Yearly Archives: 2023

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is doing something prominent New Mexico politicians have opposed for years: building more border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Department is waiving 26 federal laws to finish a 20-mile stretch of wall in the Rio Grand Valley; it stopped construction there more than two years ago.

In a six-page filing with the Federal Register, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended the decision.

“There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States in the project areas,” he wrote, citing sections of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.

Border Patrol agents working in the Rio Grande Valley Sector apprehended over 245,000 foreign nationals illegally entering the country between points of entry from the start of the fiscal year through early August. Additionally, it apprehended more than 90,000 people in August and September combined, as The Center Square has previously reported.

Although New Mexico politicians have opposed building more border wall, many of them have been silent since President Joe Biden’s administration started building more border wall, including U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-New Mexico, U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-New Mexico, and New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, another Democrat.

For example, Heinrich called the U.S.-Mexico border wall “an ugly symbol of hatred” in April 2021.

“President Trump’s wasteful and ineffective border wall was an ugly symbol of hatred, fear, and intolerance. Its construction, often times fast-tracked without consultation from border communities, dealt severe damage to the environment, private land, wildlife corridors, and sacred Native American sites,” Heinrich said in a press release at the time.

His Senate colleague Ben Ray Lujan is also vocally anti-border wall.

Lujan told MSNBC in 2018 that he opposed funding even one penny for the border wall.

"I'm not open to giving a penny to President Trump for this ridiculous wall of his," he told MSNBC. "I'm not open to supporting President Trump's wall in one form or another."

And Lujan Grisham released a video in February 2019 where she ran through walls and said, “Here’s what I think of Trump’s wall.”

The press offices for the U.S. Senators and governor did not respond to repeated efforts over two days to ask whether the Democratic politicians have changed their view of the wall now that a Democratic president was building it.

(The Center Square) – A lawmaker has a plan at the Wisconsin Capitol to make sure children are away from and cannot ride in Madison's Naked Bike ride.

State Sen. Chris Kapenga, R-Delafield, is shepherding the proposal. He said Wisconsin needs a new state law after a 10-year-old-girl rode her bike naked during Madison's Naked Bike Ride this summer.

“If you agree that people shouldn't be allowed to expose their genitals in public and that minor children shouldn't be paraded naked through streets and photographed then I encourage your support on these bills,” Kapenga said. “It's kind of a joke but it's not a joke. This is a pretty serious pretty serious issue.”

Dane County Commissioner Jeff Wiegand called both Madison police and the Dane County Sheriff's Office after he was told the girl's picture showed up on Facebook. Wiegand told lawmakers the authorities brushed him off.

“The sheriff refused to investigate, saying he ‘is not the primary law enforcement’ for the jurisdiction for where the bike ride occurred,” Wiegand said. “The Madison Police Department responded, initially, by saying its special victims unit consulted with the district attorney’s office about this incident. The DA’s office confirmed there are applicable statutes to support a criminal investigation.”

Kapenga has two plans. One would make it a crime to expose children to nudity. The other would spell out the law for explicit, intentional nudity.

State Sen. LaTonya Johnson, D-Milwaukee, said she's worried about the unintended consequences of a law that would punish parents for taking children to any show where there's nudity.

“It seems to me that for some concerts now, for example a Beyonce concert, buttocks are exposed. Would this prohibit parents from taking their kids to a concert or children under the age of 18 from attending concerts where but buttocks may be exposed?”

Kapenga said he is not worried about that at all.

“Having recently seen the revenues from some of these concerts, they are significant, into the 10s of millions of dollars,” Kapenga said. “A strip of cloth from JoAnne Fabric costs about 37 cents. If they have to buy 100 strips of cloth to cover their butt crack, I’m okay with that.”

Officials with Madison's Naked Bike Ride say the proposals would infringe on their right to protest and are trying to shame the naked form.

Former President Donald Trump has endorsed U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to be speaker of the House of Representatives.

The move comes after a handful of House Republicans voted with House Democrats to oust U.S. Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., from the role after McCarthy struck a deal with Democrats to keep the federal government from partially shutting down last weekend.

“Congressman Jim Jordan has been a STAR long before making his very successful journey to Washington, D.C., representing Ohio’s 4th Congressional District. Respected by all, he is now Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial. “As President, I had the honor of presenting Jim with our Country’s highest civilian award, The Presidential Medal of Freedom. So much is learned from sports, and Jim was a master! While attending Graham High School, he won State Championships all four years, a rarity, and compiled an amazing 156-1 record.”

Trump went on to list Jordan’s accomplishments before giving him a full endorsement.

“At the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Jim became a two-time NCAA Division l Wrestling Champion. He won his 1985-86 NCAA Championship Matches in his weight class. Jim has a masters degree in Education from Ohio State University & a Law Degree from Capital University,” Trump said. “He is STRONG on Crime, Borders, our Military/Vets, & 2nd Amendment. Jim, his wife, Polly, & family are outstanding - He will be a GREAT Speaker of the House, & has my Complete & Total Endorsement!”

Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La, also intends to run for speaker. He likely has a better chance of winning the nomination than Jordan, but it remains unclear if Trump’s endorsement will help change that.

Jordan sent a letter to his fellow Republicans this week asking for their support and laying out some of his plans if he were elected.

“We must address rising crime in major cities and reject soft-on-crime, pro-criminal policies,” the letter said. “We must get our fiscal house in order and reduce spending so that we can leave more to the next generation than a crushing deficit. We must do our constitutional oversight of the federal bureaucracy to ensure they work for the American people not the other way around. And we must continue working to secure the border and protect our national security.”

“The decision for Milwaukee County and the state to hand over money to a private entity now unaccountable to the public remains a serious...

Judge Arthur Engoron issued an order Thursday blocking former President Donald Trump from moving his assets without informing a court monitor.

The judge's order states that Trump and the other defendants must disclose all of the entities they own and declare in advance "any anticipated transfer of assets or liabilities to any other entities."

Engoron's previously found Trump liable for fraud and ruled that New York Attorney General Letitia James had proved the core of her case.

Trump has appealed that ruling.

Trump, 77, is the front-runner for the Republican nomination for president. He faces legal challenges across the country as he seeks the GOP nomination, including four criminal cases, two of which were filed in federal court by special counsel Jack Smith.

Several members of the Mark Attanasio family were physically assaulted outside the Hilton Hotel in Milwaukee last night, law enforcement sources have confirmed to...

Capitol police have identified the man accused of demanding to see Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, while armed, as Joshua Pleasnick, a Madison, Wisconsin, chef...

(The Center Square) – Supporters of the plan to use taxpayer money to pay for renovations and upkeep at American Family Field are out with a new poll they say shows most people in Wisconsin agree.

Milwaukee’s tourism office, Visit Milwaukee, and the city’s Chamber of Commerce and the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce released the poll Wednesday morning.

It shows that 66% of likely Wisconsin voters agree that “Gov. Evers and Republicans in the Legislature must work together to come up with a solution to the funding shortfall at American Family Field.”

That includes an overwhelming majority of Republicans (64%), Democrats (74%) and Independents (60%).

“The Milwaukee Brewers and American Family Field are a critical part of our tourism economy, drawing millions of attendees each year and driving spending at hospitality businesses far outside the ballpark. As an essential part of our identity as a sports destination and a source of civic pride, their impact is felt beyond baseball,” Peggy Williams-Smith, president and CEO of VISIT Milwaukee said. “This poll affirms VISIT

Milwaukee’s position that there must be a bipartisan solution that keeps the team and American Family Field in Milwaukee for generations to come.”

The poll does not delve into the specifics of the $600 million deal that would spend taxpayer money on the Brewers ballpark, though it does talk about public funding, and did ask if people are aware of the proposal at the capitol.

“Nearly 6 in 10 voters (59%) have seen, read or heard something about American Family Field and the funding shortfall. Support for the proposal currently being considered in the Legislature is higher among voters who know more about the issue, climbing to 63% among those who say they have heard something,” pollsters noted. “Voters were told ‘There is a proposal in the state legislature to cover this shortfall with a combination of funding from the state of Wisconsin, the regional Stadium District, and the Brewers organization jointly paying for these improvements.’ A 58% majority of voters support this proposal.”

The new poll comes after a poll last month that showed a majority of Voters in Milwaukee and Milwaukee County didn't want to pay for the upgrades at American Family Field.

That poll focused mainly on money from Milwaukee, and not money from across the state.

Lawmakers will hold a hearing in Milwaukee on Thursday to talk about the proposal to spend $600 million on American Family Field.

(The Center Square) – A plan at the Wisconsin capital would allow people to buy the state's voter registration list for far less money.

Rip Amy Binsfield, R-Sheboygan, introduced her plan that would shrink the cost of Wisconsin's voter rolls from $12,500 to $250.

“More or less what, we're trying to do is make sure that the voter registration list is available to our citizens. We want to make sure that it's not out of grasp when it comes to the price,” Binsfield said.

Binsfield said there's no reason for Wisconsin's voter list to cost $12,500. She said it's not like workers at the Wisconsin Elections Commission have to go and physically print the list any longer.

“But when you think of the fact that we're dealing with keystrokes I think we can all agree that over time we've come a long way from the big paper press that has happened and when we're talking about keystrokes we don't want to undermine the fact that the staff working on this is pretty competent to get these lists out fairly quickly,” Binsfield said.

Wisconsin is the fourth most expensive state in the country when it comes to buying voter lists.

“Eleven states are at $0. They give this information out to their voters publicly for $0. It does go as high as $37,000 that happens in Alabama. I'm not sure what they have going on down there but we don't want to replicate,” Binsfield said.

Binsfield said allowing voters to see who is on the list, and who is off the list, can only help to make sure the list is more accurate.

There are some concerns, however. Rep Scott Krug, R-Nekoosa, said he's not sure the $250 isn't too cheap.

“Absolutely prohibitive it is the only challenge I have is the $250. I'm just trying to figure out exactly where cost may be to create the list with the keystrokes deliver the list and if we do enough repetitive it's probably easily replicated just trying to figure out what that number might be,” Krug said.

Rep. Lee Snodgrass, D-Appleton, said she worries about what will happen to the list if Wisconsin starts to sell it cheap.

“Wisconsin has no restrictions on the use of voter data. So, as written, this bill gives every telemarketer in the world inexpensive access to the names, addresses, phone numbers and emails of every single Wisconsin voter,” Snodgrass said. “So, I guess my concern is yes transparency, but we also have to look at privacy.”

Binsfield said phone numbers are not currently included in Wisconsin's voter rolls and shouldn't be included no matter the price.

Wisconsin's voter registration list is one of the longest in the country. There are currently more than 7 million people listed, because while people are declared inactive they are never actually taken off the list.

Just hours after being voted out of his leadership position, former U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said late Tuesday he would not run for the position again.

The House of Representatives voted 216-210 earlier in the day to vacate the speakership, leaving the position open and likely kicking off a marathon of votes to replace or reinstate California Republican Kevin McCarthy.

"I believe I can continue to fight, maybe in a different manner," McCarthy said Tuesday night, after the vote. "I will not run for speaker again. I'll have the conference pick somebody else."

A handful of House Republicans joined Democrats to oust McCarthy Tuesday afternoon, despite McCarthy telling reporters earlier that he expected to survive the proceedings. As party leadership, he chose to bring the motion to vacate up quickly for a vote Tuesday afternoon.

U.S. Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., will temporarily replace McCarthy in the House leadership position until the full House, where Republicans hold a slight majority, vote in a new speaker.

McCarthy only took on the speakership earlier this year after more than a dozen votes while holdout Republicans demanded concessions.

One of those concessions was that a single lawmaker could file a motion to vacate the speakership and force a vote, something U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., started off when filing the motion to vacate late Monday.

Gaetz said McCarthy broke his promises, pointing in particular to the latest Continuing Resolution to fund the government until mid-November. That deal with House Democrats provided for disaster relief and essentially maintained spending at current levels to buy more time just hours before a government shutdown over the weekend.

McCarthy was able to whittle down the lawmakers who voted against him last time around to get the votes he needed to become Speaker, and he may be able to do it again unless another strong Republican successfully challenges him. Currently, there is no obvious choice to replace McCarthy.

“I think Matt has planned this all along,” McCarthy told reporters. “It didn’t matter what transpired. He would’ve done it if we were in shutdown or not. I firmly believe it is the right decision to keep government open, to make sure our military is still paid, our border agents are still paid, and if that makes a challenge based upon whether or not I should be Speaker, I’ll take that fight.”

Gaetz warned over the weekend that he would file the motion to vacate. He has demanded answers about an alleged side deal he says McCarthy made with the White House over more Ukraine funding, a sticking point and red line for some conservative Republicans who are unwilling to send the large sums overseas any longer.

"I rise to raise a question," Gaetz said from the House floor Monday. "What was the secret side deal on Ukraine? House Democrats and President Biden have said that as Speaker McCarthy was asking Republicans to vote for a Continuing Resolution to take up the plus-up Ukraine money, that the Speaker of the House was actually cutting a side deal to bring Ukraine legislation to this floor with President Biden and House Democrats."

As The Center Square previously reported, Gaetz and other Republicans have pushed for passing all 12 appropriations bills in the traditional procedure instead of repeated Continuing Resolutions with topline numbers decided by a handful of members.

But McCarthy says certain Republicans have slowed the appropriations process so that Congress did not meet the government shutdown deadline in time. Lawmakers passed several of those appropriations in the House already, though not enough to fully fund the government. Several were passed at the last minute last week before the shutdown.

Now, the House must continue to hold votes for a new Speaker with either McCarthy being reinstated or another taking his place all as the next shutdown deadline draws nearer.

“I have enough Republicans where at this point next week one of two things will happen: Kevin McCarthy won’t be the Speaker of the House or he will be the Speaker of the House working at the pleasure of the Democrats,” Gaetz told reporters Monday evening.

At times, the meeting grew testy. However, speakers also stressed a need to improve communication going forward. Neighbors and aldermen raised questions about a proposed...

(The Center Square) – A group with ties to national Democrats filed a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin's requirement that someone sign off on absentee votes in the state.

The Elias law firm filed lawsuit on behalf of four Wisconsin voters that claims the state’s witness requirement violates both the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Voting Rights Act of 1970.

“When Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act in 1965, it took aim ‘at the subtle, as well as the obvious,’ discriminatory state voting regulations,” The suit begins. “One especially pernicious practice adopted by southern states after the Civil War required any would-be voter to produce a ‘supporting witness’ willing to…’vouch’ for the aspiring voter’s qualifications.”

Wisconsin law requires anyone voting absentee to have a witness sign off on their ballot envelope. Absentee ballots that don't have a full and proper witness signature are not supposed to count. The Wisconsin Supreme Court barred local election officials from curing ballots that don't have the required signatures or other information.

“Generally, Wisconsin requires a voter to procure the assistance of an adult U.S. citizen witness to cast a valid absentee ballot. The witness must observe that the ballot is unmarked and observe the voter mark it and seal it in the ballot envelope. No one else may be present when the voter marks the ballot. Both the voter and the witness must then execute attestations.

The voter must attest, among other things, they are entitled to vote, they exhibited the enclosed ballot unmarked to the witness and they then, in the witness’s ‘presence and in the presence of no other person,’ marked the ballot and sealed the ballot envelope,” the lawsuit states. “The witness, in turn, must attest that ‘the above statements’ – those made by the voter in the voter attestation—’are true.’.”

Wisconsin is not alone in requiring absentee ballot witnesses. Nine other states – Alabama, Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Virginia – also require witnesses to sign off before absentee ballots can be counted.

Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma and South Dakota require absentee ballots be notarized, or at least include a copy of a state ID.

Two of the voters named in the Wisconsin lawsuit are students who attend school out of state, another is a Wisconsin native who lives overseas and the fourth is an elderly woman who lives by herself.

Current Wisconsin law allows all four to vote absentee, and the witness signature requirements have not stopped them from voting absentee in the past several elections.

The lawsuit names the Wisconsin Elections Commission and election commissioners as defendants. The Elections Commission has not commented on the lawsuit.

This is a classic U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin move: Wisconsin's Senator "Do Nothing" takes a public relations position that makes it sound like she's...

Chris Abele says the county's money is needed for more critical needs. Former Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele is urging Milwaukee County's elected officials to...

(The Center Square) – A judge in Waukesha County issued a ruling that sides with parents in the debate over how school districts handle transgenderism in schools.

Judge Michael Maxwell on Tuesday sided with two parents in the Kettle Moraine School District after they sued in 2021 because the district did not tell them that school leaders and teachers were calling their middle school-aged daughter by a different name at school.

“This court has before it what modern society deems a controversial issue –

transgenderism involving minors within our schools. Clearly, the law on this issue is still developing across the country and remaining largely unsettled. However, this particular case is not about that broad controversial issue. This particular case is simply whether a school district can supplant a parent’s right to control the health care and medical decisions for their children. The well-established case law in that regard is clear – Kettle Moraine cannot,” the judge wrote. “The School District abrogated the parental rights of [the parents] on how to medically treat [their child] when the district decided to socially affirm [the child] at school despite [the parents] requesting it does not. Through its policy of disregarding parental wishes on a medical or health related decision and with how fast questioning one's gender can arise, [the parents] are at real risk of being harmed.”

Kevin Marine Schools defended the decision to keep gender decisions from parents, saying informing all parents of all children's decisions to change gender could put some students at risk.

The judge said that argument didn't cut it.

Kettle Moraine Schools said it handles things on a case-by-case basis.

The judge took issue with that.

“Rather than doing what the voters have elected them to do, the Kettle Moraine School Board abrogated their responsibility to either pass judgment on a policy regarding these serious issues or to affirm the actions of their employee, the superintendent. Instead, the School District has hidden behind claims of no parental right or unfounded Title IX issues rather than give

parents in their district what they deserve – clear guidance on how the district intends to handle these controversial issues,” the judge wrote.

Luke Berg with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, one of the law firms that handled the case, said this is the first time a judge has come down on the side of the parents in a case like this one.

“This victory represents a major win for parental rights. The court confirmed that parents, not educators or school faculty, have the right to decide whether a social transition is in their own child’s best interests. The decision should be a warning to the many districts across the country with similar policies to exclude parents from gender transitions at school,” Berg added.

The parents in the case removed their daughter from school but have two children who remain in the school district.

The $45 million agreement between the Milwaukee Public Museum and Milwaukee County for the construction of a new museum WAS NEVER SIGNED, even though...

Wisconsin Law Enforcement Memorial vandalized... again. The Wisconsin Law Enforcement Memorial, which commemorates the sacrifice of fallen officers, was vandalized, with lines drawn over the...

A law took effect in Texas this month that bans transgender women from playing a woman's sport at the college level. It was similar to a 2021 law that banned athletes in public schools in that state from playing on any team that differed from the sex they were assigned to at birth.

This year has been the battleground for the debate on whether biological males who identify as females should be allowed to play female sports as politicians and the courts have grappled with the issue.

Many government agencies and transgender advocacy groups are pushing to allow boys who say they are girls to participate in sports previously reserved for females while polling shows that a majority of Americans are against it.

According to The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll of 2,500 registered voters across the U.S., a 2-to-1 majority oppose transgender women student-athletes competing in women's sports. The poll was released in August and conducted by Noble Predictive Insights.

A Gallup poll released in June found 69% say transgender athletes should only be allowed to compete on sports teams that align with their biological sex at birth.

At the core of the debate is the accusation of discrimination, transgender women being victims of it by those wishing to keep girls' women's sports played among women; and the accusation of fairness, girls and women being the victims when forced to compete against biological males.

“Women and young girls deserve to compete on a level playing field. When laws ignore biological reality and allow males to compete on girls’ sports teams, girls are harmed and denied athletic opportunities," Christiana Kiefer, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, wrote in an email to The Center Square. "Science and common sense tell us that males are generally bigger, faster, and stronger than females. They have larger hearts and lungs, denser bones, and stronger muscles. No amount of testosterone suppression can undo all those advantages. We hope that states continue to protect fairness in women’s sports by adopting laws and policies that reflect biological reality.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom is involved in a 2020 lawsuit in which it represented four female Connecticut high school athletes. They filed a lawsuit challenging the state athletic association's policy to allow boys to play girls' sports.

U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny ruled against the female athletes in December. The Heritage Foundation reported that Chatigny ordered attorneys for the Alliance Defending Freedom to use the term "transgender females" when referring to boys who identify as girls.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially ruled in favor of Connecticut's policy in 2022, but has since said it would reconsider the case; it is pending.

The Movement Advancement Project analyzes transgender sports policies across the country. It says the nation is split on the issue.

It found that 24 states and two territories have policies that are fair or favorable to transgender athletes and 26 states and three territories have policies that are not.

ESPN has tracked transgender legislation and reported that 23 states had passed laws restricting transgender athletes' ability to play sports since 2020.

In March, Democrats in the U.S. House introduced the Transgender Bill of Rights, a resolution that would "ensure" transgender athletes could participate in the sport of their choice. The Transgender Bill of Rights calls on the federal government to take action.

In April, Republicans in the U.S. House introduced House Resolution 734, the "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act 2023." It would ban boys, who call themselves transgender women, from playing in female sports. The House passed the bill; its road in the Senate is considered uphill with a Democratic majority in place.

In August, the North Carolina House and Senate overrode Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's veto and passed the Fairness in Women's Sports Act. The law "prohibits male students from playing on middle school, high school, or collegiate athletics teams designated for females, women, or girls." It also "requires a student's sex to be recognized solely based on reproductive biology and genetics at birth for purposes of athletic participation."

The U.S. Department of Education supports transgender athletes being able to play on the sports team gender in which they identify. The department says banning transgender athletes from playing on a sports team due to gender is discrimination.

Discussion of the issue escalated around Lia Thomas, a swimmer at Penn University who competed on the men's team as William Thomas for three years. The athlete switched to Lia for a senior season, and was allowed by the university and the NCAA to compete in 2022.

Thomas was the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship in 2022. Thomas was ranked 65th in the 500-meter freestyle in 2018-19, the last season Thomas swam for the University of Pennsylvania men's team, according to Swimming World Magazine. Thomas won the NCAA championship in the women's 500 freestyle in 2022 while competing for the Penn women's team.

Other men competing in women's categories have lifted visibility for events from volleyball, to weight lifting to cycling to running.

The website SheWon.org tracks "achievements of female athletes who were displaced by males in women’s sporting events" all over the world. As of Sept. 22, it had 608 entries.

A 2010 report conducted by authors affiliated with the Women's Sports Foundation and The National Center for Lesbian Rights called concerns that transgender females playing female sports would dominate as "not well founded." The report stated that "medically guided hormonal treatment prior to puberty" neutralized any advantage.

Thirteen years later, the polls, many women athletes and lawyers like Kiefer disagree.

In Michigan, the high school association states it will determine eligibility on a "case-by-case" basis. The Michigan High School Athletic Association does ask for documentation of a student's medical and psychological records as well as whether they have undergone hormone therapy and gender-affirmation surgery.

In Ohio, the high school athletic association allows transgender athletes to compete for girls' teams, but the athlete must be taking a medically prescribed hormone treatment related to gender transition and have completed a minimum of one year of hormone treatment. The athlete must also "demonstrate" to the high school athletic association that the athlete "does not possess physical (bone structure, muscle mass, testosterone, hormonal, etc.) or physiological advantages over genetic females of the same age group."

The Women's Sports Foundation and AthleteAlly.org didn't respond to emails seeking comment.

Few voters think children should undergo transgender interventions even with parental permission.

That's according to The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll of 2,500 registered voters across the U.S., conducted by Noble Predictive Insights. The poll found that 58% of those surveyed are against medical interventions such as gender-changing surgery or puberty blockers for children younger than 18 years old.

There were just 10% who said children should have the ability to undergo these inventions if they choose and another 21% who said children should be able to undergo these interventions, but only with parental permission.

The poll found 62% of men and 54% of women were against gender-changing surgery or puberty blockers for children.

Mike Noble, founder and CEO of Noble Predictive Insights, said it was noteworthy how little public support there is for transgender interventions of minors.

"What's surprising – for how much you hear about it, how much it is in your face – you look at the public opinion data and there's definitely not a majority who are in support of this," Noble said. "Six in ten are saying, 'That's a non-starter.'"

There was support for gender-changing surgery or puberty blockers among those voters who identified themselves as "a strong Democrat." There were 22% of that voting bloc who said children should have the ability to undergo those inventions and another 40% who believe it should be allowed but only with parental permission. Just 23% of "strong Democrats" were against the interventions and another 15% were unsure.

Sixty-four percent of voters who said they had children under the age of 18 said minors should not be having these transgender medical interventions. And 40% of voters who said children should be able to have the medical interventions, with 25% of that group saying it needed to come with parental approval.

"The people who were the least on board were people who had children under the age 18," Noble said. "The ones who are the most supportive are the ones who never had children."

State legislatures across the country have debated laws either banning such procedures for minors or preventing such bans from being put in place, with laws varying widely.

States such as Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Georgia and at least 10 other states have put restrictions in place, with many facing legal challenges.

California is leading a coalition of 20 mostly blue states, including Illinois, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oregon and Washington in opposing such restrictions.

The Center Square Voters' Voice Poll was conducted by Noble Predictive Insights from July 31 to Aug. 3. Unlike traditional national polls, with limited respondent count of about 1,000, Noble Predictive surveyed 1,000 registered Republicans, 1,000 registered Democrats, and 500 independents, culminating in a sample size of 2,500. The margin of error for the aggregate sample was ±2.4%, with each political group independently weighted. For information about the methodology, visit www.noblepredictiveinsights.com.

(The Center Square) – There is immediate pushback to a proposal at the Wisconsin Capitol that would ban sex change surgeries and gender-affirming care for children.

The Wisconsin Legislative LGBTQ+ Caucus condemned the plan from a handful of Republicans, calling it “cruel.”

“Once again, Republicans are interfering with private medical decisions that belong in the hands of patients and their doctors – not politicians. Gender-affirming care reduces gender dysphoria and helps people live healthy and authentic lives,” caucus members said in an open letter.

The legislation would ban any surgery that results in sterilization, a mastectomy, puberty blocking drugs and other hormone treatments for children.

Rep. Scott Allen, R-Waukesha, is the lead sponsor of the bill, which he is calling the Help Not Harm Act.

“There are too many studies that show the harm of these procedures, and there are too many stories of young people regretting their transition later. We need to help minors by giving them the inherent blessing of time,” Allen said. “This is why the state bans minors from voting, joining the military, getting a tattoo, signing a contract or buying alcohol or tobacco. “Why should the state depart from this prudent policy when it comes to minors engaging in untested, harmful and irreversible procedures?”

The LGBTQ+ Caucus counters that doctors and medical groups support gender-affirming care.

“Every major medical organization – including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American Psychological Association – attests that gender-affirming care is safe, medically necessary, and saves lives,” the caucus members said. “We remain committed to protecting our LGBTQ+ youth in Wisconsin and will continue to be a voice for the LGBTQ+ community throughout our state. We will continue to fight to ensure that this bill – and any future legislation that harms LGBTQ+ Wisconsinites – will never become law in Wisconsin.”

Two people were injured after a shooting at the popular Elsa's on the Park restaurant in downtown Milwaukee on Wednesday evening. Video emerged showing...

The Milwaukee Public Museum is $92 million short of its $240 million funding goal for a new museum, even after receiving a large donation...

Two Glendale Police Department officers have been awarded the Carnegie Medal, North America’s highest honor for civilian heroism. Officers Robert Wilson and Andrew Reischl were...

A group of 20 attorneys general want the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule a lower court's restrictions on local governments enforcing homeless camping bans.

In their petition regarding Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, the attorneys general wrote that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong to prohibit state and local governments from enforcing laws that bar public spaces from being used as homeless encampments.

“The Constitution nowhere strips States of the power to regulate use of public spaces,” the attorneys general wrote. “It empowers States and guarantees an inviolable sovereignty meant to address local issues like homelessness.”

Meanwhile, the attorneys general said the 9th Circuit “relied on this Court’s ‘evolving standards of decency’ jurisprudence,” something they said “lacks textual, historical, or structural support.”

“The Court should put that troublesome jurisprudence to bed once and for all,” they added.

In 2018, the 9th Circuit ruled that the Eighth Amendment allows for the right to sleep and camp in public spaces. Earlier this year, the appeals court held that the amendment also prevents fines for people “engaging in involuntary, unavoidable life-sustaining acts.” However, the attorneys general argue that cities – especially those across the western U.S – are having a difficult time combating homelessness because of the ruling.

“When it comes to public encampments, States have significant land interests,” the attorneys general said. “States regulate public encampments to protect natural resources, prevent wildfires, preserve the value of recreation, and maintain an area’s dignity and public value.

The petition was filed by attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia.

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom also submitted a brief for the Supreme Court to review the case.

The John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy announced this morning that Tucker Carlson will be the special guest at the Institute’s November 8th...

Franklin Mayor John Nelson said he wants the development agreement between the embattled Rock complex and the City of Franklin to be reopened and...

Now is a good time to remind people that Tammy Baldwin bought a swanky $1.3 million rooftop condo with her partner in Washington D.C. On...

Online commerce giant Amazon said Tuesday that a lawsuit from the Federal Trade Commission could lead to higher prices and slower deliveries for customers.

The Federal Trade Commission and 17 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Amazon.com Inc. alleging the company uses "anticompetitive and unfair strategies to illegally maintain its monopoly power."

Amazon said the FTC was misusing its authority and that the agency failed to understand the retail marketplace.

"Today’s suit makes clear the FTC’s focus has radically departed from its mission of protecting consumers and competition," David Zapolsky, senior vice president of Global Public Policy and general counsel for Amazon, said in a statement. "The practices the FTC is challenging have helped to spur competition and innovation across the retail industry, and have produced greater selection, lower prices, and faster delivery speeds for Amazon customers and greater opportunity for the many businesses that sell in Amazon’s store. If the FTC gets its way, the result would be fewer products to choose from, higher prices, slower deliveries for consumers, and reduced options for small businesses – the opposite of what antitrust law is designed to do."

The complaint alleges that Amazon violates the law by engaging "in a course of exclusionary conduct that prevents current competitors from growing and new competitors from emerging."

The complaint alleges Amazon stifles competition on price, product selection, quality, and "by preventing its current or future rivals from attracting a critical mass of shoppers and sellers, Amazon ensures that no current or future rival can threaten its dominance." Amazon's practices affect hundreds of billions of dollars in retail sales every year, according to the FTC.

"Our complaint lays out how Amazon has used a set of punitive and coercive tactics to unlawfully maintain its monopolies," FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement. "The complaint sets forth detailed allegations noting how Amazon is now exploiting its monopoly power to enrich itself while raising prices and degrading service for the tens of millions of American families who shop on its platform and the hundreds of thousands of businesses that rely on Amazon to reach them."

Amazon's Zapolsky offered a full defense of the company's practices in response.

"The FTC's complaint alleges that our pricing practices, our Fulfillment by Amazon offering, and Amazon Prime are anticompetitive," he wrote. "In so doing, the lawsuit reveals the Commission’s fundamental misunderstanding of retail."

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker on Tuesday joined a chorus of calls from top Democrats for Sen. Bob Menendez to resign after he was indicted last week on bribery and corruption charges.

In a statement, Booker called the allegations against Menendez, D-N.J., and his wife Nadine "shocking" and "disturbing" and said stepping down from "is best" for Menendez's constituents.

"The details of the allegations against Senator Menendez are of such a nature that the faith and trust of New Jerseyans as well as those he must work with in order to be effective have been shaken to the core," Booker said in a statement.

"Senator Menendez fiercely asserts his innocence and it is therefore understandable that he believes stepping down is patently unfair," he added. "But I believe this is a mistake."

On Friday, federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York unsealed a 39-page indictment accusing Menendez and his wife of accepting "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in bribes in exchange for using his political influence to benefit the Egyptian government and business associates in New Jersey.

Menendez and his wife received bribes including cash, gold, luxury vehicles and vacations, mortgage payments and other forms of compensation, prosecutors say. Federal agents said a search of his home found more than $480,000 in cash – some of it in envelopes stuffed into a jacket with his name on it – gold bars and a Mercedes Benz.

This is the second time Menendez has been indicted on allegations of bribery while a senator. In 2015, he was charged with illegally accepting favors from a Florida physician, including trips on a private jet, vacations to Paris and more than $700,000 in political contributions.

But unlike the previous allegations of bribery, when Democratic colleagues rushed to defend the longtime senator, his support is waning following the latest indictments.

Booker joins a group of 17 Democratic senators — including Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Martin Heinrich of New Mexico and Jon Tester of Montana — who have publicly called on Menendez to step down.

Menendez is also facing calls to resign from other top Democrats including New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who said in an interview that it would be a “good idea” if he stepped down.

On Monday, Menendez defended himself in public remarks and predicted that despite the charges he would be "exonerated" and retain his post as New Jersey's senior senator.

Menendez is up for reelection in the 2024 elections when Democrats will be seeking to retain control of the Senate. In 2018, he was elected to a third term with 54% of the vote, according to New Jersey election results.

On Saturday, Rep. Andy Kim, a third-term Democrat from South Jersey, announced that he will challenge Menendez in next year’s Democratic primary.

Milwaukee Police are requesting the public’ s assistance in identifying and locating the suspect and vehicle wanted in connection to a fatal hit and run that occurred on Saturday, September 23, 2023, at approximately 1:55 a.m., on the 2100 block of W. Canal St. The suspect vehicle is described as an unknown 2018-2020 white SUV, possibly a Kia Sportage. The suspect vehicle struck a pedestrian that was crossing the street. The unknown driver fled the scene in the vehicle. Anyone with any information is asked to contact Milwaukee Police at (414) 935-7360, or to remain anonymous, contact Crime Stoppers at (414)224-Tips / or P3 Tips App. [cid:[email protected]] [cid:[email protected]] [cid:[email protected]] The City of Milwaukee is subject to Wisconsin Statutes related to public records. Unless otherwise exempted from the public records law, senders and receivers of City of Milwaukee e-mail should presume that e-mail is subject to release upon request, and is subject to state records retention requirements. See City of Milwaukee full e-mail disclaimer at www.milwaukee.gov/email_disclaimer