

These types of programs are mostly offered by community and technical colleges, which have long lobbied for the change. They are studying their programs and deciding which need adjustments ahead of the eligibility expansion.

Advertisement

“Opening up financial aid and making financial aid policy more flexible and relevant to how folks are accessing workplace today, I think it has the potential to be really exciting,” said Wisconsin Technical College System President Layla Merrifield. “How do we bundle these skills? How do we construct these programs and get students a credential that’s very relevant to their field that could potentially provide a great on-ramp to a further credential later on?”

Some education policy experts have reservations about the financial aid expansion and whether it will deliver for students. There’s concern about online training programs and for-profit institutions, some of which have a pattern of predatory practices and poor graduation outcomes. Research also shows short-term programs lead to less upward mobility and lower long-term earnings for students than associate or bachelor’s degrees.

“There is a big risk here,” said Wesley Whistle, the higher education project director at New America, a left-leaning think tank. “An eight-week program is really easy to crank out lots of people. You could have a lot of low-quality programs that don’t lead to much. Students could waste their time, exhaust their Pell eligibility and be left without the right skills to succeed in the workforce. That’s my worry.”

Short implementation timeline, outcome requirements among Workforce Pell challenges

Advocates say the proposed regulations approved Dec. 12 by the federal education department include accountability measures to prevent programs from taking advantage of students and wasting taxpayer money.

Advertisement

The programs must be run by an accredited institution of higher education, and be offered for more than one year before being approved. States must track outcomes, requiring programs meet a 70% completion and job-placement rate, and demonstrate they lead to in-demand, high-wage jobs.

The law includes no additional funding for states to take on the new role of approving individual programs, a worry of Whistle’s.

The tight timeline is also a concern to him. States could quickly throw together an approval process and never again look at it. Whistle advocated for states to start with a pilot approach and reassess in the coming years. He also suggested they creatively leverage state funding to target specific programs that serve high workforce needs.

“This could actually be a moment where we have laboratories for democracy,” Whistle said. “To see what works and what doesn’t.” 

Merrifield said technical colleges are working closely with the state Department of Workforce Development on program approvals. She said she’d love to see the expansion in place for fall 2026 but it may realistically take a little longer than that.

Advertisement

Wisconsin technical colleges take stock of programs

State technical colleges already have some programs that will qualify for the expanded financial aid. But they are considering which ones to revamp.

Take the certified nursing assistant program, Merrifield offered as an example. Students pursuing their registered nursing degree earn their CNA as part of the program. But some students aren’t in the RN program and are seeking only their CNA.The program is 75 hours, which is not enough to meet the new financial aid criteria.

Do technical colleges keep the program short, meaning students continue paying out of pocket? Or do they overhaul it, add skills that hospitals and medical facilities may be looking for and allow students to qualify for Pell Grants?

“There’s potential to re-examine why is it that we package skills the way that we do,”Merrifield said. “What is it that employers are really loooking for in the marketplace?”

Merrifield said manufacturing and agriculture programs may also be ripe for revamp.

Advertisement

Milwaukee Area Technical College has identified eight technical diploma programs that will qualify for a Pell Grant under the expansion, said Barbara Cannell, the executive dean of academic systems and integrity. The programs include nail technician, office technology assistant, real estate broker associate, truck driver training, IT user support technician and food service assistant.

MATC has a number of other programs, mostly certificates, that are too short to qualify for the expansion, she said. College officials are deciding whether to keep the programs as-is or tweak them to allow students to qualify for Pell Grants.

Both Cannell and Merrifield see the Pell Grant expansion as a way to make work-force training more accessible to nontraditional students.

“This opens the door to populations of students who just never saw themselves in that way before,” Merrifield said.

Kelly Meyerhofer has covered higher education in Wisconsin since 2018. Contact her at kmeyerhofer@gannett.com or 414-223-5168. Follow her on X (Twitter) at @KellyMeyerhofer. 

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Wisconsin to receive $750k in multistate Menards settlement

Published

on

Wisconsin to receive 0k in multistate Menards settlement


MADISON, Wis. (WMTV) – A more than $4 million multistate settlement was reached with Menards Wednesday over deceptive rebate advertising and price gouging, Wisconsin officials announced Wednesday.

Attorney General Josh Kaul and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection said the settlement resolves claims that Menards falsely marketed its merchandise credit check program, also known as the Menards’ 11% Rebate Program, and allowed price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Wisconsin will receive $750,000 in the settlement, according to DATCP.

“Figuring out how much you’ll have to pay to buy something should be straightforward,” Kaul said. “It shouldn’t be an adventure.”

Advertisement

Investigators involved in the multi-state lawsuit, which included Illinois and Minnesota, reviewed several aspects of Menards’ sales practices.

Wisconsin officials said investigators reviewed allegations that Menards’ use of the 11% off rebate program falsely claimed a point-of purchase discount, when the home improvement chain only offered in-store merchandise credit for future use, among other advertising claims.

Officials also investigated price gouging on four-gallon bottles of purified water at two locations in Wisconsin, including in Johnson Creek.

As part of the settlement, Menards will need to follow several advertising and sales practices. The terms, noted by DATCP, are as follows (wording theirs):

  • Not advertising or representing that any program that offers store credit for making purchases at Menards provides consumers with a point-of-purchase discount;
  • Clearly and conspicuously disclosing material limitations of the rebate program and disclosing all applicable terms and conditions of the rebate program in a readily available manner;
  • Investigating whether and to what extent it can offer a process by which consumers can safely and securely submit rebate application forms and receipts online;
  • Investigating whether and to what extent it can offer a process by which consumers can safely and securely redeem their rebate for online purchases;
  • Clearly and conspicuously disclosing that Menards is doing business as Rebates International;
  • Allowing consumers at least one year from the date of purchase to submit a rebate claim;
  • Updating their online rebate tracker with information about the rebate claim within 48 hours of the application being input into Menards’ system;
  • Updating their online rebate tracker with additional information about the rebate, including updates about returns affecting the rebate; and
  • Not engaging in price gouging during a period of abnormal economic disruption.

Click here to download the WMTV15 News app or our WMTV15 First Alert weather app.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending