Wyoming
Barrasso, Lummis, Hageman deride concerned Wyoming jurists as ‘biased,’ ‘liberal’ – WyoFile
Amid mounting concerns about White House disregard of court orders, Wyoming’s congressional delegates made clear last week that they continue to support President Donald Trump’s defiance of the federal judiciary.
And they are willing to insult their own constituents in defense of that position.
Rep. Harriet Hageman and Sens. Cynthia Lummis and John Barrasso publicly derided a distinguished swath of the Wyoming Bar while dismissing concerns those constituents raised in a March 26 letter warning that Trump and his allies’ threats could erode the country’s rule of law.
Wyoming’s federal delegation lashed out at the letter’s signees the same week federal judges warned that the Trump administration was striking at the core of the constitutional system that protects Americans from an unruly or oppressive government.
The more than 100 Wyoming jurists who put their name on the letter asking the delegation to protect the rule of law included three former state Supreme Court justices, an ex-governor, two former state attorneys general appointed by governors from both political parties, veteran attorneys and young Wyoming lawyers making their start in the profession.
Among the names were those of Republican and Democrat politicians and the former law partner of Rep. Harriet Hageman’s husband. Though their leanings covered the political spectrum, they shared one thing in common: Mounting concern that the rule of law is under extreme duress.
In response, Lummis, Hageman and Barrasso described the signatories as “biased, misguided” and “liberal,” in a press release issued last week.
The delegation’s response came in two phases — the first was an April 11 letter rebuffing the Wyoming jurists’ concerns. Overreaching judges, not President Donald Trump’s threats, have placed the federal judiciary in the crosshairs, the delegation wrote.
That letter ended with an olive branch. “We look forward to working with each of you to secure a prosperous future for Wyoming and to ensure a return to the non-partisan rule of law,” the delegates wrote.
On April 15, however, after WyoFile reporting made their letter public, the delegation dropped any niceties and issued a press release headlined: “Wyoming Delegation Responds to Biased, Misguided WY Judges and Lawyers.”
The delegate’s letter itself was “extremely dispiriting,” Jackson attorney Bill Schwartz, one of the letter’s signees, told WyoFile on April 17. But he had not yet seen the press release.
“Well, that’s just preposterous,” he said, when a reporter described it to him. “These are very accomplished lawyers, from every part of the state, that went to the same law school as [Lummis and Hageman] did… Many of us know at least one of the delegates. And we know they know better.”
The delegation’s answer has dismayed the letter signers, who saw in it deeply worrying signs for the country’s democratic rule.
“We are, in my judgment, in very dangerous times,” Jackson attorney Bob Schuster wrote in an email to his fellow signees. “My concerns are only heightened by the cynical and unprincipled response from our Congressional delegation,” he added in the email obtained by WyoFile.
The three politicians, for their part, say they’re responding to “liberal former judges and lawyers attempting to publicly pressure the delegation into falsely condemning President Trump and allowing judges to continue blocking the agenda more than 70% of Wyoming residents support,” according to the press release.
In today’s Wyoming politics, “if you have an independent thought sometimes that makes you a liberal,” Gillette attorney Tom Lubnau said. As a Republican politician, Lubnau served in the Wyoming House from 2004 to 2014, rising to become Speaker of the House in his final term.
“I’m going to take every opportunity I have to defend our court system and our constitutional system,” Lubnau told WyoFile. “Do I think the system is perfect? No. Do I think it’s the best system man has devised? Yes.”
Lummis, Hageman and Barrasso did not respond to interview requests from WyoFile.
Lawyers and former judges who signed the letter say that even in the more restrained portion of the delegate’s response, the politicians misstated fundamental tenets of American law. Though disheartening, the delegation’s response has galvanized the letter’s signees to continue speaking up, and has led other Wyoming jurists to reach out and offer support, Schwartz said.
The delegation issued its response during a week of ongoing clashes between the president and federal judges over the rights of migrants detained by the Trump administration and shipped to a prison in El Salvador.
On Wednesday, a federal judge in Washington, D.C. issued an order suggesting he could soon begin proceedings to hold the Trump administration in contempt of court. Trump had called for that judge, James Boasberg, to be impeached after Boasberg issued an injunction temporarily halting the president’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to detain people.
Trump invoked the act to justify his administration’s imprisonment of Venezuelans and other Latin Americans in El Salvador, without court hearings. The act was last used during World War II, when it led to the infamous internment of Japanese-Americans, including at Heart Mountain in Wyoming.
The Heart Mountain Wyoming Foundation has also called on the delegation to check Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act. “The misuse of the Alien Enemies Act at that time makes us particularly sensitive to any future abuse of the law,” the foundation wrote in an April 1 statement.
The delegates did not respond to that message, though it was delivered to each of them, officials from Heart Mountain Wyoming Foundation told WyoFile Monday.
Concern over Trump’s suggestion that Boasberg should be impeached was central to the Wyoming jurists’ letter to the delegation. The signees called on Hageman, Barrasso and Lummis to speak against the idea that a judge could be personally targeted for a ruling the president didn’t like. Trump’s threat also drew a rare rebuke from U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts.
The George W. Bush appointed chief justice said Trump was challenging two centuries of precedent, and that “impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”
What’s at stake is far broader than the rights of those now imprisoned in El Salvador under Trump’s invocation of wartime powers, according to the signees of the letter to Wyoming’s delegation.
Schwartz, the Jackson attorney, and others pointed to a Thursday ruling and admonition penned by conservative, Ronald Reagan appointed judge Harvie Wilkinson, as an example of their concerns.
“The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order,” Wilkinson wrote. “This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”
“If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?” he continued.
Lummis on Thursday labeled Boasberg’s injunction pausing the deportations to, and imprisonments in, El Salvador as “one of the most shocking examples” of judicial overreach during the Trump administration.
“Boasberg ordered planes full of dangerous illegal aliens and alleged Tren de Aragua gang members to turn around mid-flight and return to the United States,” Lummis wrote in an opinion column published by Cowboy State Daily.
In the first three months of Trump’s presidency, judges have issued 15 nationwide injunctions on federal policies, Lummis wrote, one more than they did throughout the entirety of President Joe Biden’s term. “We must remember that judges are not policymakers – and they have not been elected by the American people to legislate. The people of Wyoming deserve a government where their elected representatives make the laws,” she wrote.
Her fellow Wyoming Bar members say she’s being disingenuous at best.
“You would think that any reasoned response to our letter might have paused to consider one of the first cases any of us read in our Constitutional Law course — Marbury v. Madison,” Schuster, the Jackson attorney, wrote in his email to colleagues.
That 1803 case established that the courts can find that laws passed by Congress and executive actions are unconstitutional. The delegation, Schuster continued, is arguing that “the Court really did not mean what they said and that its 222 years of lasting precedent … is vaporous.”
Oil City News publishes letters, cartoons and opinions as a public service. The content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Oil City News or its employees. Letters to the editor can be submitted by following the link at our opinion section.
Wyoming Sun Bucks is a net gain for children, families
Dear Casper,
Rep. Ken Pendergraft’s recent column opposing the Sun Bucks program raises concerns about cost, but it does so in a way that risks giving readers an incomplete picture.
It is true that the Department of Family Services requested approximately $3.5 million for startup and operations. However, that figure represents a combined state and federal investment, split evenly. Wyoming’s share is half of that — and more importantly, those dollars are not intended to purchase food directly. They fund the administrative framework required to deliver federally funded benefits to eligible children.
Those responsibilities are not trivial. They include verifying eligibility, processing applications, maintaining technology systems, preventing fraud and ensuring benefits are accurately distributed. Without that infrastructure, the program simply cannot function, and no child would receive assistance.
The initial startup cost of $1.6 million covers one-time expenses such as building the IT system, setting up application processing, contracting with the EBT vendor that issues and loads benefit cards, and establishing temporary staffing and support systems to serve families statewide. This is not “an office for one person,” but the foundation of a program designed to reach roughly 32,000 children.
Once operational, the ongoing cost to Wyoming is estimated at about $483,000 per year in state funds. In return, the program would deliver approximately $3.84 million annually in federal food benefits to Wyoming children. That is a significant net gain for families across the state.
While the article emphasizes administrative expenses, it overlooks the scale of the benefit those costs unlock. The question is not whether administration exists — it must — but whether the outcome justifies the investment. In this case, a relatively modest state contribution enables millions in direct food assistance to flow into Wyoming communities.
Reasonable people can debate the role of government programs. But that debate should be grounded in a full accounting of both costs and benefits. When viewed in that light, the Sun Bucks program is less about bureaucracy and more about whether Wyoming chooses to participate in a federally funded effort to help ensure children have access to food during the summer months.
Mike Thompson, Chairman of the Department of Family Services Oversight Council
Evansville
Wyoming GOP endorsement of candidates
Dear Casper,
I have read about the plans for the Wyoming Republican party to endorse specific candidates in the upcoming primary election. It is my understanding that the state law currently prevents the Wyoming Republican party from officially endorsing a candidate. I agree with the party’s position that this is not in keeping with the party and its members’ First Amendment right to free speech.
However, I think that the party should be careful in exercising this right. As the purpose of the primary election is to select the candidate that the majority of the registered Republican party members feel is best suited for the position, it feels like there could be a conflict of interest in explicitly endorsing a specific candidate without receiving the input from all of the registered members of the party.
Without seeking the input of the entire Republican electorate, how will the party itself provide a fair and accurate endorsement of a candidate? I certainly hope that the party leadership is not intending to offer an endorsement on behalf of the entire party based simply on what they (the leadership) might believe. To offer such an endorsement without seeking the input from all of the party members would be anti-democratic and would invoke Orwellian images of the party which, rather than listening to and responding to the input from the party members, would tell the party members what they should think.
If the members of the party leadership wish to offer an endorsement, they should do so as individuals and should not presume to speak for the entire membership of the party, at least not before the entire Republican electorate has had a chance to provide input regarding a party-level endorsement.
To circumvent this problem, I would recommend that the Republican party hold a vote among all of its registered members to determine whom the party ought to endorse. Maybe we could hold an event where polling places are established, where party members can go to indicate their preference for that endorsement. This would provide a fair and democratic method to ensure that the Republican party’s endorsement reflects the will of the party members.
I think that there might be an event similar to what I have described scheduled for Aug. 18. Maybe the party could do more or less the same thing for their endorsement event — or just wait until then.
Carlos Buckner
Casper
Related
The 2026 Wyoming High School boys’ soccer season is close to its finish. Only three weeks remain. 4A teams will conclude the regular season, as they jockey for positions going into next week’s regional tournaments. Meanwhile, 3A schools have this week and next week left in the regular season. They are trying to reach the top four of the league standings, as those are the teams that qualify for the state tournament in two weeks.
WYOPREPS WEEK 8 BOYS SOCCER SCHEDULE 2026
Three matches this week feature ranked opponents squaring off. Sheridan will host Thunder Basin on Friday. In 3A on Saturday, top-ranked Cody is at No. 5 Mountain View, and four-rated Torrington goes to No. 2 Buffalo. Just like the ladies, you have some rivalry matches on the schedule with Rock Springs-Green River, Jackson-Star Valley, and Thunder Basin-Campbell County. Wednesday will bring new soccer rankings. This is the boys’ schedule for Week 8. Schedules are subject to change.
TUESDAY, MAY 5:
CLASS 4A
Final Score: #2 Sheridan 2 Campbell County 1 (conference match)
Final Score: Riverton 3 Natrona County 1 (conference match)
CLASS 3A
Pinedale at Rawlins – postponed to May 11 – changed to May 9 for boys’ match only!
WEDNESDAY, MAY 6:
CLASS 4A
Laramie at Cheyenne Central – postponed to May 9
Cheyenne South at Cheyenne East – postponed to May 9
Read More Soccer News from WyoPreps
WyoPreps Boys Soccer Standings on 5-4-26
WyoPreps Week 7 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Coaches and Media Soccer Polls 4-29-26
Nominate a Boys Soccer Player for WyoPreps Athlete of the Week
WyoPreps Week 6 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Coaches & Media Soccer Polls 4-22-26
WyoPreps Boys Soccer Standings on 4-20-26
WyoPreps Week 5 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Coaches & Media Soccer Polls 4-15-26
WyoPreps Week 4 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Week 3 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Week 2 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
WyoPreps Week 1 Boys Soccer Scores 2026
THURSDAY, MAY 7:
CLASS 4A
Final Score: #1 Jackson 8 Star Valley 2 (conference match)
Final Score: #4 Thunder Basin 3 Campbell County 1 (conference match)
Final Score: Rock Springs 2 #5 Green River 1 (conference match)
FRIDAY, MAY 8:
CLASS 4A
Final Score: Cheyenne Central 6 Cheyenne South 0 (conference match)
Final Score: #2 Sheridan 3 #4 Thunder Basin 1 (conference match)
Final Score: #2 Kelly Walsh 6 Riverton 0 (conference match)
Final Score: Laramie 3 Cheyenne East 1 (conference match)
Final Score: Evanston 2 Natrona County 2 – TIE (conference match) – Red Devils scored with 1 second left for the draw.
CLASS 3A
Final Score: #4 Worland 1 Rawlins 0 (conference match) – Kobe Bradshaw scored the GW goal on a PK in the 1st half.
Final Score: Douglas 2 Torrington 2 (conference match) – Shootout = Torrington wins 4-3!
Final Score: #1 Cody Lyman (conference match)
Final Score: #2 Lander 3 Pinedale 0 (conference match)
Final Score: Powell 1 #5 Mountain View 0 (conference match) – Gianrey Dallesandro with the GW-goal, assisted by Ethan Frame.
Final Score: #3 Buffalo 1 Newcastle 0 (conference match) – forfeit win for the Bison.
SATURDAY, MAY 9:
CLASS 4A
Laramie at Cheyenne Central, 11 a.m. (conference match)
Evanston at #2 Kelly Walsh, noon (conference match)
Cheyenne South at Cheyenne East, noon (conference match)
Riverton at Natrona County, noon (conference match)
Rock Springs at Star Valley, 1 p.m. (conference match)
CLASS 3A
Pinedale at Rawlins, 11 a.m.
#1 Cody at #5 Mountain View, noon (conference match)
Powell at Lyman, noon (conference match)
Torrington at #3 Buffalo, 2 p.m. (conference match)
#4 Worland at Douglas, 2 p.m. (conference match)
Final Score: Rawlins 1 Newcastle 0 (conference match) – forfeit win for the Outlaws.
Cheyenne Central vs. Cheyenne East HS Softball 2026
The Indians faced the rival Thunderbirds on April 15, 2026
Gallery Credit: David Settle, WyoPreps.com
James Forest Mothersbaugh Jr.: 1953 – 2025
James “Jim” Forest Mothersbaugh Jr. passed away on Saturday, December 6, 2025 at Central Wyoming Hospice in Casper, Wyoming, from complications of Multiple System Atrophy. He is survived by his wife, Becky Mothersbaugh; his sons, James Forest Mothersbaugh III and Blair Mothersbaugh; and Blair’s fiancée, Kelsey Baron.
Jim’s life was defined by music. He was a highly accomplished violinist, performing with the Orquesta Sinfonica de Puerto Rico, Wyoming Symphony Orchestra, and Savannah Symphony, among many others. He held degrees in violin performance, music education, and conducting from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and the Hartt School of Music in Hartford, Connecticut, with additional doctoral studies at the University of Iowa. He met his wife when they were both performing in San Juan, Puerto Rico, and passed his musical acumen to both of his sons. Jim taught orchestra and music theory to generations of students of all ages & abilities during his 28 years in the Natrona County School District. He conducted award-winning orchestras, taught students who went on to become professional musicians, and instilled a sense of purpose, character, and belief in both his students and colleagues that extended far beyond the stage. He was also an expert in the craft of re-hairing bows for string instruments, knew everything there is to know about The Beatles, and possessed a rare ability called synesthesia, which allowed him to see specific colors when hearing music. He leaves an extensive, enduring, and active legacy in the Wyoming musical community.
Jim will be immensely missed by his family, his friends, his colleagues, and his students. A celebration of life will take place at Backwards Distilling Company in Casper, Wyoming on June 28, 2026 from 2 to 5 p.m. Please RSVP at https://jimsmemorial.rsvpify.com/.
Related
-
Arkansas6 minutes agoOklahoma Responds Well But Collapses Late to Drop Series With Arkansas
-
California12 minutes agoTwo GOP candidates for California governor participate in Bakersfield forum
-
Colorado18 minutes agoColorado man sentenced to over 40 years in prison for murder of ex-girlfriend
-
Connecticut23 minutes agoBody recovered from Connecticut River near Chester-Lyme Ferry, DEEP says
-
Delaware30 minutes agoFormer Delaware police officer accused of raping woman he met on dating app
-
Florida36 minutes agoFlorida man taken into custody related to call threatening business
-
Georgia42 minutes ago
Leschber Named to 2026 ACC All-Tournament Team
-
Hawaii48 minutes agoFlames engulf van on H-1 Freeway near Punchbowl
