Elvira Benitez Suarez stepped out of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) office in downtown Milwaukee on Monday to cheers from a crowd of supporters — her first time leaving the building without handcuffs.

The 51-year-old Sheboygan Falls woman left U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody last week on bond; her daughter picked her up outside the northern Kentucky detention facility where she had spent the previous two months. 

“I didn’t see daylight for 17 days, so I was very, very heartened and excited that I saw my family,” she said. 

The Monday morning check-in in Milwaukee was her first interaction with immigration authorities since returning to Wisconsin. She arrived with her family, attorney and two members of the Milwaukee Common Council in tow. 

Nearly a dozen other immigrants wove through the crowd to line up behind Benitez for their own check-ins; some picked up contact information from her attorney while they waited to enter the building. 

Benitez’s time in Kentucky was her second stint in ICE custody in the past year. Benitez, who emigrated from Mexico as a teenager and lived without legal status for over three decades, first landed in detention after a wrong turn on a family road trip took her across the Canadian border in July 2025. U.S. immigration authorities arrested her when she reentered the country. Benitez had no prior interactions with law enforcement or the federal immigration court system. 

In her absence, Benitez’s two adult daughters, both U.S.-born, took in their school-age siblings and helped manage their parents’ painting and cleaning business. 

A federal district court judge in Ohio ruled last fall that Benitez is eligible for a green card, citing — among other factors — the hardships her children experienced in her absence. After waiting a month for immigration authorities to complete her background check, Benitez returned to Wisconsin in December, only to be arrested again during a check-in at the Milwaukee DHS office in March while the agency appealed the judge’s ruling. 

“We checked in, everything went fine, and we were actually walking out the door when they stopped us,” recalled her attorney, Marc Christopher. 

After stops in Chicago and Indianapolis, Benitez landed in a cell at the Campbell County Detention Center, a northern Kentucky jail that contracts with ICE to hold immigrants facing deportation proceedings. Benitez recounted finding fellow Wisconsinites in her unit; nearly two dozen other immigrants detained in Wisconsin have passed through Campbell County within the last year.

But a recent decision by an Ohio-based federal appeals court opened a door for Benitez to again return to Wisconsin. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month that a year-old Trump administration policy requiring detention for most immigrants in deportation proceedings amounts to a violation of due process rights, joining federal appellate courts in New York and Georgia. Appellate courts in Louisiana and Missouri have sided with the Trump administration, and the appellate court based in Chicago remains divided on the issue.

The 6th Circuit holds jurisdiction over Kentucky, and its ruling allowed Benitez to file a bond motion in immigration court — an option once available to most immigrant detainees that largely vanished after the Trump administration introduced its mandatory detention policy last year. An immigration court judge in Memphis granted her bond motion on May 21, setting her bond amount at the minimum allowed under court rules: $1,500.

As a condition of her bond, Benitez will continue checking in at the Milwaukee DHS office.

Benitez’s Monday morning check-in was brief and straightforward. Like other immigrants granted bond, she was directed by immigration officers to download a tracking app that will prompt her to take a photograph of her face once a week to compare against booking photos.

DHS is still appealing last year’s ruling that set Benitez on track to secure legal permanent residency. That appeal, currently in the hands of the federal Board of Immigration Appeals, is still pending. 

“I would never put anything past the Board of Immigration Appeals,” Christopher said during a press conference on Monday, alluding to the board’s recent tendency to side with the Trump administration on immigration court rule changes. Nevertheless, Christopher added that he believes Benitez’s case is strong enough to defy the odds.

Benitez herself is still recovering. “I can’t sleep,” she said, recounting the grim details of her latest stint in custody — fellow detainees whose pregnancies ended in miscarriages, late-night bus trips with erratic drivers and no seat belts, and harassment from nonimmigrant inmates with whom she shared a cell in Kentucky. Benitez noted that she is in contact with the families of several fellow detainees who remain in Kentucky.

Her eldest daughter, Crystal Aguilar, also needs time to bounce back. In her mother’s absence, “my life was on hold,” she said. A return to normality still seems far away, she added.

The post Freed on bond, Sheboygan Falls woman returns to Milwaukee immigration office amid legal limbo appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

As Wisconsin’s prison population nears a record high, the state’s already-full prisons are getting even more crowded — especially for women. The state’s three women’s prisons collectively house 18 women for every 10 they were designed for, making them the most crowded of all state facilities.

One reason: While growth in the women’s prison population has far outpaced growth in the men’s system, Wisconsin prison officials shrank the facilities that housed them — to make more space for men.

Now, to make room for women, prison officials have set up beds in gyms and offices.

“They just cram us in wherever they can, it’s sad,” wrote Sarah Buckingham, who is currently incarcerated at Robert E. Ellsworth Correctional Center, a minimum-security facility in Racine County that now houses more than twice as many people as it was designed for.

Across the system, the rising number of prisoners and a shortage of staff have strained resources. Prisoners often wait months or years for limited spots in treatment, education and work programs, the very programs designed to prepare them for release. That, advocates say, could mean people wait longer to get out, or even end up returning to prison — making facilities even more crowded.

A new data tool from Wisconsin Watch allows anyone to track the population of the system and of each facility for free. The dashboard, which shows weekly population and capacity counts going back to 2006, updates automatically when prison officials post the latest figures. 

The data makes it clear: Overcrowding is not new. Wisconsin’s prisons have held thousands more people than intended for at least the last 20 years. The population dipped during the COVID-19 pandemic but is now heading toward an all-time high. More than 23,600 people are in state custody, according to the latest figures available from the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. That’s about 200 shy of the record 23,826 set in 2019.

The dashboard can’t show how the trends could soon change. In April, Gov. Tony Evers announced the state would soon commute prison sentences for the first time in 25 years, though it’s not yet clear how many people may be eligible or how long the process will take.

Women’s prisons are the most crowded

Female prisoners bear the brunt of the state’s overcrowding predicament. While the state’s male facilities are about 30% over capacity in total, its female facilities are 78% over capacity. That’s according to the department’s latest data, which shows population and capacity as of May 22. 

Taycheedah Correctional Institution, the state’s only maximum-security women’s prison, is designed to house 653. On May 22, it housed 1,039. 

Prison officials have raised alarms about conditions at Taycheedah for at least a decade. 

“The increased population at TCI has detrimental effects on the prison,” they wrote in a 2016 budget request, when the population was 873. Crowded conditions could cause security problems, they wrote, as each correctional officer must supervise more prisoners. They also noted the steep competition for access to programs for treatment or training. 

“There is also decreased programming availability to inmates, and programming has been shown to help reduce recidivism,” the authors wrote.

Since then, the facility has added nearly 170 women. 

“(Taycheedah) has already undergone conversions to turn spaces into living areas that were not originally meant to be used as living areas due to a problem with overcrowding,” said Daniel Cromwell, an administrator for the state’s corrections department, in an April court filing.

Wisconsin Watch heard from six currently incarcerated women who watched the women’s prison population balloon. They described sharing already overcrowded bathrooms with more women and competing for treatment and employment resources. 

Department of Corrections spokesperson Beth Hardtke confirmed that beds have previously been set up in the gym at Taycheedah but said no one is living in the gym now. Taycheedah staff are currently converting a “former property room” into a dormitory to house 20 women, Hardtke said.

The issue isn’t isolated to Taycheedah. The Milwaukee Women’s Center is at 255% capacity. Robert E. Ellsworth Correctional is now at 219% of its capacity.

Fifteen years ago, the state’s women’s prisons had nearly enough space, not just because there were fewer prisoners, but because there was a fourth women’s minimum-security prison. John C. Burke Correctional Center in Waupun, designed for 186 prisoners, housed women from 2000 to 2011, when it was converted into a men’s minimum-security prison. 

The move dropped the capacity of the women’s system — just as the number of female prisoners spiked. In the 15 years since, the women’s prison population has grown nearly 29%, more than four times as fast as the men’s population.  

Now, state officials are making plans to turn Burke back into a women’s prison, part of a $500 million prison reorganization Gov. Tony Evers proposed last year.

Overcrowding limits education, training 

Overcrowding doesn’t just mean getting an extra roommate or waiting longer for a shower. It also means prisons need extra staff — staff they often struggle to find. In 2023, prison officials locked down Waupun — canceling programs and confining prisoners to their cells for the better part of several months — because they didn’t have enough officers to conduct normal operations, Wisconsin Watch reporting revealed.

While the staffing shortage has eased since, the system is still short about 620 full-time correctional officers and sergeants, the latest DOC figures show. 

Those shortages can mean prison programs get cut or canceled, said Shannon Ross, founder and executive director of the Milwaukee-based nonprofit The Community, which helps incarcerated people pursue education and develop as leaders.

“If you have too many people to watch per staff member, now, ‘Oh, we can’t have classes tonight because we need to have more people over here watching more people that are incarcerated,’” Ross said. 

Ross, who earned a bachelor’s degree while serving a 17-year sentence in Wisconsin prisons, said when prisons are packed and money is tight, prison officials scale back vocational training and higher education to focus on the basics: food, housing, security, court-ordered programming and services prisons are legally required to provide.

“Anything beyond that is going to become superfluous,” he said. That’s a problem, he said, because more than 90% of Wisconsin’s prisoners will one day be released. “Who do we want them to be?”

How we got here

Wisconsin isn’t the only state struggling to find room for all its prisoners. Across the country, prison populations spiked in the 1980s and 1990s as states adopted harsher punishments and “truth-in-sentencing” legislation. The latter requires most prisoners to spend their full sentence behind bars, without the possibility of parole. 

Suddenly the flow of people out of prison slowed, while as many as ever flowed in. Lots also flowed back, returning to prison for allegedly violating the terms of their release.

In Wisconsin, the prison population peaked in August 2019 at 23,826, then dropped sharply beginning in March 2020 as courts shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In just over a year, the number of people in prison fell by nearly 20% to 19,381, the lowest figure in the last two decades. 

As the state’s courts reopened, they began working through a backlog of cases — and sending more people to prison. In a 2023 report, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau said that if the prison population continued growing as fast as it was, it would set a record of 24,800 by July 2025. 

The authors predicted that wouldn’t happen, and they were right. 

“While recent growth patterns have been sizable, it is likely that the updated growth rate is too high to continue for the duration of the 2023-25 biennium, and that the recent rapid growth is likely temporary,” the authors wrote, noting that “at some point, the courts will catch up and prison populations will level out and grow at a slower rate.”

Still, the numbers have kept rising, and the growth has gotten faster, not slower. In the last year, that growth has been fueled entirely by a surge in women prisoners: While the male population fell slightly between May 2025 and May 2026, the female population rose by more than 4%.

What’s the solution?

Policymakers and prisoner advocates disagree about the answer to Wisconsin’s crowded prisons. 

In the major revamp he proposed last year, Gov. Evers called for, among other things:

• Closing the nearly 130-year-old Green Bay Correctional Institution.
• Transforming Waupun Correctional Institution into a “vocational village.” 
• Converting the troubled Lincoln Hills School from a juvenile prison to an adult prison.
• Converting Burke into a women’s prison.
• Expanding a program that allows some people incarcerated for nonviolent crimes to qualify for early release by completing treatment for substance use. 

Together the changes would reduce the state’s prison capacity by 700. The plan drew criticism from Republican lawmakers, who pointed to the state’s crowded prisons as a sign that the state needs more space in its prisons, not less.

State Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, said the answer is “right-sizing” the number of prisoners by “adding additional beds, reducing overcrowding and making facilities safer for not only our inmates, but for our staff,” Wisconsin Public Radio reported. 

In October, the State of Wisconsin Building Commission released $15 million to plan for Evers’ proposed changes. 

Ross of The Community calls that proposal a “marginal improvement.”

“It’s not getting us the level of change that everybody would need to see and want to see … You’ve got to get past marginal improvements at some point to really have something different,” Ross said. “Otherwise, it’s just a different version of the exact same problem every year we’re facing.”

One way to do that, he said, is to repeal truth-in-sentencing laws to reduce the number of people behind bars.

“Stop having a system in which people cannot get back out if they’re ready,” Ross said.

That, like other major prison changes, would require legislative action. But lawmakers in the Republican majority have stymied reform for years, Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback said. 

“Gov. Evers has repeatedly worked to comprehensively reform our state’s justice system and corrections statutes to save taxpayers and reduce overcrowding, invest in evidence-based alternatives to incarceration, and improve public safety in our communities while reducing the likelihood that someone may reoffend once they have completed their sentence,” Cudaback said in an email. 

But Evers can’t make those changes unilaterally, Cudaback said, and lawmakers in the Republican majority have “refused nearly every effort to address these challenges over the last nearly eight years.”

In April, with nine months left in office, Evers announced he would use one of the few tools available for single-handedly easing overcrowding: commutations. It’s the first time in 25 years that incarcerated people in Wisconsin can request to have their sentence shortened. 

Advocates across the state are still trying to determine how many of Wisconsin’s nearly 24,000 prisoners may be eligible, and they’re working to help as many eligible people as possible apply. 

The first meeting of the Commutation Advisory Board will take place in June, and the first commutations will be issued some time after that. With Gov. Evers leaving office in January, it will be up to the next governor to decide whether the process continues.

Wisconsin Watch reporter Addie Costello contributed to this report.

The post Wisconsin’s prison population is heading toward a record high. Track the trend here. appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct that the New Lisbon Correctional Institution is in Juneau County.

Marshall Jones is a good test case for your opinion about the state’s revived commutation process. 

In April, Gov. Tony Evers announced he was restarting the commutation process – a form of clemency that allows governors to change prison sentences for incarcerated people. 

In a statement, Evers said he was trying to move Wisconsin’s “justice system into the 21st Century by reforming our criminal justice and corrections systems to improve public safety, reduce the likelihood that individuals will reoffend when they enter our communities and save taxpayer dollars in the long run.”

Some supporters of Evers’ decision say people can change after decades in prison and that remaining there no longer serves any beneficial purpose. 

However, critics question whether people convicted of serious violent crimes should ever be released early.

Jones sits at the center of these views.

He was sentenced in 2004 to two consecutive terms of life in prison without parole after pleading guilty to two counts of first-degree intentional homicide. 

He said he fully acknowledges his crimes, which occurred during an armed tavern robbery in Racine, and continues to have remorse over them. 

“No amount of right I have done would ever erase the wrong I have done to my victims and their families, and I understand that perfectly,” Jones said. “I also know that I am a transformed man, and I am rehabilitated.”

Applying for commutation

Jones said he decided to apply for a commutation the moment his wife, Jessica Jones, told him about Evers’ announcement.

There are two commutation tracks: a general commutation process for people convicted as adults and a separate process for some sentenced as juveniles.

Jones, who was 22 when he was sentenced to life and is now 44, qualifies for the first track. 

Applicants qualify for this track if they are: incarcerated on a Wisconsin conviction; have more than one year left on their sentence; have served at least half their incarceration term or at least 20 years of a life sentence. 

They also cannot be serving sentences for sex offenses; have unresolved criminal charges or warrants; or have committed violent misconduct in prison within the past five years.

Individuals who apply must provide information about the crimes for which they are seeking commutation; prior interactions with law enforcement; prison disciplinary history; rehabilitation efforts; and reentry plans. 

Applications also require certified court records as well as letters of support. 

“Emotionally, a person has to remain calm,” Jones said. “There is a sense of urgency that will be overwhelming at times.”

He said coming up with a clear plan has been vital to overcoming his panic.

 “One box at a time. One task at a time,” he said.

For and against

Nationally, many politicians associated with “tough-on-crime” policies have opposed sentence reductions for people convicted of violent crimes, arguing rehabilitation cannot outweigh the harm caused.

In Wisconsin, it has become a hotbed issue in the race for governor. 

Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany’s gubernatorial campaign told NNS that he would rescind the executive orders that allow murderers, including those serving life sentences, to be released back into the community after 20 years. 

“He is making a commitment as governor that he will not release violent criminals early and will ensure victims and their families receive the full measure of justice,” said the Tiffany campaign.

Diego Rodriguez, coalition coordinator for Justice Forward Wisconsin, an advocacy coalition focused on criminal justice reform, said he understands the concerns people have but believes they are based on misunderstandings of the process. 

Commutation is far from automatic, he said. The approval process includes multiple reviews, eligibility restrictions and detailed reentry planning requirements. 

“These are pretty thorough applications,” Rodriguez said. “If somebody still poses a threat to the community, they’re not going to let them out.”

Shannon Ross, a criminal justice advocate who works with Justice Forward to support the commutation application process, said people in prison who have genuinely transformed often have clear ways of showing that to be the case.

“If you’ve been doing the work, if you’ve been spending your time constructively, this is your moment,” Ross said.

Impact of victims

The impact of a commutation on victims and survivors will be part of how applications are evaluated, according to Executive Order #287.  Also evaluated will be the potential impact on public safety, applicants’ prison conduct and their personal growth and development since conviction. 

“What commutations allow is for the governor to come in and to step in and to identify people who have made changes,” Rodriguez said.

If someone is truly remorseful, has accepted responsibility and demonstrated long-term change, prison no longer serves any meaningful rehabilitative purpose, he said.

Rodriguez also said that commutations could improve public safety by helping reduce overcrowding inside Wisconsin prisons.

Wisconsin prisons have long faced overcrowding and staffing shortages.

“Far more people are incarcerated than we even have space for,” Rodriguez said. 

Under these conditions, Rodriguez said, prisons become less safe and less effective at rehabilitation.

“It makes our community less safe when we have overcrowded prisons because they’re not getting the same quality of treatment,” Rodriguez said.

Accountability

During a commutation application webinar organized by Justice Forward Wisconsin, former Wisconsin Parole Commission Chair John Tate II said accountability is central to the process.

“The thing that I would emphasize the most when we’re talking about a discretionary mechanism within the criminal legal system is accountability, accountability, accountability,” Tate said. 

“Any minimization of what their role in that (crime) was is often seen as a lack of accountability,” he added.

Jones said his accountability starts with fully acknowledging the harm he caused and what kind of person he once was.

“I was a horrible person, and I took lives without mercy,” Jones said.

But Jones said decades in prison changed him.

His wife, Jessica, who met him while working at the New Lisbon Correctional Institution in Juneau County, said her views on rehabilitation have changed by getting to know people who are incarcerated. 

“Most of the general public believes that all people in prison are horrible people, incorrigible and worthless,” she said. “I used to be one of those people. I believed everyone in prison could be nothing more than their worst day. Then, I worked in the prison and learned how wrong I was.”  

She said she met many men in prison who shouldn’t be there anymore. She believes her husband is one of them. 

“He does more good than many free people I know,” she said. “He does not let his sentence or crime define him even though it’s a daily reality.”

Open questions

Major questions about the process still remain, including how quickly applications will be processed and how many people could ultimately receive commutations. 

There is also uncertainty surrounding the future of the process itself. NNS reached out to the governor’s office to ask whether the commutation process could change under new leadership but did not receive a response. 

“This is a governor’s last term,” Rodriguez said. “When it comes to executive orders, those can be changed in an instant.”

The post Commutations are back in Wisconsin – as are strong feelings about them appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Los Angeles International Airport customs officers took Everlee Wihongi aside for questioning in April. Her family hasn’t seen her since.

Wihongi, a longtime resident of Hortonville, Wisconsin, was passing through Los Angeles during a return trip from her native New Zealand. The 37-year-old green card holder had made the same trip at least a half-dozen times, even after pleading no contest to a felony marijuana possession charge in Fond du Lac County in her mid-20s. 

But with the White House’s nationwide immigration enforcement crackdown in full swing, customs officers took a new approach to the felony on her record. After a few uneasy hours in a secluded screening room, Wihongi left the airport in shackles en route to an immigration detention center in a desert valley northeast of Los Angeles.

Wihongi is one of hundreds of legal permanent residents federal immigration authorities have detained since President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025, often while they passed through airports and other ports of entry. Most — like Wihongi — had prior criminal convictions.

Those convictions generally make immigrants “inadmissible,” meaning they cannot freely re-enter the U.S.

Customs officers have “a lot of discretion at the port of entry” when deciding whether to allow green card holders with convictions like Wihongi’s to re-enter the country, Madison-based immigration attorney Aissa Olivarez said. “They have given none lately.”

“Possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right,” a U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson wrote in an email to Wisconsin Watch. “Our government has the authority to revoke a green card if our laws are broken and abused,” the spokesperson added, and to detain legal permanent residents while they await a decision in their removal case. 

The sharp increase in arrests of green card holders doesn’t stem from a policy change, but immigration attorneys say cases like Wihongi’s are yet another sign that federal immigration authorities are reshuffling their priorities.

Old conviction is grounds for detention

Wihongi has held a green card since childhood, when her father’s career as a locomotive engineer brought the family to northeast Wisconsin. “As the years went by, it was just cheaper to renew (her) green card,” her mother, Betty Wihongi, recalled.

Her 2014 conviction was not grounds for deportation, said Marc Christopher, a Milwaukee immigration attorney representing Wihongi. “She can remain here and become a U.S. citizen,” he said, “but once she crosses the border, she’s governed by the rules of admissibility.”

But family vacations to New Zealand passed without incident over the decade following Wihongi’s conviction. “Normally, they will just look at, look at your passport, look at your green card, you know, ask you, where you’ve been?” her mother said. “And usually it’s like two, three minutes, not even that.” 

“I just don’t think they made an issue of it” in the past, Christopher added. “They weren’t going to detain her for two to three months,” he said, in part because detaining and prosecuting a green card holder is an expensive undertaking. As of May 2025, DHS reported that the average cost to arrest, detain and deport an immigrant was roughly $17,000, though costs vary widely from case to case.

DHS detention records point to a sudden shift in practice after the Trump administration resumed control of immigration enforcement operations last year. Immigration authorities detained an average of at least 100 legal permanent residents each month between January 2025 and February 2026 — five times the monthly average in the final two years of the Biden administration, the only portion of his term for which data is available. 

At least 75% of legal permanent residents detained during the latter half of the Biden administration had prior criminal convictions, compared with at least 66% of those detained since Trump returned to office. 

Only a tiny fraction of detainees’ records from either period list marijuana possession as their most serious criminal charge, though immigration enforcement officers arrested more legal permanent residents with prior marijuana possession convictions in the first year of the Trump administration than in the previous two years combined. 

Wihongi is the second Wisconsin green card holder in ICE custody to join Christopher’s caseload since January 2025. His previous client, also blocked from re-entering the country because of a prior marijuana possession conviction, spent five months in detention before Christopher secured his release. 

Olivarez, the Madison-based immigration attorney, offered another recent example from her own caseload: a legal permanent resident and longtime Milwaukeean detained while returning from his wife’s funeral in Egypt because of a prior felony. That client eventually accepted a deportation order to avoid a lengthy stint in custody.

A stricter standard

The growing cohort of green card holders in ICE custody is still vastly outnumbered by the tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants detained alongside them. 

Federal immigration authorities have arrested more than 400,000 people since January 2025, including roughly 1,700 in Wisconsin. 

Just over half of all immigrants arrested by ICE in Wisconsin during the second Trump administration had prior criminal convictions, as was the case in the latter years of the Biden administration. But the criminal histories of more recent arrestees suggest that the stricter standards that landed Wihongi in custody are reshaping other corners of the immigration enforcement apparatus.

ICE officers in Wisconsin arrested 82 immigrants with prior traffic offense convictions in the first full year after Trump returned to office, up from 19 in the last full year of the Biden administration.

In years past, Christopher said, federal immigration authorities were less inclined to begin removal proceedings solely based on traffic offenses like driving without a license, instead prioritizing immigrants convicted of more serious offenses. 

Immigrants who come into contact with Wisconsin courts after a traffic offense now face a far higher risk of landing in federal custody, Christopher added. 

He attributes the shift in part to dramatic additions to DHS’ budget in the past year and a half. Those funding boosts, including a $170 billion increase last year, lowered the financial barriers that previously made federal immigration prosecutors wary of spending resources on immigrants with lower-priority criminal histories, Christopher argued. 

The U.S. Senate is currently considering an additional $72 billion in new funding for DHS.

Transferred without warning 

Wihongi was the only legal permanent resident in the 46-person cell in Adelanto, California, where she spent her first month in detention, her mother told Wisconsin Watch.

Her visa doesn’t spare her from the unpredictability of the federal immigration detention system. When money disappeared without notice from her commissary account on a Friday in early May, Wihongi called her mother in a panic. “Inmates all know that if that happens to your commissary,” her mother explained, “that means they’re getting ready to transfer you.” 

She resurfaced that Sunday in a detention camp outside El Paso, Texas, reaching her family by phone that evening to recount two mostly sleepless days of travel, including hours spent in shackles. 

Wihongi has since transferred again to a federal contract facility in Eloy, Arizona. An internet outage Thursday pushed her first scheduled court appearance back a week. Meanwhile, Christopher has filed a motion in Fond du Lac County to vacate her 2014 conviction.

The post Decade-old marijuana conviction prompts ICE detention of Wisconsin green card holder after family trip appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Editor’s note: Wisconsin Watch asked the candidates whether they would allow commutations for murder convictions. After publication, David Crowley’s campaign responded that he would not allow commutations in such cases.

The top Democratic candidates for governor plan to continue allowing commutations and pardons if they are elected in November — though two are splitting with the current governor on whether to offer commutations in murder cases — while the front-runner for the Republican nomination plans to curtail clemency. 

The contrast is sure to feature in the gubernatorial election, as Democrats rally around a national mood that has turned against President Donald Trump, while Republicans try to capitalize on lingering distaste for the Democratic brand.

Their statements, in response to questions from Wisconsin Watch, come after Gov. Tony Evers signed executive orders in early April to reestablish the state’s commutations process, with just nine months remaining in his last term as governor. 

Evers’ executive orders specifically create a commutations advisory board to consider applications from incarcerated individuals seeking to reduce their prison sentence and establish a commutations procedure for people sentenced to life in prison as juveniles. The commutations advisory board is expected to hold its first meeting in June. 

Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany’s gubernatorial campaign said in a statement he would rescind Evers’ executive orders on commutations, particularly because they don’t exempt individuals convicted of murder. Under Evers’ executive order only those previously convicted of sexual assault, physical abuse or sexual exploitation of a child, trafficking of a child, incest or soliciting a child for prostitution are ineligible for commutations. 

“(Tiffany) is making a commitment as governor that he will not release violent criminals early and will ensure victims and their families receive the full measure of justice,” Tiffany’s campaign said. Tiffany’s campaign did not respond to an additional question about whether the congressman would consider commuting the sentences of incarcerated individuals who were convicted of nonviolent offenses.

The difference between Tiffany and the top Democrats suggests that criminal justice reform and executive clemency, the powers the governor has to lessen or nullify a sentence, are topics that will get attention from the candidates ahead of the general election in November. Debate on the campaign trail will happen as Wisconsin’s prisons continue to be over capacity. The population of the state’s adult prisons as of April 17 was 23,548 people, which is nearly 32% above what the facilities were designed to hold. 

Evers is not running for reelection, which leaves the commutation process created by his executive orders subject to the views of the state’s next governor. That person could rescind, suspend or revise an executive order from the predecessor, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau. 

Wisconsin’s governors have taken different approaches to using the office’s executive clemency powers. The last governor to commute a prison sentence was former Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson. 

Former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle approved 326 pardons as governor but no commutations. Former Republican Gov. Scott Walker, who issued no pardons or commutations in office, previously said he saw “no value” in visiting the state’s prisons. 

Evers reinstated the pardons process after taking office in 2019 and has since issued 2,000 pardons, according to his office. In early 2025, he released a prison restructuring plan with a “domino series” of projects that include closing the Green Bay Correctional Institution, converting the Lincoln Hills juvenile prison into an adult facility and transitioning the Waupun Correctional Institution into a vocational village with job training for inmates. 

Evers’ plan caught pushback from Republicans, who said they were not included in the process and objected to any reductions to the capacity of the prison system. There have been no updates since the state building commission voted in October to release $15 million to fund a design report for projects in the governor’s proposal. 

Diego Rodriguez, the coalition coordinator for Justice Forward Wisconsin, which advocates for a more equitable criminal justice system, emphasized that “broad, blanket statements” about incarcerated individuals don’t reflect a person’s remorse or growth over time.

“Democrats and Republicans have historically used clemency to make sure that we honor when people grow, we honor changes in development and changes in people,” Rodriguez said. “That is something that I think our nation is rooted in, this idea that people can grow and develop, and that redemption is a real thing.” 

What Democratic candidates said 

The seven top Democratic gubernatorial candidates who responded to questions from Wisconsin Watch said each of their approaches to executive clemency would attempt to take into account the growth of inmates and the needs of victims, although specifics differed between each candidate.  

Former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes would work with an independent commission to guide decisions on pardons and commutations, campaign spokesperson Cole Wozniak said. Also, unlike Evers, he would exclude those convicted of murder. He was the only Democratic candidate to make that distinction without being asked specifically about that issue. Wisconsin Watch asked the other candidates about that particular issue Friday afternoon and didn’t receive any responses before this story published Monday morning.

“Lt. Gov. Barnes will work to keep Wisconsinites safe — ensuring the justice system rehabilitates those who’ve served their time and pose no threat, while requiring individuals convicted of murder, sexual assault, or other violent crimes stay behind bars and serve their sentences,” Wozniak said.

Asked why Barnes differs from Evers on commutations for murder convictions, Wozniak said “for those already convicted, he believes the existing appeals process offers sufficient relief.”

Joel Brennan, the former Department of Administration secretary, said Evers “did the right thing” in restoring commutations. 

“The ability to pardon and commute sentences is one of the most consequential tools a governor has,” Brennan said in a statement. “I’d take that seriously, listen to the people closest to these cases, review them on the merits, and act where it makes sense.” 

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley said he would work with the Legislature to “institutionalize” Evers’ commutations process. After this story published, Crowley’s campaign responded to the follow-up question about murder commutations, saying he “would not allow commutations of murderers.”

“I believe clemency is an important tool to correct past wrongs, especially in cases where sentences were excessive, laws have changed, or individuals have demonstrated real rehabilitation,” Crowley said in a statement. “At the same time, it must be handled with care, consistency, and respect for victims and communities.” 

Madison state Rep. Francesca Hong said she supports Evers’ decision to restore commutations and would work with stakeholders to build a “fair and safe” process. 

“My approach to executive clemency actions would be to build a senior advisory council and pardon board with diverse representation of lived experiences and leadership in the carceral reform sector,” Hong said in a statement. 

Missy Hughes, the former CEO of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., said in a statement she is supportive of Evers’ executive orders to restore commutations. In response to a follow-up question, her campaign spokesperson said she would offer pardons only to “nonviolent offenders who have paid their debt to society and only after a thorough and transparent review process.” He added that she “would take her commutation power seriously and use it only to ensure proper justice is delivered,” but didn’t specifically diverge from Evers on commuting murder sentences.

“I believe it is an important tool to have at the governor’s disposal to ensure we have fairness in our criminal justice system,” Hughes said. “As governor I would keep this executive order in place so that we have a mechanism for those who have paid their debt to society, and pose no threat to the public, can have their freedoms restored through an open and transparent process.”

Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez said in a statement that Evers has established a “thoughtful approach” to commutations. She criticized the Republican Legislature for not taking “a serious approach to criminal justice and corrections reform.” 

“As governor, I would continue the restored commutations process and carefully review it with input from stakeholders, including victims’ advocates, law enforcement, corrections professionals, and criminal justice reform organizations,” Rodriguez said. “We need to be guided by preventing crime, reducing recidivism, and keeping our communities safe.”

Madison state Sen. Kelda Roys said in a statement that “public safety and justice” will be the focus of her criminal justice policy. 

“As an attorney, I know that our judicial system is imperfect, and clemency can be an important safeguard so long as the process is fair, thorough, and transparent,” she said.

Correction: Missy Hughes’ campaign spokesperson responded before publication that she would only pardon nonviolent offenders. A previous version said the spokesperson didn’t respond. Wisconsin Watch regrets this error.

The post Tony Evers revived commutations, but what will Wisconsin’s next governor do? appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Wisconsin Watch is testing a new approach to data storytelling: news applications. As a first step, we’re launching a tool to track activities in federal immigration courts nationwide, designed with local and state-level interests in mind. 

Nearly 5 million people entered the federal immigration court system between 2020 and 2025. 

Many were new arrivals handed notices to appear in court shortly after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. Others spent years in the U.S. before landing in deportation proceedings. Nearly 40,000 listed addresses in Wisconsin.

Federal immigration courts are a function of the U.S. Department of Justice, not the federal judiciary. The roughly 550 immigration judges in courts scattered across the U.S. are appointees; since President Trump returned to office in January 2025, their numbers have fallen by about a quarter, including nearly 100 judges whom the administration fired over the past year.

The courts primarily hear deportation cases, though immigrants can also seek asylum and other forms of relief through the court system, albeit only as a defense against deportation.

Wisconsin Watch frequently relies on federal immigration court data to shape our reporting, but navigating the data is no small task. The DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review updates a vast public dataset of immigration court records monthly — the result of repeated public records requests from the nonprofit data analytics organization Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

While other tools to explore that data exist, we have learned through trial and error that extracting local- or state-level insights is easiest when we do it ourselves.

We want to make those insights accessible to you.

Our immigration court tracker provides national, state, county and court-level summary details about the millions of immigrants placed in deportation proceedings over the past five years. It tracks the nationalities of immigrants with cases before the courts, the volume of new and active cases and the share of immigrants with legal representation, among other metrics, all summarized in brief “explainers” available through the dashboard.

The underlying data is an important counterpart to our recent reporting on the past year’s worth of ICE activity in Wisconsin. Wisconsin-level data often parallels our past coverage, and it will continue to inform our approach to covering immigration.

This is a living project, and we welcome your suggestions. If you find a way to use the dashboard — as a reporter, student or otherwise — please tell us how. The records offer far more detail than this dashboard currently provides, but we can update and upgrade our offerings in response to feedback.

It won’t be our last news application. We want to make public data as accessible as we can, so we will roll out more tools for you to explore.

The post Wisconsin Watch launches immigration court data tracker appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Gov. Tony Evers announced April 3 that he’s reviving the state’s commutation process, allowing Wisconsin prisoners to apply to have their sentences shortened for the first time in 25 years.

Immediately, the news began echoing through the state’s prisons. 

Some people caught it on the 4 o’clock TV news. Some got texts from excited family members and friends. 

With the news came questions. Who exactly will be eligible? How will the process work? How will people behind bars get the records they’ll need to apply, especially those who don’t have outside help?

Without access to the open internet, it’s notoriously hard to get reliable information in prison and even more so on a still-developing issue. 

Incarcerated people began calling and texting the people they trust on the outside, looking for answers. Several wrote to Wisconsin Watch reporters, sharing questions and reporting misinformation they’d heard.

Here at Wisconsin Watch, we’ll be following this developing issue in the coming weeks and months. 

As a starting point, we asked advocates for incarcerated people what potential candidates for commutations most need to know right now. They told us they’re still waiting for details, but they offered tips on how people can start preparing. 

Here are our sources:

• Diego Rodriguez, coalition coordinator for Justice Forward Wisconsin.
• Beverly Walker, executive director of the Integrity Center and administrator of the commutations committee at WISDOM, a statewide network of faith-based organizations.
• Harm Venhuizen, government and public affairs specialist at the Wisconsin State Public Defenders Office.

How big a deal is this news?

The last Wisconsin governor to commute sentences was Tommy Thompson, who issued seven commutations during his 14 years in office. Gov. Evers has granted more than 2,000 pardons since taking office in 2019. Pardons restore some rights but do not shorten a person’s sentence. Currently, they are available only to Wisconsinities who have completed their sentence, including any required supervision. 

Walker, who leads WISDOM’s commutations committee and worked with the governor’s office for three years on reviving the commutations process, called last week’s announcement “life-changing.”

“People were excessively sentenced and they just deserve an opportunity to have freedom, if they’ve done the work, to have a chance to come home,” Walker said.

Rodriguez agrees. “This is huge news,” he said. “This is the time for people to celebrate because we can safely lessen our prison population in a way that can help promote community, promote family bonds.” 

Wisconsin’s prisons are over capacity. As of April 3, 23,554 people were behind bars, 32% more than the facilities were designed to hold. As Wisconsin Watch has reported, that crowding has combined with a shortage of correctional officers to create dangerous conditions. 

Meanwhile, politicians on both sides of the aisle want to close the 128-year-old Green Bay Correctional Institution. If it closes, officials will need somewhere to send its more than 1,100 prisoners. 

Rodriguez said the members of Justice Forward Wisconsin, who belong to various Wisconsin groups that advocate for current and formerly incarcerated people, are working to gather as much information as they can for incarcerated people and their loved ones. They’re looking for answers to the potential challenges that could keep people from applying, like if they can’t afford to send mail or make photocopies.

But overall, he said, “there’s a general level of excitement and hope.”

Venhuizen of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders said in an email that “establishing this board provides hope that people who have done all the hard work of rehabilitation won’t have to languish but can instead return to their families and communities.” The process offers a much-needed “second look” at convictions, he said, but it doesn’t address the reasons so many Wisconsinites are in prison. 

“Wisconsin’s epidemic of over-incarceration is complex and deeply entrenched,” he said. “On the individual level, it’s going to be life-changing for the people who will receive commutations. At the system level, this is a step in the right direction, but it’s not a cure-all.”

How can incarcerated individuals and their loved ones learn more?

• Read Gov. Evers’ press release and the executive orders on commutations and on commutations for people sentenced to life without parole as juveniles. 
• Monitor the governor’s office’s commutations page and read its frequently asked questions. Check back for announcements about who will be on the commutations board. “The governor’s office is the best source of information on this topic right now,” Venhuizen said.
• Join WISDOM Wisconsin’s “Advocating for Commutations” Facebook group or check the page for announcements about future information sessions.

What steps can incarcerated individuals take now if they’re interested in applying for a commutation?

“Start preparing now if you meet the initial eligibility criteria, as we expect this board to move quickly ahead of the gubernatorial election,” Venhuizen said. 

He recommends the following:

• Review the application requirements listed on the governor’s commutations website and begin compiling the required documents.
• Start making plans with the people you’d want to write letters of support for you. 
• Write a “clear and compelling story of your growth and rehabilitation.” 
• Draft a post-release plan that explains where you would live and work and what programs you would participate in.

For those who are incarcerated and want help with the process, Rodriguez recommends contacting ProSay, an organization advocating for people on parole in Wisconsin, by messaging hello@weareprosay.org through the GTL app.

“I would say the biggest advice is to reach out to a group that is doing this work,” Rodriguez said. “This work gets so much easier when you’re involved in a community of other people that are doing it … And then keep asking questions until you get the answers that you need.”

The post Commutations are back. Here’s what incarcerated people and their loved ones should know. appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

The post Steady arrests, shifting targets: Explore latest data on ICE activity across Wisconsin appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

A loosely formed coalition of about 60 federal litigators are working with immigration attorneys in Wisconsin who represent clients being detained and facing deportation.

Gabriela Parra, an immigration attorney and partner at Layde & Parra S.C. in Milwaukee, said immigration policies are constantly changing, which adds new challenges. 

Many cases now involve both immigration proceedings and federal civil rights issues, she said.

“If you haven’t done this, it’s a learning curve,” Parra said. 

Federal litigators and immigration attorneys are working together to help meet this demand in Wisconsin.

Surge in overall need

The need for legal representation has grown as immigration enforcement has expanded.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement held an average of 69,600 people per day in detention in December 2025 – a 78% increase compared with the year before, according to an analysis by the Vera Institute of Justice, a national nonprofit working on issues related to mass incarceration and immigration. 

But more than half the people in the immigration court system are fighting the government alone, according to immigration court data analyzed by Vera. 

“There is a due process crisis right now happening in our immigration system,” said Elizabeth Kenney, associate director of Vera’s Advancing Universal Representation Initiative. 

While people have the right to obtain an immigration attorney, the government does not have to provide one, said Timothy Muth, staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin.

Kenney said not having legal representation has major consequences. 

People who have attorneys are up to 10 and a half times more likely to get successful outcomes, Kenney said.

More complex cases

Parra said policy changes have added a federal civil rights dimension to many cases – changes that include how the Board of Immigration Appeals has interpreted immigration law.

The board sets binding rules for immigration judges and has authority over appeals in immigration cases.

Parra said there have been more than 80 decisions by the board since January 2025 that have affected immigration policy.  

One Board of Immigration Appeals decision, known as Yajure Hurtado, requires immigration judges to treat many as subject to mandatory detention. The decision has significantly limited people’s access to bonds.

“Now you have individuals in detention unless you can file a habeas petition in federal court,” Parra said. 

A habeas petition is used to argue that a person’s detention is unlawful. 

Habeas petitions vary widely depending on a person’s situation, said Elisabeth Lambert, a federal civil rights attorney working with the network.

Some involve people who have lived in the United States for years and seek release on bond while their cases proceed. Others involve people who entered through legal processes but are later detained and denied bond.

There also are other barriers that make it harder for people to defend themselves, requiring different support in federal court.

For example, Lambert said, immigrants facing deportation don’t have a right to discovery. This means that the only way to get the records is through a specific type of federal records request. 

A right of discovery allows a defendant to access information that could be used against them from a prosecutor ahead of trial. 

Lambert said records can face various delays and other barriers and may arrive after the deportation proceeding has already happened.

Why federal court is different

Lambert said the two court systems – immigration court and federal court – operate very differently.

Each of these legal spaces has its own sets of rules, norms and procedures, she said. 

“It’s just a lot to learn very quickly in a very high-stakes situation,” Lambert said. 

It works the other way, too.

“I couldn’t go into immigration court,” she said. “I don’t have the knowledge or the experience.” 

In one case Lambert and Parra worked on together, a judge issued a restraining order barring ICE from moving ahead with a client’s removal proceeding until the Freedom of Information Act issue was resolved, she said.

Lambert anticipates similar litigation in the future.  

“We think that this is going to be a pretty common issue – of the government withholding people’s immigration records as part of this effort to stack the deportation process against people who are seeking immigration relief.”

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Wisconsin attorneys partner with federal litigators as deportation cases grow more complex appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

A proposed ordinance that would prohibit face coverings for all law enforcement agencies operating in Milwaukee – including U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement – moved a step forward March 12.  

The Public Safety and Health Committee unanimously supported the ordinance, which still needs approval by the full Common Council.

Federal immigration agents routinely cover their faces during raids and arrests, which has raised concerns throughout the country about transparency and accountability.

Ald. Alex Brower, primary sponsor of the legislation, said in a statement that the ordinance is a response to such “unprecedented times.” 

This legislative work sends an important message to the community that the Common Council is willing to take action on what is within their power, said Alan Chavoya, treasurer and organizer with the Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression.

“We’ve seen in different cities that they kind of do as they please,” he said. The proposed ordinance is part of the Milwaukee Common Council’s “ICE Out” package of legislation announced by the council in February, aimed at locally regulating federal immigration enforcement.

The ban

The ordinance, introduced by Brower and fellow aldermen JoCasta Zamarripa, Marina Dimitrijevic, José G. Pérez, Russell W. Stamper II and Peter Burgelis, bans the wearing of face coverings to conceal their identities when acting in an official capacity. 

It would also require officers and their vehicles to have identification for their agency. 

The penalty for violating the ordinance would be from $5,000 to $10,000. 

The ordinance is a broader version of recent policy changes affecting only Milwaukee Police Department officers. 

On March 2, Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman updated MPD policy to restrict officers from wearing face coverings to conceal their identities.

Norman made the move because his department was previously “silent on face coverings and/or identity concealment,” an MPD spokesperson said.

Exceptions and limitations

The ordinance states it would “not apply to a law enforcement officer engaged in an undercover assignment for which concealing identity is necessary for the investigation of a criminal offense, provided that information related to the undercover assignment has been provided to the Milwaukee Police Department.”

Officers would also be allowed to wear face coverings for safety purposes. 

Similarly, the new MPD policy states that officers are allowed to wear facial coverings and masks when assigned outdoors during periods of cold or extreme weather as well as to prevent the spread of diseases and exposure to hazardous materials.

During a civil disturbance or crowd control incident, “a more advanced response may include members assigned from the Major Incident Response Team who utilize personal protective equipment,” according to the MPD spokesperson.

During a civil disturbance, a face covering could be worn for protection, not to conceal identity, which would be permitted under the updated policy, the MPD spokesperson said.

While many welcome these sorts of changes, others have said more should be done to protect Milwaukee residents.  

“Until MPD is actively protecting undocumented residents from ICE, I am unsure of the effectiveness of this preliminary measure,” said Noah Dinan, an organizer with the Young Democratic Socialists of America and student at the Milwaukee School of Engineering.

The college is the site of regular protests by students and community members objecting to ICE leasing a downtown building owned by MSOE.

Full vote

The ordinance extending a facial covering ban to federal agents will go before the full Common Council at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, March 24. 

The ordinance must be approved by a majority of the members – or eight – to pass.

The post MPD banned its officers from concealing their identities. Will the Common Council extend a similar policy to ICE agents? appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Gov. Tony Evers does not support a Republican-led amendment to a state bill that would require the Milwaukee Common Council to unanimously agree before it can change Milwaukee Police Department policies, a spokesperson for Evers’ office said.  

The governor plans to veto the bill if it reaches his desk, the spokesperson said. 

It’s the latest development in a long-running dispute between state lawmakers and Milwaukeeans over who should control police policy.

Rep. Bob Donovan, R-Greenfield, who represented Milwaukee’s South Side on the Common Council for 20 years, proposed the amendment to Senate Bill 799. The amendment would require all 15 council members to agree before they could reject or modify an MPD policy. 

Donovan’s amendment sets a higher bar for influencing Milwaukee police policy than currently exists under state law. The Common Council can currently reject or modify an MPD policy with a two-thirds vote – 10 of its 15 members.

The amendment could have real and tangible effects on life-and-death matters in the city.  

For example, city officials have long disagreed over strategies for how best to address gun violence, such as the use of ShotSpotter, a technology that alerts officers when gunfire is detected. 

Some council members have supported it as a tool to respond more quickly to shootings, while others have questioned its effectiveness and cost.

If Donovan’s amendment were to be enacted, council members would have to agree unanimously in order to change it.

“Allotting single member veto power to any Common Council member who wishes to block a policy change that is potentially supported by the rest of the Council opens the door to unnecessary roadblocks for matters as serious as public safety,” said Amanda Avalos, former vice chair of the Fire and Police Commission. “Standard operating procedures and guidelines are meant to protect the members and community alike – there should be no room for governance loopholes.” 

A more recent controversy involving the use of facial recognition technology illustrates how the two-thirds majority rule can influence policy. 

MPD has previously said it was considering entering into an agreement with a company called Biometrica to use facial recognition technology to assist in criminal investigations. The announcement triggered widespread pushback from residents and others. 

In May, 11 council members sent a letter to MPD Chief Jeffrey Norman expressing opposition to MPD entering a contract with Biometrica. That meant the Common Council had enough votes to veto the policy. If Donovan’s proposal became law, that wouldn’t be the case.

MPD’s perspective

Even if that policy did become law, that doesn’t necessarily mean that MPD wouldn’t take into account feedback it gets from others.  

An MPD spokesperson said in an email that the department collaborates with local communities and officials in a variety of ways.

“MPD continually and regularly reports to the Fire and Police Commission, who still have directive powers, promotional powers and chief oversight, the Common Council that oversees budget, creates ordinance and resolution and now has (policy) modification authority, as well as the mayoral administration,” the spokesperson said.

Most importantly, they said, MPD serves and ultimately reports to the community it serves.

Donovan did not respond to requests for comment about the amendment.

Act 12

How police policy is determined has already undergone significant changes in recent years.

When Wisconsin Act 12 was enacted in 2023, it stripped the authority from the Fire and Police Commission to determine MPD policy – authority it held for many years.

Civilian authority over police policy is something quite rare in the U.S., Edward Fallone, former chair of the commission, previously told NNS.

With this power, the commission banned, for example, the use of chokeholds as well as “no-knock” warrants.

After Act 12 took effect, the commission’s role in setting police policy became limited to making recommendations, with the police and fire department chiefs setting policy and the council having authority to reject or change policy with a two-thirds majority.

The changes brought by Act 12 prompted the resignations of Fallone and Avalos.

Legislative steps

The bill has passed both chambers of the Legislature and now heads to Evers’ desk, where he plans to veto it. 

The MPD respects the legislative process at the state and local level, the department’s spokesperson said.

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Evers to veto a bill weakening Common Council authority over MPD policy appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

After nearly 30 years in prison, Derek Williams appreciates the progress he’s made in his pursuit of parole. 

NNS previously reported that Williams’ 180-year sentence for a string of armed robberies was reduced after he protected a correctional officer during a stabbing. 

The sentence reduction made him eligible for parole decades earlier than he would have been otherwise. 

He said he’s been doing all he can to go from parole eligibility to freedom 

Right now, he’s housed at the Sturtevant Transitional Facility, a minimum-security prison. 

Five days a week, he is transported to the Racine Correctional Institution for his job in the gatehouse. 

“I walk around freely,” Williams said. “I see every staff member and every visitor that comes through.”

But what he wants is work release, something fundamentally different. 

Williams, 51, said he has always understood that a key way to demonstrate readiness for parole is doing work release – in which the Wisconsin Department of Corrections allows incarcerated people to leave a prison for a job in the community and return after their shift. 

Williams said his pursuit of parole hit a major setback because his pursuit of work release has hit one. 

In February, the Wisconsin Parole Commission deferred Williams’ parole for six months and withdrew its endorsement for work release, citing concerns that he was dishonest during his January parole hearing. 

It is a setback driving Williams, his wife and other loved ones crazy.  

“I’m literally being held in prison because the prison is not letting me out to do work release,” he said.

A Wisconsin Watch investigation found that work release opportunities in the state were limited and that prison officials weren’t tracking participation rates.

Accusation of dishonesty

The commission said Williams falsely claimed during his January hearing that at a previous hearing a commissioner had discussed initiating a pre-release investigation. 

A pre-release investigation is conducted by correctional staff to verify housing, employment and public safety before parole is granted.

After reviewing the audio and transcript from the earlier hearing, the commission wrote that there was no mention of a pre-release investigation. 

Williams’ “willingness to be dishonest during a parole review (and about another parole commissioner) heightens the commissioner’s stated reservations,” the Wisconsin Parole Commission said in its Feb. 2 decision.  

Williams disputes this characterization, saying he was attempting to explain prior discussions, not mislead the panel or manipulate the parole process.

He also said he was not provided an opportunity to clarify his comments before the Wisconsin Parole Board made its decision.

‘Not an entitlement’

Despite the different claims about what happened, the effect on Williams’ prospects is clear. 

Robert Miller is the warden of the Racine Correctional Institution, who oversees off-site authorizations for people housed at Sturtevant. Miller told Rikki Williams in an email that because the Parole Commission no longer endorses work release, her husband’s anticipated release date could be “significantly in the future.” 

Beth Hardtke, director of communications for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, said in an email that work release decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. 

“Work release placement decisions and approvals may vary based on the individual and the types of conviction(s),” Hardtke said. “The individual’s conduct and work history … may be considered.”

In its decision, the Wisconsin Parole Commission also cited Williams’ criminal history and public safety concerns but did not elaborate on them.

A spokesperson for the commission previously told NNS that “a parole grant is not an entitlement.”

For now, Williams remains in the gatehouse.

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post What do you do when the Parole Commission says you’re lying? Following up with Derek Williams appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Over the past six months, dozens of immigrants held in Wisconsin jails awaiting deportation have challenged their detention in federal court. Judges ruled in their favor in more than half the cases, pushing back on new federal immigration enforcement practices.

Wisconsin’s federal courts have not seen comparable volumes of immigration-related habeas corpus petitions, which challenge the legality of a person’s detention, in at least a decade. More than a third of the petitions heard in Wisconsin since 2016 were filed in the past six months.

Two forces are driving the influx: the Trump administration’s effort to halt bond for virtually all detainees and its enforcement surge in neighboring Minnesota. 

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals ruled last September that all unauthorized immigrants in ICE custody are ineligible for bond, meaning they must remain in custody while their case plays out.

The ruling reversed a long-standing practice that previously enabled many immigrants to continue their cases while out on bond. In its wake, habeas petitions became one of few remaining paths to an exit.

Wisconsin’s growing tally of habeas petitions pales in comparison to national figures. Federal district courts nationwide have received more than 24,000 habeas petitions from detained immigrants since January 2025, with numbers surging after the Board of Immigration Appeals decision, overwhelming federal prosecutors tasked with defending the legality of ICE detentions.

Soon after the board’s ruling, the Trump administration targeted Minnesota in its immigration crackdown, deploying thousands of federal agents to patrol the Twin Cities and nearby rural communities. The White House claimed in early February that the campaign resulted in the arrests of more than 4,000 immigrants.

Since January 2025, ICE has transferred at least 108 immigrants from Minnesota to the Douglas County jail in Superior, Wisconsin. The sheriff’s office contracts with ICE for detainee housing, as do three other Wisconsin counties.

At least 15 immigrants held in Douglas County have filed habeas petitions in Wisconsin’s Western District Court since September 2025. Judges have thus far sided with immigrants four times, including two Ecuadorian men arrested in a raid on a construction site in a Minneapolis suburb. Five of the cases remain pending.

Those detained in the Douglas County jail made up two-thirds of the Western District’s immigration-related habeas petitions between September 2025 and February 2026. 

While arrest locations were not available for every case, available data indicates that 60% of immigrants who passed through the Douglas County jail between January and October 2025 were arrested in Minnesota.

The Madison-based court had not previously handled an immigration-related habeas case in over a decade. 

Habeas petitions in the recent past were a “hodgepodge,” said Milwaukee immigration attorney Benjamin Crouse, and were often dismissed or denied by judges in Wisconsin’s Eastern District.

Prior to last September, many habeas petitions challenged the legality of detaining immigrants for months at a time without a clear end date. A Colombian man transferred into ICE custody after a drug arrest in 2014 filed a habeas petition after spending more than 20 months at the Dodge County Detention Facility in Juneau, arguing his detention had stretched beyond reasonable time limits. 

Judge William Griesbach denied the man’s petition in 2016. Griesbach has ruled on 17 habeas petitions in the past decade, granting only one: a 2018 petition filed by a Mexican asylum seeker who spent more than two and a half years in the Kenosha County Detention Center without a bond hearing.

In some cases, Griesbach and other federal judges had no choice but to deny or dismiss habeas petitions: In at least 10 cases filed in Wisconsin’s Eastern District Court since 2016, federal immigration officials deported immigrants before the court could fully consider their petitions. 

Nearly as many immigrants left ICE custody through other routes, including community supervision and asylum, before a judge could rule on their habeas petitions.

Despite the influx of new cases in the Western District, the Eastern District has still heard roughly two-thirds of the immigration-related habeas petitions filed since September. 

Most federal district court judges who have considered habeas petitions since September have ruled against the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision prohibiting bond hearings for detained immigrants. 

Wisconsin’s Eastern District judges are split. Griesbach called the board’s position “persuasive” in December, rejecting a habeas petition filed by a Venezuelan man arrested alongside his wife during a routine check-in at the Department of Homeland Security’s downtown Milwaukee office earlier that year. That man, Diego Ugarte-Arenas, left ICE custody after receiving asylum in January.

Judge Brett Ludwig also sided with the Trump administration’s position on detaining immigrants without bond. Trump appointed Ludwig to the Eastern District bench in 2020; then-President George W. Bush appointed Griesbach to the court in 2002. 

Eastern District judges Byron Conway, a Biden appointee, and Lynn Adelman, a Clinton appointee, have both criticized the board’s ruling. “Courts have nearly universally rejected the conclusion of the Board,” Conway wrote in an October order granting the habeas petition of a Nicaraguan man arrested during an incidental run-in with ICE agents.

Western District judges have uniformly ruled against the Board of Immigration Appeals’ bond decisions.

Keeping cases in courts like Wisconsin’s Western District is a high priority for attorneys representing detained immigrants.

“It’s less about jurisdictions where you’re successful and more about avoiding jurisdictions where it’s more problematic,” said St. Paul immigration attorney Solomon Steen, who has represented two clients detained in the Douglas County jail.

Many of ICE’s largest detention facilities are in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi — states within the jurisdiction of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last month backed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ bond eligibility decision.

When a client arrested in Minnesota lands in a Wisconsin jail, Steen said, attorneys can find them within “hours or days.” Tracking clients’ locations becomes tougher once they are transferred to larger detention facilities elsewhere, he added.

With thousands of immigrants now bouncing between distant detention centers, Steen said many face pressure to give up on their legal cases. “You won’t know if you’ll be able to contact a lawyer if you get detained,” he said. “So wouldn’t it be easier to just take a voluntary departure or take a removal order in immigration court just so that you will know where you are and what’s happening?” 

Steen and other attorneys are now working to keep clients’ cases in Midwestern courts — and out of the 5th Circuit’s jurisdiction — even when their whereabouts are unclear, preserving their chances of a successful habeas petition.

Even before the Board of Immigration Appeals blocked most detainees from seeking bond, voluntary departures — wherein an immigrant leaves the U.S. to avoid a deportation on their record — increased 21-fold between January and September of last year. 

Meanwhile, an order from a federal district court judge in California has opened the door for many of Wisconsin’s current ICE detainees to request bond for the first time in months. 

Judge Sunshine Sykes of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California initially ruled in November that the Department of Homeland Security’s practice of denying bond hearings to most immigrant detainees ran afoul of federal law. 

DHS didn’t budge, maintaining that the Board of Immigration Appeals’ rulemaking authority takes precedence over a ruling in federal district court. Chief Immigration Court Judge Teresa Riley, a Department of Justice employee, later directed judges in immigration courts nationwide to continue denying detained immigrants’ requests for bond hearings. 

Sykes doubled down last week, rebuking DHS for ignoring her earlier order. 

“It is not the executive department’s province and duty to say what the law is,” she wrote. 

Sykes vacated Board of Immigration Appeals bond rules in all states outside of the 5th Circuit, which still leaves most immigrants in ICE’s largest detention centers unable to request bond hearings. 

Crouse recently observed one Chicago immigration court judge notify immigrants about Sykes’ latest order.

 “They’re taking this a little more seriously now, but we still don’t know exactly what this looks like,” he said. 
He and other Milwaukee-area immigration attorneys are again filing bond motions for their clients. “We’re getting hearings,” he added.

Aissa Olivarez, an attorney with the Community Immigration Law Center in Madison, confirmed that immigrants detained in Dodge County are receiving notice that they are eligible for bond. So far, she said, there is no indication federal immigration authorities are rushing to move Wisconsin detainees to holding facilities farther south.

The post Immigrants fight ICE detention in federal court — and increasingly win appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

The nonprofit Center for Self-Sufficiency closed in September as federal investigators audited its use of $750,000 in government funding. 

The organization focused on supporting residents reentering society from the criminal justice system and strengthening families. Services included financial and employment coaching, parenting support and restorative justice. 

The center was based for years out of the Community Advocates headquarters at 728 N. James Lovell St. before moving to the YWCA building on King Drive in May. 

The government audit found that the use of $749,000 of the federal funds was unsupported by documentation.

“It’s kind of shocking because it’s portrayed as if there was no information that backed up spending, and that definitely wasn’t the case,” said Maudwella Kirkendoll, chief operating officer of Community Advocates and former vice president of the Center for Self-Sufficiency’s board of directors. 

Despite the audit, two former employees who were working at the center when it closed said the main reason the organization dissolved was a gradual dwindling of funding opportunities. 

Kirkendoll agreed. 

“The funding,” Kirkendoll said, “was just drying up.”

The employees asked to remain anonymous to avoid any negative impacts to future work opportunities.

The federal audit

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs oversees Second Chance Act grants, which are generally meant to support people as they reintegrate after incarceration and help reduce recidivism. 

The Center for Self-Sufficiency was awarded nearly $750,000 to provide case management and employment services to men returning to Milwaukee after incarceration from 2021 to 2024, its third time receiving the grant. 

The office approved an extension to continue the grant with no additional funding until September. 

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General launched an audit in May into the center’s program. The office conducted a site visit, interviewed staff, reviewed policy and procedures and requested accounting and financial records.

The audit, which was released in September, indicated the Center for Self-Sufficiency could not demonstrate compliance with certain grant requirements because it did not provide the accounting documentation needed to show how funds were spent to support its program performance. 

“While we determined that a majority of (Center for Self-Sufficiency’s) policies aligned with important conditions of the laws, regulations, guidelines, and terms and conditions applicable to the award, we found critical issues with (Center for Self-Sufficiency’s) grant financial management,” the report reads. 

The audit also found the grant’s financial activity was mixed together with activity from other sources in the organization’s accounting records for most of the timeframe that was examined. 

The report recommended that the Office of Justice Programs review and “remedy” the spending, find a better use for the remaining $1,000 that was not used and make sure the Center for Self-Sufficiency has proper systems in place to track how it spends grant money before receiving any future funding. 

According to the report, the center notified the office that it was considering dissolving in July and that its board ultimately voted to close the organization by Sept. 30, 2025.

What former staff and board member are saying

Kirkendoll and the two former employees said the Center for Self-Sufficiency did not misallocate any funds.

It could verify grant program expenses with receipts and paper and computer records, but it had a past accounting system that was not clear, they said. 

When Dafi Dyer became president and CEO of the Center for Self-Sufficiency in late 2022, she and the board implemented a review of the center’s outside accounting firm after noticing some problems and switched to a new accounting firm and system in mid-2023, according to Kirkendoll.

During the audit, the center provided the records from its updated system, as well as the records from the previous accountant, according to Kirkendoll and the former employees. 

“So all that stuff is substantiated, it was there, it just wasn’t in the format that they would have expected from the accounting firm,” Kirkendoll said. 

The audit also reported that the center did not complete single audits for 2021, 2022 and 2023.

The Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs did not respond to questions about the services and documentation provided by the Center for Self-Sufficiency. 

The Office of the Inspector General did not attempt to collect the spent money, according to the former employees and Kirkendoll.

Shutting down

Kirkendoll said the board was having conversations with the center’s leadership about potentially dissolving the organization in the first quarter of 2025. 

As limited-term grants ended, according to Kirkendoll and former employees, leadership and the board were not sure if the organization would be able to receive enough funding from other grants to support its operations. 

“When we dug deeper, it just got to a point where, as a board, we decided having even one or two grants remaining just didn’t make sense,” he said. 

The center moved out of the Lovell Street building into the YWCA Southeast Wisconsin building at 1915 N. Martin Luther King Drive in May.

The Center for Self-Sufficiency made efforts to downsize by reducing employee hours and salaries, according to a former employee. It cut its staff of 10 in half in June.

The organization’s total public support dropped from $3.46 million in 2015 to $2.2 million in 2019 to $1.3 million in 2023, according to the center’s tax filings.

It also did not have much private funding – in 2023, it reported $55,054 in other gifts or contributions. 

Kirkendoll said concerns about grant funding are not specific to the Center for Self-Sufficiency. 

“Over the course of the last five-plus years, I think this funding overall for organizations that are doing the work has decreased substantially,” he said.

Impact

Both former employees said the center had a great working environment and a staff dedicated to the people they served. 

One former employee said success stories from past clients, such as staying at a job for two years or having relationships with their children or families that they couldn’t maintain before, might not be reflected in data reports but can make a big difference in a person’s life. 

Another former employee said they gave their contact information to the final participants in the reentry program and still tries to connect them with other resources. 

“They did great work, and this is the nature of nonprofits,” Kirkendoll said. “It’s, of course, always my hope that the work continues, whether it be with another organization, because there’s definitely a need in the community.” 

Meredith Melland is the neighborhoods reporter for the Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service and a corps member of Report for America, a national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on under-covered issues and communities. Report for America plays no role in editorial decisions in the NNS newsroom.

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Center for Self-Sufficiency quietly closed last year amid a federal audit and funding challenges appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Editor’s note: This story was originally published on Feb. 25. It has been updated with new information.

Sheriff Denita R. Ball announced Feb. 27 that her department would not move forward with implementing the use of facial recognition technology — at this time.

“While we recognize the potential of this software as an investigative tool, we also recognize that trust between the [Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office] and the people we serve is important,” said Ball in a statement issued Friday.

She said her discussions with advocates highlighted valid concerns about the use of the technology to obtain data given the current national climate.

Ball did leave the door open for its use in the future.

“This decision is not a retreat from innovation but rather an understanding that timing matters, too,” she said.

Her decision came on the heels a federal lawsuit filed Feb. 23 by the legal nonprofit group Protect Democracy which alleges the Department of Homeland Security used facial recognition technology unlawfully to track legal observers and label them domestic terrorists. 

Local law enforcement representatives have been addressing facial recognition technology-related fears from residents. Residents and others were concerned about a potential collaboration with a company called Biometrica, which provides access to facial recognition search results.  

In August, Ball signed an “agreement of intent” to enter into a contract with Biometrica, said James Burnett, director of public affairs and community engagement and acting chief of staff at the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office. 

“But the contract is still considered to be in draft form – not fully signed, executed or valid – and has to proceed, like any other proposed contract, through the county’s statutory signing process,” said Burnett prior to Friday’s announcement.  

Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman banned the use of facial technology by his department in early February. 

On Feb. 24, Norman announced the suspension of MPD officer Josue Ayala for the improper use of a different tracking tool, the Flock camera system, to track a dating partner and their former partner. 

“I am extremely disappointed to learn about the incident and expect all members, sworn and civilian, to demonstrate the highest ethical standards in the performance of their duties,” said Norman in a statement.

Ayala was charged by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office with one count of attempted misconduct in public office. Norman said he immediately directed MPD to create additional auditing mechanisms.

Concerns remain high

Social justice and civil rights advocates have expressed grave concerns about the use of facial recognition technology, citing evidence of inaccuracies, racial bias and privacy violations. 

Facial recognition technology uses artificial intelligence to identify someone by comparing a photo of an unknown face to some database of images of known faces, said Katie Kinsey at the Feb. 5 Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting during a presentation by the NYU Policing Project. 

The image databases can include mug shot collections, driver’s license records or images found on the internet, Kinsey said.

Emilio De Torre, executive director of the Milwaukee Turners, a nonpartisan civic group, said he’s cautiously optimistic about the Sheriff’s Office and MPD opting not to use the technology.

He said other surveillance techniques that are being used in Milwaukee, such as Flock, unfairly project guilt on residents.

“The nonstop surveillance on residents is toxic and needs to stop,” De Torre said.

He also questions whether new auditing measures Norman said would be implemented after the incident involving Ayala, will work.

“The victims found out about the surveillance on their own,” De Torre said. “That further erodes any confidence that any safeguards will protect us.”

Facial recognition technology and local law enforcement

In spring, MPD acknowledged it used outside agencies’ licenses for facial recognition search results for two to three years without a written department policy.

The department also announced it was considering an agreement with Biometrica – an agreement that would have provided access to facial recognition technology to the department in exchange for approximately 2.5 million Milwaukee County Jail booking photos.

This proposal prompted months of public pushback before the announcement by Norman in February that the department would no longer pursue the technology.

An MPD spokesperson recently told NNS the department could revisit the issue in the future when a policy is in place that aligns with both public safety benefit and public concerns.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin is urging Milwaukee residents to remain vigilant.

“Countless Milwaukee residents and community leaders have engaged in thoughtful community education, spent hours upon hours in public meetings and contacted their local elected officials to voice their unequivocal opposition to the use of (facial recognition technology), and they will still be watching,” the spokesperson said. 

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Update: Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office decides against using facial recognition technology appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

A federal lawsuit filed Feb. 23 by the legal nonprofit group Protect Democracy alleges the Department of Homeland Security used facial recognition technology unlawfully to track legal observers and label them domestic terrorists. 

Locally, law enforcement representatives are addressing facial recognition technology-related fears from residents. They’re concerned about a potential collaboration with a company called Biometrica, which provides access to facial recognition search results.  

In August, Milwaukee County Sheriff Denita Ball signed an “agreement of intent” to enter into a contract with Biometrica, said James Burnett, director of public affairs and community engagement and acting chief of staff at the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office. 

“But the contract is still considered to be in draft form – not fully signed, executed or valid – and has to proceed, like any other proposed contract, through the county’s statutory signing process,” Burnett said. 

There currently are no services or technology being provided by Biometrica, and Biometrica does not have access to any sheriff’s office data, Burnett said.

County Supervisor Sky Capriolo, member of the county’s Judiciary, Law Enforcement and General Services Committee, said she and residents have serious concerns.  

“It warrants more consideration, education and discussion,” Capriolo said. “I certainly am not ready to green light a contract.”

Capriolo said she’s waiting to hear whether the contract will go to her committee again. 

Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman took a different step and banned the use of facial technology by his department in early February. 

On Tuesday, Feb. 24, Norman announced the suspension of MPD officer Josue Ayala for the improper use of a different tracking tool, the Flock camera system, to track a dating partner and their former partner. 

“I am extremely disappointed to learn about the incident and expect all members, sworn and civilian, to demonstrate the highest ethical standards in the performance of their duties,” said Norman in a statement.

Ayala was charged by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office with one count of attempted misconduct in public office. Norman said he immediately directed MPD to create additional auditing mechanisms.

Concerns remain high

Social justice and civil rights advocates have expressed grave concerns about the use of the technology by both agencies, citing evidence of inaccuracies, racial bias and privacy violations. 

Facial recognition technology uses artificial intelligence to identify someone by comparing a photo of an unknown face to some database of images of known faces, said Katie Kinsey at the Feb. 5 Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting during a presentation by the NYU Policing Project. 

The image databases can include mug shot collections, driver’s license records or images found on the internet, Kinsey said.

Facial recognition technology and local law enforcement

In spring, MPD acknowledged it used outside agencies’ licenses for facial recognition search results for two to three years without a written department policy.

The department also announced it was considering an agreement with Biometrica – an agreement that would have provided access to facial recognition technology to the department in exchange for approximately 2.5 million Milwaukee County Jail booking photos.

This proposal prompted months of public pushback before the announcement by Norman in February that the department would no longer pursue the technology.

ACLU preaches vigilance

The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin welcomed Norman’s announcement but also expressed concerns about MPD’s past decision making.  

It is “extremely concerning that MPD secretly used FRT (facial recognition technology) searches for years without any standard operating procedure – or any written guidelines – in place,” an ACLU spokesperson said in an email to NNS.

The organization is urging Milwaukee residents to remain vigilant.

“Countless Milwaukee residents and community leaders have engaged in thoughtful community education, spent hours upon hours in public meetings and contacted their local elected officials to voice their unequivocal opposition to the use of (facial recognition technology), and they will still be watching,” the spokesperson said. 

The MPD spokesperson told NNS the department could revisit the issue in the future when a policy is in place that aligns with both public safety benefit and public concerns.

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Critics still wary of facial recognition technology use by law enforcement appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Monte Mabra had already been doing anti-violence work for more than 20 years when his brother, LaTroy Harris, was shot and killed outside a Northwest Side bar in December. 

As the Milwaukee Police Department continues the search for his killer, Mabra created the “I Will Not Die to Gun Violence: The LaTroy Harris Initiative.” 

He said he created the program to give meaning to his brother’s death. 

Central to the initiative is a focus on the role interpersonal dynamics play in gun violence, especially street codes revolving around revenge. 

“We have to stop that cycle of thinking – that it’s all right to give into revenge, or it’s all right to kill someone because you can’t beat them up, or they call you out by name, or because they talk to your girlfriend,” Mabra said. “We want to get to that distortion and challenge it.”

LaTroy and Antonio

On Dec. 15, 2025, Harris was shot and killed outside Dee’s Elegance Bar, 7420 W. Villard Ave. 

Milwaukee County prosecutors charged Antonio D. Brown, 39, with first-degree intentional homicide in connection with that shooting, according to court records. 

A years-long beef between Harris and Brown preceded his murder, Mabra said. 

A warrant was issued Dec. 30 for Brown’s arrest. He remains at large.

‘I wanted revenge’

Mabra said he had to pause and think after learning of his brother’s death. 

“I once was one of those guys that believed in the street code. I wanted revenge,” Mabra said. “However, my training, my history helped me to challenge those irrational beliefs.” 

Mabra said Harris was 14 years old when he was adopted into the family. Mabra was in his 30s. He said they viewed each other simply as brothers.

They lived in different parts of Milwaukee but were both exposed to the city’s street and gang culture. In that environment, Mabra said, violence often carried an expectation of retaliation – if someone hurts you, you have to hurt them.

Benjamin Huntington, a lifelong Milwaukee resident, said that remains the case. 

The retaliation mindset ensnares a lot of people – and families – he said. 

Huntington met Mabra while attending a court-ordered domestic violence workshop facilitated by Mabra. 

“It’s just a domino effect,” Huntington said. “Revenge goes back and forth.” 

Milwaukee’s homicide rate has historically been higher than the national average.

MPD data show homicides increased from 132 in 2024 to 141 in 2025 – a 7% rise. 

Wendel Hruska, executive director of Project RETURN, a nonprofit that supports people leaving incarceration, sees a clear connection between violence and exposure to trauma. 

Hruska, who has known Mabra for years, said the vast majority of their clients have experienced trauma related to violence at some point in their life.

“Too many of our clients operate in kind of a survival mode where it’s about just being able to get through one day to the next, versus thinking about stability and structure and success down the road,” Hruska said.

Seeing the impact of gun violence

Instead of giving in to his initial desire for revenge, Mabra began talking to friends and fellow community organizers about how to bring about change in Milwaukee. 

Over time, the conversations developed into a curriculum for a 10-week course, with two sessions each week. 

Mabra envisions local leaders, departments and politicians taking part, adding their unique perspective on the problems related to – and possible solutions for – gun violence. Sessions include visits from MPD’s homicide unit, Milwaukee Fire Department paramedics and emergency room doctors and nurses. 

He’s also working to connect with the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office and the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. 

The district attorney’s office said it will continue monitoring Mabra’s efforts as they move forward in their development. 

“The key question about our ability to collaborate with them as part of the Milwaukee Early Intervention Program is their ability to underwrite the costs of the programs so that participants are not charged other than a nominal fee (like we do with MATC),” Jeffrey Altenburg, chief deputy district attorney, told NNS in an email.  

The sessions are meant to be interactive and would include different mock sessions showing how participants’ lives might unfold. 

One session is a mock funeral, and another takes place in a mock courtroom where participants are handcuffed, placed on a bus and driven to a correctional facility.

Altogether, the sessions explore loss, emotion, family, trauma and accountability. 

“It’s all to see what they’ve done and the impact that it has had on others – and to see what’s actually going to happen to them. The consequences,” Mabra said.

Huntington believes these sorts of explorations can have an impact on the quality of life that is possible in Milwaukee.  

“With the revenge thing – like, what does it solve?” Huntington asked. “That’s somebody’s dad, somebody’s brother, somebody’s son.” 

How you can help

An MPD spokesperson said the department continues to seek Brown in relation to the murder of Harris. Anyone with information can contact Milwaukee police at 414-935-7360. 

Those who wish to remain anonymous can contact Milwaukee Crime Stoppers at 414-224-8477. Crime Stoppers is offering a reward for information leading to Brown’s arrest.

People can reach out to Mabra to learn more about “I Will Not Die to Gun Violence: The LaTroy Harris Initiative,” at 414-210-9953.

Jonathan Aguilar is a visual journalist at Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service who is supported through a partnership between CatchLight Local and Report for America.

The post Monte Mabra wants the revenge to stop appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

The backlog of unresolved felony-related matters in Milwaukee County has surpassed the pandemic-era peak, topping more than 10,000 as of Oct. 13, according to data obtained from the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office through an NNS open records request.

As cases linger, people throughout the criminal justice system feel the effects, including victims and their families, people accused of crimes and the broader community, said Kent Lovern, Milwaukee County district attorney.

“‘Justice delayed, justice denied’ applies to everybody,” Lovern said. 

One recent high-profile incident reaffirms how case backlogs could have tragic and life-altering consequences. 

On Feb. 5, a Milwaukee man, Mile Dukic, allegedly stabbed and killed 44-year-old Amanda Varisco on West National Avenue and S. 36th Street. At the time of the killing Dukic had separate open felony cases in Milwaukee County Circuit Court – for bail jumping and stalking. He was charged with another felony, first-degree intentional homicide, on Feb. 9.

Dukic is currently in custody with bail set at $500,000.

Two different backlogs

The district attorney’s office plays a pivotal role at both ends of the felony pipeline, said a spokesperson for the Wisconsin State Public Defender’s Office: referrals from police awaiting a charging decision, and charged felony cases working their way through the courts.

The Milwaukee Police Department made 5,650 summary felony arrests in 2025, according to an MPD spokesperson. The department continues to work with the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office to best address the felony backlog, the MPD spokesperson said.

District attorney records show 2,924 pending uncharged felony cases as of October 2025.

State office wants county to change approach, charge fewer felonies

The spokesperson for the Wisconsin State Public Defender’s Office said the district attorney’s office can and should do more to address the growing backlog by adjusting its approach. 

“We believe prosecutors should be exercising more discretion in which referrals they are charging,” the spokesperson said. The spokesperson said their office regularly sees clients charged with relatively minor offenses lose jobs or housing as a result – consequences that can outweigh the underlying charge.

When the prosecutor’s office officially presses felony charges, these cases can get bogged down and stay in the courts. Resolution to the cases depends not only on prosecutors but also on defense attorneys, judges, court staff and other resources that are strained as well, Lovern said. 

Based on the district attorney’s internal case-tracking system, more than 7,000 felony cases were charged but not yet resolved as of Oct. 13. 

“The influx of felony charges coming out of the DA’s office isn’t benefiting the court system or public safety,” said State Public Defender Jennifer Bias. “It’s a waste of our scarce attorney resources.”

Increase in ‘serious criminal activity’

Lovern pushes back on the idea that prosecutors are charging too many cases.

“I want to make it very clear: I don’t have goals for what we ought to be charging,” he said. “I don’t have a directive of what the percentage of our charging rate should be.”

Prosecutors decline to move forward on many referrals, said Jeffrey Altenburg, Milwaukee’s chief deputy district attorney. 

On a basic public safety level, there are simply more serious felonies being committed, Lovern and Altenburg said.

“I think that that’s exactly what we’re seeing,” Altenburg said. “We’re seeing more referrals coming to this office that involve firearms, violence, sexual violence.” 

Milwaukee Police Department data show reports of the majority of the most serious offenses declined from 2024 to 2025, with the exception of homicides and human trafficking, which increased slightly.

Violent crime in Milwaukee has generally declined in the past few years – but from historic highs seen during the pandemic, according to data from the Council on Criminal Justice.

When to charge

Charging decisions begin with a decision about whether a case is provable beyond a reasonable doubt, Altenburg said.

“We adhere to that standard very scrupulously in this office,” he said.  

Once that is determined, the district attorney’s office moves to the question of whether prosecution is necessary or a different kind of intervention is more appropriate, Altenburg said.

Alternatives to traditional prosecution

In Milwaukee, there are two alternative interventions: diversion and deferred prosecution.

Diversion allows a person to complete requirements, such as treatment, restitution or community service, without a criminal charge. 

Deferred prosecution involves issuing charges with an agreement in which a conviction is withheld if the person meets various conditions.

Lovern said local prosecutors created an early-intervention approach designed to steer nonviolent cases driven by substance use or mental health challenges out of the criminal justice system when appropriate. 

In 2020, Milwaukee County intervened in roughly 600 cases, Altenburg said. Last year, the county intervened in roughly 1,600 cases.

Modern policing demands

Lovern said the nature of modern policing – and modern evidence – has fundamentally changed prosecutors’ workload.

The sheer volume of evidence that must be reviewed contributes to growing wait times before charging decisions can be made, Lovern said. 

More evidence is generated because of modern technologies and other tools used by police. A single incident can, for example, generate hours of body-camera footage that prosecutors review before making charging decisions, Lovern said. 

In 2020, there were 84,000 pieces of evidence in Milwaukee’s database. In 2024, there were 1.7 million items. 

“I’m sure last year, it was even higher. That’s just where we’re headed,” Lovern said.

Staffing and system capacity

Something that adds to both backlogs – uncharged cases awaiting a decision and charged cases in the system – is insufficient staffing levels throughout the court system, a trend that has continued since the pandemic. 

The district attorney’s office has about 125 full-time prosecutors, Lovern said. 

“Now that is a lot. It’s the same number that we had when (Altenburg) and I started in this office 28 years ago, though.”

The State Public Defender’s Office also faces staffing challenges, according to its spokesperson. 

“Broadly speaking, our agency needs more staff statewide,” the spokesperson said. “This wouldn’t address delays caused by prosecutors, but it would help to decrease the time it takes to appoint attorneys to indigent defendants and reduce the turnover in staff that office experiences due to burnout.”

There is also a need for support staff that help with administrative tasks, freeing up attorneys.

Lovern said unstable funding adds to staffing pressures.

About a third of legal staff in the county had been funded with federal grant dollars, which has been a little less predictable in the last couple of years, Lovern said.  

“We can use more positions,” Lovern said. “There’s no question about that.”

The post Felony backlog in Milwaukee hit historic high during pandemic. It has continued to grow since then appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

Last week we asked for your questions about immigration enforcement in Wisconsin, particularly as thousands of federal immigration agents patrol Minnesota’s Twin Cities, conducting door-to-door searches for immigrants and clashing daily with protesters and observers.

One reader reached out for information about Wisconsin’s firearms laws, citing the example of armed civilians at anti-ICE protests in Minnesota. The question preceded the Jan. 24 killing of Alex Pretti by a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officer in Minneapolis — a shooting that escalated tensions in Minnesota, sparked national protests and reignited questions about unchecked federal power. 

The episode also renewed a national conversation about the implications of exercising Second Amendment rights during protests and interactions with law enforcement. Pretti, a 37-year-old nurse at Minneapolis’ Veterans Affairs hospital, held a concealed carry permit for the handgun he carried that day. Video of the incident shows a CBP officer confiscating the handgun shortly before other agents shot Pretti multiple times, killing him.

Here’s the reader’s question and our answer below:  

I would like to know more about open carry in Wisconsin. I know Wisconsin has more permissive open carry laws compared to Minnesota. But, I know there are some restrictions as to locations as well.

Wisconsin law is, at least on the surface, fairly permissive on the matter of carrying firearms in most public spaces — a practice often referred to as “open carry.” 

“As long as you’re not a prohibited possessor for a firearm and you’re an adult, you are allowed to lawfully open carry a firearm in the state of Wisconsin,” said Milwaukee defense attorney Tom Grieve, a former state prosecutor and Second Amendment commentator.

Those prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal or state law include those with a felony conviction, anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence or anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order. Others prohibited include people found not guilty of a felony by reason of mental illness, those adjudicated incompetent by a court or those with a history of involuntary commitments for mental illness or drug dependence.

Legal permanent residents can lawfully own a firearm, provided they meet other eligibility requirements. Most foreign nationals with nonimmigrant visas, including temporary employment-based visas, cannot own guns. Federal law also bars unauthorized immigrants from owning firearms — a rule that withstood a recent challenge in federal court.

But carrying openly, particularly without a concealed carry license, can be a legal minefield. Carrying a firearm on federal property — including post offices — or on school grounds is a felony, and Wisconsin law sets a 1,000-foot radius around all school properties in which possessing a firearm is generally illegal. In urban areas, Grieve added, “you’re almost always within 1,000 feet of a school.”

The right to carry — either open or concealed — also does not extend to police stations, courthouses or correctional facilities. Private property owners may prohibit guns on their premises and direct anyone violating their rules to leave. “Signs or no signs, if you’re asked to leave, you have to leave,” said Nik Clark, president of the advocacy group Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Private property owners cannot, however, bar people from keeping a gun in their personal vehicle while on their premises.

Concealed carry license holders are allowed to carry within 1,000 feet of a school under state law, but they are not exempt from the law prohibiting firearms on school grounds. Licensees may also carry their guns in bars and taverns, but only if they do not drink alcohol. 

Wisconsin residents over the age of 21 who are permitted to own a firearm can apply for a concealed carry license through the Wisconsin Department of Justice. Applicants must prove they have completed a firearms training course and background check and pay a $40 fee to obtain their first license, which remains valid for five years. 

State law generally prohibited Wisconsinites from carrying concealed firearms until 2011, when then-Gov. Scott Walker signed into law broad concealed carry rights that extend to most public spaces, including the state Capitol. 

The state issued or renewed more than 67,000 concealed carry licenses in 2024. Bryan Voss, a Milwaukee-area firearms instructor and member of the Wisconsin Libertarian Party, said the demographics of concealed carry license applicants are shifting. 

“I’ve heard that Black women are the most rapidly growing population of gun owners,” he said, “and the makeup of the classes does seem to support that.”

Most states either honor Wisconsin concealed carry licenses or do not require a license to carry a concealed firearm. Neighboring Illinois and Minnesota do not honor Wisconsin licenses, nor do 12 other states and the District of Columbia.

A growing number of states, including Illinois, prohibit openly carrying “long guns” — meaning rifles and shotguns — at protests. Those rules aim to prevent armed confrontations between protesters, counterprotesters and law enforcement, said University of Wisconsin-Madison law professor John Gross. “What (law enforcement) don’t want,” he said, “is a situation where you have two armed groups facing off against one another with the police in between them.”

But Wisconsin law generally allows both open and licensed concealed carry at political demonstrations. A few demonstrators carried rifles outside the Wisconsin State Capitol during a massive protest against COVID-19 restrictions in 2020, for instance. 

Minnesota also allows concealed carry permit holders to bring firearms to political demonstrations. 

Family members have confirmed that Pretti held a concealed carry permit for the handgun that a CBP agent confiscated moments before the shooting. Minnesota laws allow concealed carry permit holders to openly carry their firearms, although videos show Pretti had his handgun holstered and was holding a phone camera.

Wisconsin attorneys and gun rights advocates argue gun owners considering openly carrying their firearms at protests should think carefully about their decision.

“We have a right to our own self-defense, and the defense of our family and of our communities,” Voss said. “(But) I usually advise people against open carry. I find that there are very few situations in which that makes anyone feel better or really does you any good. Worst case scenario, it makes you the target.”

“When you are open carrying a firearm people generally think, ‘Oh, this is a great way to deter someone,’” Grieve said. “It might (be), or they’re just going to make sure the first thing they do is grab your firearm.”

Clark broadly cautioned against bringing firearms to protests against the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

“I would encourage anyone who wants to go ‘demonstrate’ armed to keep a safe distance from law enforcement,” he wrote in an email. “Wave your flag, say what you want to say, but don’t get in close contact with law enforcement. I would advise anyone not to try to interfere with law enforcement at all. But if you do interfere with law enforcement, doing so armed is presenting yourself as a deadly threat and that is dangerous for both law enforcement and agitators.”

Still, Grieve said, carrying a firearm in the presence of law enforcement is not intrinsically grounds for officers to react with deadly force, as some Trump administration officials suggested in the immediate aftermath of Pretti’s killing. 

“If that’s the case, then game wardens in the United States would be slaughtering tens of thousands of Americans every year,” he said, “because those are law enforcement officials who, by their very nature, are dealing with armed Americans on a daily and hourly basis.”

Voss challenged the White House’s initial efforts to blame Pretti’s death on his decision to carry a firearm. In his view, none of Pretti’s actions captured on video justified the shooting. “At what point did (Pretti) do something that invited an immediate execution?” he asked.

Gross shares a similar view of the shooting. “He was a lawful gun owner legally carrying his firearm in a public space, and any arguments from the Department of Homeland Security or the FBI or other members of federal law enforcement that his possession of that weapon by itself indicates some intent to harm federal law enforcement (are) completely ridiculous.”

He was referring to comments from FBI Director Kash Patel and then-Border Patrol Commander-at-Large Gregory Bovino questioning Pretti’s reasons for carrying a firearm on Jan. 24. Bovino has since been removed from his role.

“If that were true, it would eviscerate the Second Amendment right to possess a firearm,” Gross added. “It would essentially be saying, ‘If federal agents believe you have a gun, and you potentially could use that firearm against them, then they have the authority to disarm you or even use deadly force against you to protect themselves.’”

If you are considering carrying a firearm in Wisconsin either openly or concealed, consult with the Wisconsin Department of Justice and, if possible, an attorney to learn more about how to legally and safely exercise your Second Amendment rights, Grieve said. 

Wisconsinites may remember another incident that placed the intersection of firearms rights and protests in national headlines: In August 2020, then-17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse of Illinois shot and killed two men in separate confrontations while patrolling Kenosha as part of an informal volunteer militia amid civil unrest following the shooting of Jacob Blake by a Kenosha police officer. Rittenhouse later stood trial for homicide and reckless endangerment, among other charges. A Kenosha County jury acquitted Rittenhouse in 2021.

Rittenhouse has since become a gun rights advocate, and the shooting of Pretti prompted some national pundits to compare his exercise of Second Amendment rights to Pretti’s. Rittenhouse himself weighed in on Monday via Twitter. “Carry everywhere,” he wrote. “It is your right.”

The post Guns and protests: What are Wisconsin’s laws on open and concealed carry? appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.

The Milwaukee Police Department will discuss a potential new policy governing facial recognition technology at the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission meeting on Thursday, Feb. 5 at City Hall.

Milwaukee Police Chief Jeffrey Norman has the authority to issue department policy, a power granted through Wisconsin’s Act 12. But the Milwaukee Common Council can modify or reject that policy with a two-thirds vote, or 10 of the 15 members.

In May, 11 council members signed a letter urging Norman to reject the expanded use of facial recognition, citing the risk of misidentification – particularly for people of color and women – and the potential harm to the public’s trust of police, among other concerns. 

Ald. Marina Dimitrijevic, who circulated the letter among council members, said she believes opposition among the council may have grown since the letter was sent.

MPD and others weigh in

MPD said facial recognition has helped generate leads in serious crimes, including homicides, and the department would implement it carefully, using it as one tool among many others. 

Dimitrijevic said that good policy may not be enough, especially considering the atmosphere surrounding immigration enforcement. 

“I just don’t feel comfortable having that large amount of information out there right now,” she said.  

Advocacy groups, including the League of Women Voters of Milwaukee County, have expressed similar concerns. 

“At every turn, the League of Women Voters of Milwaukee County has stood in opposition to law enforcement’s use of facial recognition technology in this city and county,” said Emily Sterk, the organization’s mass incarceration advocacy program leader. 

“Evidence-based research has proven that technology is a product of humans’ own biases and racism,” Sterk said. 

An MPD spokesperson said the department is aware of the many concerns of residents and that public safety is its number one priority. 

“While we would like to acquire the technology to assist in solving cases, being transparent with the community that we serve far outweighs the urgency to acquire,” the spokesperson said. “MPD remains committed to working with our community to build sustainable healthy neighborhoods free of crime and maintained by positive relationships.”

How to participate

The Fire and Police Commission meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 5 at City Hall, Room 301-B, 200 E. Wells Sy. 

The meeting will be livestreamed on the city’s website.

The post Fire and Police Commission and MPD to discuss facial recognition technology policy Thursday appeared first on Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service.