Connect with us

Vermont

Officials condemn ICE’s actions at violent Vermont protest, while advocates question state’s role – The Boston Globe

Published

on

Officials condemn ICE’s actions at violent Vermont protest, while advocates question state’s role – The Boston Globe


Meanwhile, new details emerged about the day-long skirmish, which included a lengthy standoff outside a residence in South Burlington, the detention of three undocumented immigrants, none of whom were the original target, and the use of pepper spray and flashbang devices for crowd control.

Local and state police said the incident began around 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, when US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents sought to detain a man they believed to be Deyvi Daniel Corona-Sanchez, a Mexican citizen who had previously been deported and subsequently charged with driving under the influence in Vermont.

Federal officials pursued a car they believed Corona-Sanchez was driving in a busy neighborhood of South Burlington. The driver crashed into multiple vehicles, including two driven by federal agents, and then escaped on foot. Authorities surrounded a nearby house into which they said the driver had fled.

ICE operation in Vermont leads to violent clashes between protesters and police

Advertisement

A daylong protest over an immigration enforcement operation escalated into a chaotic confrontation between activists and police late Wednesday. (Video by Paul Heintz Globe Staff)

Occupants refused to let federal agents into the house without a warrant and, with assistance from the advocacy group Migrant Justice, summoned supporters to block the doors. Over the course of the day, the crowd swelled to more than 200 people singing and chanting as more law enforcement officers arrived.

Just after 5 p.m., an unidentified federal agent told the crowd a federal judge had issued a criminal arrest warrant for Corona-Sanchez and ordered them to disperse. Vermont state troopers wearing tactical gear cleared a path through the protesters, allowing federal agents to enter the house — and leave a short time later with three people.

Protesters sought to prevent federal agents and police from departing by blocking their vehicles while officers wrestled some protesters to the ground, pepper-sprayed them, and deployed flashbangs. At least three protesters were cited for criminal trespass, according to Vermont State Police.

On Thursday, the US attorney in Vermont said the three people detained inside the house did not include Corona-Sanchez. And, according to Rachel Elliott, a spokesperson for Migrant Justice, Corona-Sanchez no longer owned the car, was not driving it on Wednesday, nor was inside the house raided by agents.

Advertisement

Rather, Elliott said, the occupants included two women from Ecuador, one man from Honduras, and two minors. She said the man, Christian Jerez-Andrade, was among the passengers in the car, along with one of the minors, a 17-year-old boy. According to Elliott, the driver of the car, whom she did not identify, never entered the house. The other minor, a young girl, was spirited out of the house Wednesday afternoon, before the protest escalated.

Jerez-Andrade and the two women were being held in Vermont prisons Thursday. Their attorneys filed petitions in court seeking to keep them in Vermont, and federal judges granted their requests later that day.

State and federal police gathered outside of a home in South Burlington on Wednesday.Paul Heintz/Globe Staff

Elliott described a harrowing scene inside the house. She said the 17-year-old “watched armed officers chase people through the home.” At one point, she said, a federal agent tripped and accidentally discharged their service weapon.

ICE did not respond to a request for comment.

Top officials in the state blasted federal agents for initiating the raid and confronting protesters, all while failing to achieve their initial objective of detaining Corona-Sanchez.

Advertisement

“President Trump’s domestic army, ICE, came into Vermont yesterday from out of state and, as is virtually always the case, acted in an irresponsible, reckless and unprofessional manner,” said Senators Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch, as well as Representative Becca Balint, in a statement.

Governor Phil Scott, a Republican who has long distanced himself from the Trump administration, called the incident “totally unnecessary,” and said the actions of federal law enforcement “further demonstrates a lack of training, coordination, leadership, and outdated tactics which put both peaceful protesters and Vermont law enforcement in a difficult situation.”

He thanked local and State Police, but he criticized “those there to agitate,” an apparent reference to protesters, some of whom threw water bottles and other objects at police vehicles.

Sarah George, the county prosecutor, called for the US attorney’s office to investigate the conduct of federal agents, a sentiment echoed by other officials.

One statewide officeholder, Treasurer Mike Pieciak — a Democrat viewed as a potential challenger to Scott — went a step further, calling for an independent investigation of both federal and state law enforcement.

Advertisement

“Who made the decision and why was the decision made for the State Police to get involved in an immigration enforcement matter?” he said in an interview.

State and local police agencies in Vermont are required to follow Fair and Impartial Policing policies, which limit the extent to which they can cooperate with federal authorities on immigration matters. Pieciak questioned whether Vermont State Police might have run afoul of those policies when they pushed through the crowd so ICE agents could reach the house.

A protester outside an immigration enforcement action in South Burlington, Vt., on Wednesday recovered from the apparent use of pepper spray by police.Paul Heintz/Globe Photo

“It seems like the State Police were providing the pathway, providing the opportunity for ICE agents to get into the house and conduct their search or try to execute on their arrest warrant,” he said. “And without the State Police, that would not have happened.”

But Vermont Public Safety Commissioner Jennifer Morrison, who oversees the State Police, took issue with the notion her officers facilitated the arrests.

“We did not help ICE get into the house,” she said. Rather, state troopers “created a safe corridor” through which federal agents could move, she said, “and make their way to the door, where they handled the operation exclusively.”

Protesters blocked a law enforcement vehicle during the stand off on Wednesday.Paul Heintz/Globe Photo

Morrison said her agency made the assessment, based on similar protests throughout the country, that without its involvement, federal agents were more likely to use “techniques . . . that could have harmed Vermonters.”

Lia Ernst, legal director for the ACLU of Vermont, said she was skeptical local and State Police were focused on keeping protesters safe and protecting the First Amendment.

Advertisement

“When they’re gearing up in masks and tactical gear, that doesn’t feel to me like an agency preparing to do those things,” Ernst said, calling for a “full and thorough” investigation.

At least one local officer was already facing scrutiny Thursday.

Burlington Mayor Emma Mulvaney-Stanak, whose police department assisted at Wednesday’s incident, said the city was reviewing the actions of a Burlington officer “who has been accused of using excessive force against protesters.”

She appeared to be referring to an officer pictured in a video circulating on social media who grabbed a woman by the arm, swung her around, and slammed her to the curb. The woman, Gwendolyn Heaghney, 33, of Winooski, said she had been trying to remove a mask from a fellow protester who was being led away by police in order to help him breathe.

“It was just like crazy whiplash,” she said Thursday as she sought treatment at a local hospital. “I’ve never really been in a physical fight, but he grabbed my arm, twisted it, and my whole body went with him.”

Advertisement

Heaghney said she hoped to see “something other than milquetoast” statements from politicians and police.

“I want to see some accountability,” she said.


Paul Heintz can be reached at paul.heintz@globe.com. Follow him on X @paulheintz.





Source link

Advertisement

Vermont

Commentary | Afonso-Rojas: Who pays when businesses ignore risks?

Published

on

Commentary | Afonso-Rojas: Who pays when businesses ignore risks?


In 2024, when Vermont passed the nation’s first Climate Superfund law (Act 47), it did something unusual; it sent a bill. After catastrophic flooding that turned roads into rivers, damaged homes and businesses, and strained public budgets, our little green state moved to require major fossil fuel companies, such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell USA, and BP America, to help pay for the costs of climate damage. It was a striking moment for policy innovation and corporate accountability. Implicit in the law is a simple idea: these costs were predictable, and someone chose not to plan for them.

For community members across Vermont, and in similar towns nationwide, Vermont’s decision is a call to action. When major companies avoid managing environmental risks, local residents pay the price through higher taxes, damaged homes, disrupted livelihoods, and strained public services. “Good” business should mean safeguarding the communities they rely on, not shifting costs onto neighbors and taxpayers. Every time companies ignore these risks, the burden lands on local taxpayers and community budgets, not just corporate balance sheets.

Thus, community benefit must be proactively built into business models from the start. They must choose prevention over mitigation. Vermont’s Climate Superfund law makes clear that when companies fail to invest in local resilience, the burden shifts to taxpayers and neighbors. Too often, companies take from communities without investing in their strength. When disaster strikes, the community pays first, while corporate donations often arrive too late or are motivated more by public relations than genuine support.

Advertisement

This is inadequate and inefficient, leaving communities vulnerable and weary. Companies that prioritize local hiring, invest in regional supply chains, and partner with community organizations create stronger, more resilient neighborhoods and consumers. Local procurement reduces supply chain disruptions, and partnerships with governments and nonprofits ensure investments address real needs. Embedding community benefit is not charity; it is smart risk management that protects both businesses and residents.

However, purpose without power is empty. Many companies continue to fall into the trap of confusing “purpose” with performance, as mission statements and sustainability pledges have become synonymous with largely symbolic changes. Executives continue to be rewarded for short-term financial gains rather than long-term resilience or community impact. This results in sustainability commitments often being sidelined when they conflict with quarterly targets. If companies are serious about sustainability, they must collaborate, employ, and invest locally to reduce long-term risks and improve communities’ well-being.

Some critics of Act 47 may argue that requiring businesses to invest in sustainability and community resilience imposes unnecessary costs. But these costs do not vanish. When companies fail to manage environmental risks, families pay higher taxes, local governments stretch their budgets, and communities face lasting hardships. Vermont’s Climate Superfund law puts the responsibility back on those who caused the harm, rather than allowing community members to bear the weight.

Addressing these challenges requires companies to work directly with their stakeholders. Multi-stakeholder solutions and collaborations between businesses, governments, NGOs, and labor groups are essential for achieving meaningful impact. For example, working with local governments can improve infrastructure planning, while collaboration with community organizations ensures that projects address real needs. These partnerships transform sustainability from a corporate initiative into a collective effort with broader and more lasting benefits.

Vermont’s Climate Superfund law is, in many ways, a response to communities being left to bear the consequences of unmanaged risks. Companies must embed community benefit into their operations, align incentives with long-term outcomes, and engage in partnerships that extend beyond their own walls. Because when the bill for unmanaged risk comes due, it lands squarely on the community.

Advertisement

Vi Afonso-Rojas is an Honors student at the University of Rhode Island, double-majoring in Supply Chain Management and Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. The opinions expressed by columnists do not necessarily reflect the views of Vermont News & Media.



Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

VT Lottery Pick 3, Pick 3 Evening results for May 10, 2026

Published

on


Powerball, Mega Millions jackpots: What to know in case you win

Here’s what to know in case you win the Powerball or Mega Millions jackpot.

Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

The Vermont Lottery offers several draw games for those willing to make a bet to win big.

Advertisement

Those who want to play can enter the MegaBucks and Lucky for Life games as well as the national Powerball and Mega Millions games. Vermont also partners with New Hampshire and Maine for the Tri-State Lottery, which includes the Mega Bucks, Gimme 5 as well as the Pick 3 and Pick 4.

Drawings are held at regular days and times, check the end of this story to see the schedule.

Here’s a look at May 10, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Pick 3 numbers from May 10 drawing

Day: 3-7-1

Evening: 7-1-8

Advertisement

Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Pick 4 numbers from May 10 drawing

Day: 5-6-1-9

Evening: 1-7-2-0

Check Pick 4 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from May 10 drawing

01-03-20-35-46, Bonus: 05

Advertisement

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your lottery prize

For Vermont Lottery prizes up to $499, winners can claim their prize at any authorized Vermont Lottery retailer or at the Vermont Lottery Headquarters by presenting the signed winning ticket for validation. Prizes between $500 and $5,000 can be claimed at any M&T Bank location in Vermont during the Vermont Lottery Office’s business hours, which are 8a.m.-4p.m. Monday through Friday, except state holidays.

For prizes over $5,000, claims must be made in person at the Vermont Lottery headquarters. In addition to signing your ticket, you will need to bring a government-issued photo ID, and a completed claim form.

All prize claims must be submitted within one year of the drawing date. For more information on prize claims or to download a Vermont Lottery Claim Form, visit the Vermont Lottery’s FAQ page or contact their customer service line at (802) 479-5686.

Advertisement

Vermont Lottery Headquarters

1311 US Route 302, Suite 100

Barre, VT

05641

When are the Vermont Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 10:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 11 p.m. Tuesday and Friday.
  • Gimme 5: 6:55 p.m. Monday through Friday.
  • Lucky for Life: 10:38 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Megabucks: 7:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 11:15 p.m. daily

What is Vermont Lottery Second Chance?

Vermont’s 2nd Chance lottery lets players enter eligible non-winning instant scratch tickets into a drawing to win cash and/or other prizes. Players must register through the state’s official Lottery website or app. The drawings are held quarterly or are part of an additional promotion, and are done at Pollard Banknote Limited in Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Advertisement

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Vermont editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

Vermont State Police investigating suspicious death

Published

on

Vermont State Police investigating suspicious death


Vermont State Police are investigating a suspicious death in the eastern part of the state.

The investigation began around 10 a.m. Saturday when police received a report of a dead woman at a property at 48 Douglas Hill Road in Norwich. First responders located a woman dead inside the residence.

State police said their initial investigation indicates the woman’s death occurred under “potentially suspicious circumstances.” Everyone associated with the matter is accounted for, and they said there is no danger to the public.

The victim’s body will be brought to the Chief Medical Examiner’s Office in Burlington for an autopsy to determine cause and manner of death. State police said they will release the woman’s identity following further investigation and notification of family members.

Advertisement

No further details have been released.

Anyone with information that could assist investigators is being asked to call 802-234-9933 or submit an anonymous tip online at https://vsp.vermont.gov/tipsubmit.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending