We read and write a great deal about the SAVE Act that may or may not pass. It is a federal law, and really it’s unconstitutional, because the states control their own elections. If it passes as a federal law, well, there are still a few things that can be done. In the meantime, state legislatures are busy. Depending upon your own state’s legislature, it’s at least likely there’s committee work happening on this. Or, possibly, your state has progressed (ha) as far as my state has.It’s a fine day to check in with your state’s business, so you aren’t caught unawares come your next election.
Kansas is not rewriting its election system with one sweeping law.
It is doing so in pieces.
A deadline adjustment here. A database requirement there. A repeal of mail-in ballot authority. A restriction on ballot return methods. A new reporting mandate. A rule centralizing constitutional challenges in one county. A provision that repeals advance voting if courts intervene.
Individually, each bill appears technical. Administrative. Procedural.
Collectively, they form a kind of architecture, and architecture is never accidental.
The justification offered repeatedly is election integrity, specifically, noncitizen voting. Yet documented cases of noncitizen voting in Kansas have been counted in the single digits through the decades.
National reviews of millions of ballots have found similarly rare occurrences. The problem, statistically, is exceedingly small.
The legislative response, however, is structurally expansive.
Consider what is being built.
One bill requires certain public assistance agencies to report identifying information about noncitizen recipients to the secretary of state. Another one mandates recurring comparisons between Kansas’s voter registration system and the federal SAVE database.
Others expand the removal triggers to include driver’s license status or database mismatches.
In practical terms, that creates a dubious data pipeline: Public benefits system data is sent to the Secretary of State, where it is cross-referenced against the federal immigration database, then checked against the statewide voter rolls and then returned to the secretary of state, who has removal authority.
Public benefits databases were designed to determine eligibility for food, health care, and housing assistance. The federal SAVE system was designed to verify immigration status for entitlement programs. Kansas’s voter registration system was designed to facilitate elections.
Now, these systems are being interconnected for enforcement.
Even small database error rates become significant when the right to vote is at stake. Federal oversight reports have documented reliability and oversight concerns within SAVE.
Legislative testimony in Kansas has acknowledged audit-tracking issues within the state’s voter system. When automated cross-checking expands and removal authority increases, the margin for error shrinks, and the constitutional risk grows.
At the same time, access pathways are narrowing.
Deadlines for advance mail ballots are shortened. Remote ballot return boxes are eliminated. The statutory authority for certain mail ballot elections is repealed. These changes do not eliminate voting, but they constrict time and space.
When time compresses, errors matter more.
If a voter is flagged incorrectly due to a database mismatch, an outdated record or a clerical error, there is less opportunity to correct the problem. Fewer alternatives. Less flexibility.
Then there is process.
Several of these election bills have moved rapidly through the House, advancing from committee to floor debate to final action within compressed timelines. Emergency procedural tools reduce the space between debate and final vote. Hearings are scheduled even when broad support is thin.
Procedure is not neutral.
When legislative time is compressed, public scrutiny thins. Stakeholder response shortens. Amendments shrink. The result may comply with formal rules, but deliberative depth diminishes.
Finally, litigation itself is being reshaped. House Bill 2569 centralizes constitutional challenges to election laws in Shawnee County. Another contains a provision that would repeal advance voting statutes if courts invalidate certain signature verification requirements. These measures alter the terrain of judicial review, raising the stakes of constitutional challenges.
States unquestionably possess the authority to regulate elections. That authority is granted by the Constitution. But it exists alongside equal protection guarantees, due process protections, and the Voting Rights Act.
The question is not whether Kansas can regulate elections.
The question is whether it should construct an expansive enforcement and restriction architecture in response to a statistically rare problem.
From a social work perspective, policy is not evaluated solely by its stated purpose but also by its impact.
Who is most likely to be flagged incorrectly in database cross-checks? Who relies most heavily on mail voting? Who has the least time and fewest resources to correct administrative errors?
Who bears the burden when access narrows, and timelines tighten? When election administration shifts from facilitation to filtration, those questions matter.
This is not about one bill. It is about the convergence of data centralization, verification expansion, access contraction, procedural acceleration and litigation hardening, all moving in the same direction, creating a cumulative burden on Kansas voters.
Kansas may not rewrite its election system in a single dramatic stroke.
But architecture does not require drama. It requires design. And Kansans deserve to understand the structure being built in their name.
Robin Monroe is a native Kansan living and working in Wichita. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
Kansas Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sherman Smith for questions: info@kansasreflector.com.
Rabbi Moti Rieber watches law enforcement as they confront protesters March 10, 2026, outside the Senate chamber in the Kansas Statehouse. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
TOPEKA — Rabbi Moti Rieber sat on the tiled floor, legs akimbo, in front of the arched passage leading to the Kansas Senate chamber with at least 20 people behind him and more lining the walls with handmade signs.
“We are here because when injustice becomes law, then resistance is necessary,” Rieber said. “We are here as moral witnesses.”
Clergy members led a sit-in protest Tuesday in opposition to a recently passed anti-trans law. The Republican-controlled Legislature used tactics to avoid public input and overrode the governor’s veto to pass Senate Bill 244, requiring people in public buildings to use the bathroom that coincides with their biological sex and also mandating driver’s licenses include a person’s sex assigned at birth instead of their gender.
Sergeants-at-arms looked on from behind the group, and Kansas Highway Patrol troopers soon joined. But it wasn’t until the group prevented Sen. Tim Shallenburger, R-Baxter Springs, from entering the chamber that troopers grabbed people by the arms to clear a path.
As troopers hoisted activists up from their seats, encouraging them to disperse, the group sang in harmony: “No one is getting left behind this time. No one is getting left behind. No one is getting left behind this time. We get there together or never get there at all.”
At one point, a trooper knocked a woman to the ground as she tried to pass through the crowd, appearing to mistake her as part of the demonstration. Protesters responded with chants of “Shame!”
The woman declined to be identified or comment but told Kansas Reflector she was OK.
Rieber, executive director of Kansas Interfaith Action, said while sitting on the floor, addressing the crowd, that the process to pass SB 244 was “crooked.” (There is a TikTok embedded on the page, linked in the title above.)
The law has already been challenged in Douglas County District Court, where a judge decided Tuesday not to pause enforcement of the law. The state sent letters to 275 Kansans shortly before the law went into effect, telling them their driver’s licenses were invalid. Some experts say laws targeting trans people can harm their mental health and increase the likelihood of discrimination.
The Rev. Mandy Todd, pastor at Messiah Lutheran Church in Lindsborg, said SB 244 is hurtful, targeted and part of a culture war. She said the group is “disgusted by this Legislature’s treatment of trans people.”
The bill stokes fear and anxiety, she said.
Todd, the director of engagement for Kansas Interfaith Action, said trans people in her community have felt the immediate effects of SB 244. The closest driver’s license office is in the next town, which Todd said has hamstrung one Lindsborg woman, who now cannot legally drive to sort out her invalid license.
Pastor Charles McKinzie II of Grace United Methodist Church in Winfield is confident the law, which he said was flawed in process and in substance, will make its way to the Kansas Supreme Court to be overturned.
“In the meantime, people are hurting, and people need to know that they are seen,” McKinzie said.
Conversations about the effects of SB 244 aren’t limited to a courtroom. They are taking place in churches, synagogues and other small group settings across the state, McKinzie said, and the sit-in was meant as a show of nonviolence “to shed light on a violent system.”
About an hour after the protest, Master Trooper Scott Whitsell said that no one from the group had been cited or arrested to his knowledge. The only law the protestors broke was blocking an entryway, he said.
Sorry this article is so old. I have dozens more older than this in open tabs with the hope of one day being able to get what I think is important news out to those who may have missed it at the time. Here is the southern states patriarchy punishing women for not bringing forth a well formed offspring of a male who bred them. That is the way this reads to me. The woman means nothing, just the fetus, zygote, the failed issue of a man must be the fault of a woman. Think of this being promoted as prolife while they are willing to torture live females for a few cells in the human body that act parasitic. Remember no man is required to give any part of his body to another even his own dying child. Tht is the law. But a woman, a female is required to give her body over entirely and all actions of her life entirely to that male inserted parasitic entity that will drain her life force and can cause life long medical problems. It tells you exactly how these male law makers and their Christian supports see women. Hugs
Hundreds of US women charged with pregnancy-related crimes since fall of Roe
Study finds prosecutors targeting low-income women mainly in US south – and figure likely to be an undercount
Abortion rights supporters protest outside the supreme court in Washington in June last year. Photograph: Aashish Kiphayet/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
In the first two years after the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, prosecutors in 16 states charged more than 400 people with pregnancy-related crimes, new research released on Tuesday found.
Of the 412 cases tracked by Pregnancy Justice, the vast majority took place in the US south, targeted low-income women and involved allegations that women broke laws against child abuse, endangerment or neglect, according to the research, which was compiled by the reproductive justice group. About 300 prosecutions took place in Alabama and Oklahoma. In 16 cases, law enforcement charged women with homicide.
Because there is no national database of US arrest or court records, the group believes the tally is likely to be an undercount. In a report released in September 2024, Pregnancy Justice said it had recorded 210 pregnancy-related prosecutions in the first year after Roe fell – the highest number ever recorded at that time. Pregnancy Justice is now devoting more resources to unearthing records of pregnancy-related prosecutions, so the group can’t say for sure whether these prosecutions are on the rise post-Roe or whether they are simply tracking them more closely.
Louisiana issues warrant for California doctor accused of mailing abortion pills
Read more
Nearly 400 of the cases included in the new report involved allegations of substance use during pregnancy. In an example described to the Guardian, after one woman gave birth, the hospital tested her umbilical cords for drugs. When the test came back positive for marijuana, the woman was arrested for felony child neglect, even though she had a medical marijuana card.
The laws used in most of these prosecutions, Pregnancy Justice pointed out, are typically meant to protect children, not fetuses. By prosecuting pregnant women under them, the group says, states are cementing the legal doctrine of “fetal personhood”, which seeks to grant embryos and fetuses full legal rights and protections – sometimes at the cost of the rights of the woman carrying them. Alabama and Oklahoma are both hubs for the growing fetal personhood movement.
“That is the ultimate goal of the anti-abortion movement,” said Dana Sussman, the senior vice-president at Pregnancy Justice, which scoured court and police records to find the cases. “It wasn’t just to overturn Roe. It is to establish full personhood, full rights for embryos and fetuses.”
Sussman said a number of women have faced criminal consequences for taking substances that were legal or prescribed to them. For that reason, Donald Trump’s claim last week that pregnant women who take Tylenol may give their children autism, raised alarms. Scientific research does not support this claim.
“It’s a perfect storm of all of the things that we work on: stigmatizing pregnant people for not being perfect pregnant people, blaming them for their perceived failures, and relying on misinformation and junk science to create a panic when there shouldn’t be one or isn’t one – while also increasing surveillance in the police state to monitor and potentially criminalize people when they don’t meet these impossible ideals,” Sussman said.
Only 31 of the cases documented by Pregnancy Justice included a stillbirth or miscarriage, while almost 300 of the cases led to a live birth.
A woman whose case was included in the Pregnancy Justice report reportedly didn’t realize she was pregnant until she started to feel intense pain in her stomach. The woman, a new immigrant to the US, suspected that she had food poisoning and decided to drive herself to the hospital.
Before she could get in the car, however, the woman started to give birth. She ultimately delivered what police records listed as a stillbirth. Pregnancy Justice did not factcheck the cases in the report and could not say whether the fetus was past 20 weeks of pregnancy, after which the term stillbirth is used. After police found the remains, the woman was charged with abuse of a corpse.
Abortion pill providers targeted by new Texas law refuse ‘anticipatory obedience’
Read more
The report indicates there are far more cases of miscarriage criminalization than have made national headlines. In one widely covered case in late 2023, police charged an Ohio woman with felony abuse of a corpse after she miscarried into a toilet. In another, earlier this year, a Georgia woman who had been found bleeding and unconscious after a miscarriage faced one count of concealing the death of another person, and one count of throwing away or abandonment of a dead body. The charges against both women were ultimately dropped.
Nine cases discovered by Pregnancy Justice involved allegations that women had considered abortions, such as ordering abortion pills or looking for information about abortion online. Only one woman in those cases was charged with violating a criminal abortion ban, likely because it is legal in most states to “self-manage” one’s own abortion. US abortion bans tend to penalize providers and people who help abortion patients, not the patients themselves.
In 2025, lawmakers in at least 12 states – including Alabama and Oklahoma – introduced legislation that would treat fetuses as people, which would leave women who have abortions vulnerable to being charged with homicide. In several of those states, that charge would carry the death penalty.
“What our work has proven is that, unfortunately, anything is possible when it comes to policing pregnancy,” Sussman said.
Kavanaugh claims the court does the same for every president not just tRump. The facts don’t show that to be true. tRump has a near perfect record of the court giving himwhat ever he asks for, while Biden was often either denied a chance for the court to rule or the court ruled against him often having to ignore precedent and prior rulings to do so. Either tRump has compromising material on the right wing justices or they are ruling based on poltical idology and racism. Hugs.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh disagreed about frequent rulings in favor of the Trump administration at a rare joint appearance.
Supreme Court Justices Kentanji Brown Jackson, left, and Brett Kavanaugh.AP; Getty Images
WASHINGTON — Internal Supreme Court divisions over how the high court has frequently ruled in favor of the Trump administration in emergency situations spilled out into public Monday with liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh locking horns.
The court’s conservative majority has on a regular basis blocked lower court rulings that have stymied President Donald Trump’s agenda, sparking criticism from within and outside the judiciary.
Jackson, often a vocal dissenter in those cases, forcefully aired her critique of the court’s actions in a rare public appearance with Kavanaugh at an event for lawyers and judges held at the federal courthouse in Washington.
Bemoaning the recent increase in such emergency filings — requested to challenge lower court rulings — she suggested that the number of filings would drop if the court were stingier about granting them.
The procedure has become known as the “shadow docket” because the court rarely hears arguments and often issues terse decisions with little explanation. The Supreme Court decisions can allow policies to go into effect at early stages in legal challenges, long before lower courts have reached any definitive conclusions. The casesmight then return to the Supreme Court later in the process, leading to final decisions on the merits.
In the last year, the court has, among other things, allowed Trump to fire thousands of federal workers, assert control over previously independent federal agencies and implement various aspects of his hard-line immigration policy. All those moves, done through the shadow docket, had been blocked by lower courts.
“I just feel like this uptick in the court’s willingness to get involved … is a real unfortunate problem,” Jackson said. Among other things, it affects how lower court judges approach cases, as they already have a preliminary sense of how the Supreme Court might approach them on appeal, creating “a warped kind of proceeding,” she added.
Jackson and Kavanaugh during introductions at the beginning of Monday’s event.Lawrence Hurley / NBC News
“It’s not serving the court or this country well,” Jackson said.
Kavanaugh, usually in the majority in shadow docket cases, defended the court — as he has done in the past — saying it has to act one way or another when the government or another litigant files an emergency application.
Kavanaugh noted that the increase in government applications is not unique to Trump, saying the court also granted similar requests made by the Biden administration, albeit at a lower rate.
The reason successive administrations have rushed to the Supreme Court is that presidents have relied more on executive orders in recent years because of the difficulty of persuading Congress to enact legislation, and those actions are often challenged in court, he said.
The justices have aired their disagreements in written opinions, but this was a rare example of two justices entering into a public debate about internal court business.
“None of us enjoy this,” Kavanaugh said of the shadow docket trend, noting that the court has opted in some cases to hear oral arguments and issue longer written rulings in response to some of the criticism.
“We have to have the same position regardless of who is president,” he added, a statement that Jackson expressed agreement with.
Responding to questions posed by Washington-based Senior U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, the justices were otherwise mostly on the same page during the hourlong event.
In particular, they both expressed concern about the increase in violent threats against judges. Recently, judges who have ruled against Trump have been regular targets.
“There’s no easy answer, for sure,” Jackson said. “It’s unfortunate because it relates to a lack of understanding about judicial independence.”
Kavanaugh praised Chief Justice John Roberts, who he said had “picked his spots” to push back against the criticism.
Roberts, for example, put out a statement rebuking Trump and his allies for suggesting judges should be impeached for ruling against the administration. One of the judges some Republicans want to impeach, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of Washington, D.C., was among those at Monday’s event.
I emailed this to me on Sunday, but have only just gotten back to it to post here. My apologies on that, but it’s been both busy and stormy here! Anyway, I haven’t heard anything about the status of this; I hadn’t heard anything about it at all until I read it in Kansas Reflector. With no further ado:
LAWRENCE — Kansans won’t know until at least Tuesday if a judge will delay implementation of the state’s new “bathroom law,” but a concession by Attorney General Kris Kobach means key components of the law can be delayed until March 26.
Douglas County District Judge James McCabria heard arguments Friday about Senate Bill 244, the controversial new law that forces people to use bathrooms in government buildings and gender markers on driver’s licenses based on sex assigned at birth.
The three-hour hearing focused on technicalities, including whether the law meets any one of five specific criteria that would lead the judge to approve a temporary restraining order and pause enforcement of the law for up to 14 days.
Attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Kansas Department of Administration said the law’s speedy implementation provided no grace period to Kansans needing a new driver’s license and for government leaders statewide to put a system in place for tracking bathroom usage.
The law took effect Feb. 26, a little over a week after the GOP-led Legislature overrode Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto. Kansans who held driver’s licenses with a gender marker that didn’t match their sex at birth were told their licenses were immediately invalidated and government leaders statewide were told they had to immediately enforce the bathroom portion of the bill.
Kobach told McCabria he agreed to give Kansans who needed to update driver’s licenses until March 26 to complete that. He also said he wouldn’t enforce the law’s penalties — which could be as high as $125,000 per day for violations — for cities, counties, municipalities and schools that might violate the bathroom rules, as well.
Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, talks to reporters after a Douglas County District Court hearing on March 6, 2026. Seldin asked the judge to place a temporary restraining order on the state to stop implementation of a new law that forces Kansans to use bathrooms and have documentation in their biological sex at birth. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
Harper Seldin, an ACLU attorney representing the two Lawrence transgender men who brought a case against the law under pseudonyms Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe, told the judge the law violates the Kansas Constitution.
SB 244 infringes on the rights of personal autonomy, expectations of privacy, and equal protection under the law, and has other issues, he said.
“The attorney general is incorrect when he says that we’re asking the court to break new ground,” Seldin said. “This is not a novel set of theories that require the government to do anything. The thread through these individual rights claims is that this is about Daniel and Matthew’s right to be left alone by the government.”
Seldin also said the law targets transgender individuals, which can be shown by the results of its implementation even if it’s not stated outright. He said the way SB 244 was implemented violated the Kansas Constitution when the bathroom portion of the bill was “logrolled” into the bill that originally addressed driver’s license and birth certificate gender markers.
Logrolling refers to dropping a bill into an unrelated bill, sidestepping the opportunity for public input. Seldin said cramming two separate subjects into one law violates the Kansas Constitution, which has a “single subject” clause.
Kobach said the two issues are congruent in that they both deal with defining sex within Kansas government.
“It’s this idea that bills should mean what they say and say what they mean,” Seldin said. “There’s a particular perniciousness to a law that hides the law.”
Kobach told the judge that a driver’s license is a government document, used for government purposes, and the state has the right to define the information contained in the document.
McCabria questioned Kobach about briefs included in the plaintiff testimony outlining the negative psychological effects on transgender people being made to use documents that don’t match their gender identity.
“Whatever a person may feel about their need to be perceived by the world in a certain way, what right do I have to compel the government to identify me in that way?” McCabria asked.
Kobach said the driver’s license is a document that records pertinent information, and sex is one of the elements, along with eye color and birthdate, that doesn’t change over time.
Kobach said the bathroom portion of the bill maintains the status quo in Kansas, where he contended residents have always gone to the bathroom that matches their biological sex at birth.
Seldin said trans people in the state have been going to the bathroom without any harms for decades.
Kobach said women who hear a man’s voice or see a man in private spaces could become anxious about their safety.
He acknowledged plaintiff’s assertions about the psychological or emotional harm they may suffer but told McCabria that in a balance of equities, that didn’t outweigh the harms of “99-plus percent of the population.”
When McCabria asked him to substantiate that number, Kobach said he didn’t mean to imply that everyone outside of transgender individuals were harmed by the law.
“Many courts have recognized the fear that ‘biological females’ have when a ‘biological male’ is in the bathroom with them, and that is something that I think any Kansan can identify with, especially a female,” Kobach said after the hearing.
Asked how women would be affected by seeing or hearing a transgender man who now has to use a woman’s bathroom, Kobach said, “All kinds of hypothetical cases are possible.”
McCabria said he had hoped to make a ruling Friday but that he needs more time to study the filings in the case and examine constitutional issues. He said he expects to rule by Tuesday.
“I think most people want to be respectful,” Seldin said after the hearing. “I think most people don’t want to pry into other people’s private lives. I think a law like this suggests the opposite, that Kansans have some prurient interest in other people’s habits and private spaces. And I don’t think that’s right.”
Z Kemp attended the hearing because her partner and many friends are affected. She said the law has caused “a lot of stress and anxiety.”
“That’s just unnecessary because as they’ve stated before, there was — especially with the bathroom situation —- no prior problem,” she said. “It’s only a problem whenever you make it a problem. I don’t think it’s that radical to just let trans people be. Just let them go to the bathroom.”
Avie Fallis said she has been through a lot of physical and legal changes to find herself. She said she is tired of well-meaning people recommending that she leave Kansas, which is her home state where her family and loved ones live.
“I feel like it’s a fire that’s just growing,” she said. “I’m not going to run away from fire. I feel like it should be extinguished.”
Z Kemp, left, and Avie Fallis attended a Douglas County District Court hearing March 6, 2026, about Kansas’ new law because it affects them and their loved ones. The law forces people to use the bathroom related to their biological sex at birth and to put that sex marker on their driver’s licenses and birth certificates. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)
Amazing news! We were in the middle of of a zoom press conference about the Gas Suffocation aspect of the planned execution of Sonny Burton in Alabama on Thursday when a reporter put into the chat:
“Did you see that Governor Ivey just commuted Burton’s sentence?”
And with that, the news was broken. Governor Ivey heard YOUR messages, received YOUR petitions, read the articles YOU sent, heard YOU ringing her phone off the hook, heard us tolling our bell outside her house…. and she acted. Amen! THANK YOU!
Once again, this proves, sometimes, our united efforts work!
Congratulations to Sonny and his legal team, his family, and to all who had a hand in creating this moment!
Governor Ivey has declared that “All Life is Precious,” which is why we made sure to bring along our 4×10 foot banner to the 24-hour vigil we helped coordinate in front of her house a few weeks ago. The banner could not be missed from any street-facing window of the Governor’s mansion. We know with certainty that the Governor was there…. NOW we know that she heard our message!
The other good news is that now we don’t have to drive all the way to Alabama. In fact, we had planned to go to Texas fiirst to toll the bell outside the prison in Huntsville at the execution of Cedrick Ricks on Wednesday, which is still on. Without our planned return through Alabama, making such a long drive makes less sense.
As you know, everything we do to support local activists working to halt executions is another expense. It’s not just the costs of being on the road that we must cover, but also the overhead…
The four full time staff and our media consultant who do the behind-the-scenes work.
The costs of the tools and services we use to communicate our message to the world.
The price of existing as an organization that shows up to oppose every execution.
(snip-donation request. You can get there from the page of any of these links.)
Thank you. Yours in the Struggle,
–abe
PS: New execution dates are being set regularly. Click here to oppose every upcoming execution.
This caller is a well know immegration lawyer who calls in often. There has been a long running joke about the buttons on Sam’s shirts so ignore that part. The lawyer talks about what ICE is doing to help the detained people and he describes how horrific the conditions are. The goal is to make it so horrific these people will self-deport willingly. But the government is doing everything possible to hurt and harm the immigrants and detained people because of hate and bigotry of ICE and the white supremacists in the US government. Hugs
Her real crime was exercising her 1st amendment right to report negatively on ICE and the higher crime of doing it in spanish a language I would say most ICE couldn’t understand. She committed no crime and remember what DHS, Tom Lyons, Stephen Miller, and Bovino keep telling us they are only going after the worst of the worst criminals. Again look at my first sentence to see her worst of the worst crime. It is flat out racism and genocide of brown people in and name of creating a white ethnostate with an entrenched apartheid system. These people say they want people to come here legally but she is here legally. Hugs
A reporter for a Spanish-language news outlet in Tennessee who has been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was not shown any warrant when she was arrested this week, according to court documents filed by her attorney.
Estefany Rodriguez Florez, a reporter for Nashville Noticias who has done stories critical of ICE, was arrested Wednesday during a traffic stop, according to documents filed in federal court in Nashville. Her lawyer called for her immediate release, but ICE has asked a judge to deny the request.
Rodriguez, a Colombian citizen, entered the U.S lawfully and has been living in the country for the past five years, court records filed by her lawyer show. She has a valid work permit, and she has applied for political asylum and legal status through her husband, who is a U.S. citizen.
Rodriguez has said she left Colombia after receiving death threats for her coverage of crime in the region, according to a statement from the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. The association said it “denounces immigration tactics that detain journalists and any efforts to interfere with news coverage of immigration enforcement.”
Rodriguez was with her husband in a marked Nashville Noticias vehicle when it was surrounded by several other vehicles and she was taken to a detention center, the news outlet said in a statement.
A court filing Friday by a lawyer for ICE said an arrest warrant had been issued for Rodriguez on Monday and her visa authorizing her to stay in the U.S. had expired. The filing said her arrest and detention “are not in violation of any laws or regulations.” ICE spokesperson Melissa Egan said Rodriguez was arrested during a “targeted enforcement operation” and she will remain in custody as her case proceeds through court.
Court documents filed by Rodriguez’s lawyer said that her attorney, Joel Coxander, spoke to an ICE agent who indicated that there was no arrest warrant for her at the time of her arrest. When she was arrested, Rodriguez was only shown an immigration document telling her to appear before ICE, according to the documents.
Rodriguez’s lawyer said in court documents that ICE had twice rescheduled a meeting with Rodriguez on her case, first because the office was closed during a winter storm and the second time because an agent couldn’t find her appointment in the system.
A new meeting was then set for March 17.
Rodriguez joined Nashville Noticias in 2022, covering social, family, health, police and immigration issues, the news outlet’s statement said.
“She needs to reunite with her young daughter and husband to continue her legal process within the framework permitted by law,” the statement said.
___
This story has been corrected to show the reporter’s second surname is Florez, not Flores as her attorneys initially said in a court filing.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt walked into a briefing this week trying to keep the focus where President Donald Trump wanted it — defending the administration’s handling of the escalating war with Iran and projecting confidence that the operation was working exactly as planned.
But as reporters pressed her about the deaths of U.S. service members, the moment began slipping away, and the briefing room exchange quickly spiraled into a tense back-and-forth she struggled to rein back in.
WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 06: White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt introduces Steve Witkoff, special envoy to the Middle East to speak to the press outside of the White House on March 06, 2025 in Washington, DC. Witkoff spoke to the press about a range of foreign policy issues including peace talks involving Ukraine and Russia and the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
On Wednesday, Leavitt’s sales pitch ran into turbulence. CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins pressed her about remarks made earlier in the day by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who appeared to complain about the way the media was covering the deaths of American troops killed during the military campaign known as Operation Epic Fury.
The tense exchange erupted in the White House briefing room after Collins asked whether the administration believed the press should avoid prominently covering the deaths of U.S. service members.
Earlier that day, Hegseth had lashed out at the media while discussing the conflict.
“This is what the fake news misses,” Hegseth said. “So when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front page news. I get it — the press only wants to make the president look bad. But try for once to report the reality.”
When Collins brought up those remarks during the briefing a tense back and forth ensued.
“Given what Secretary Hegseth said this morning, is it the position of this administration that the press should not prominently cover the deaths of U.S. service members?” Collins asked.
Leavitt immediately rejected the premise.
“No. It’s the position of this administration that the press in this room and the press across the country should accurately report on the success of Operation Epic Fury …,” she said.
Collins wasn’t convinced and pushed back, quoting Hegseth directly and noting that he had criticized the media for placing coverage of the troop deaths on the front page.
“That’s not what the secretary said, Kaitlan, and that’s not what the secretary meant — and you know it,” Leavitt fired back. “You know you are being disingenuous.”
Leavitt continued, attempting to pivot away from the quote, “We’ve never had a secretary of defense who cares more.”
But Collins quickly interrupted and read Hegseth’s remarks verbatim. Suddenly Leavitt seemed to reverse course.
“The press does only want to make the president look bad — that’s it, that’s a fact,” she declared, doubling down in a way that appeared to confirm the very point Collins was pressing.
The room erupted as reporters reacted to the blunt admission.
“Listen to me,” Leavitt snapped, attempting to regain control of the briefing.
“Especially you — and especially CNN.”
She went on to accuse the network of relentlessly attacking the president, declaring that it was an “objectible fact” that CNN’s coverage of Trump was overwhelmingly negative — though she appeared to briefly misspeak while making the argument.
“If you’re trying to argue right now that CNN’s overwhelming coverage is not negative of President Donald Trump I think the American people would tend to agree — and your ratings would tend to agree,” Leavitt said with a freudian slip she never caught.
Clips of the confrontation quickly spread across social media, where critics mocked the press secretary’s argument and accused the administration of attacking journalists rather than answering the underlying question.
“He does not need help looking bad Karoline,” one Threads user wrote. Another added, “Trump makes Trump look bad. The press don’t need to put any effort in.”
“Kaitlan Collins seems to be the only one who asks this administration tough questions. Look how they completely lose their shit every time she presses them on something,” one X user wrote.
“Leavitt really out here mad the truth got dragged into the light huh,” one X user wrote.
“She is unraveling in real time. Let’s see if she lasts a month,” another added.
Some critics also pointed to the controversy surrounding Trump’s past remarks about service members. One X post read, “Karoline Leavitt and Pete Hegseth: the press is making Trump look bad by reporting the death of 6 ‘suckers and losers.’”
The phrase “suckers and losers” references allegations that Trump privately disparaged U.S. service members killed in war. In 2023, former White House chief of staff John Kelly confirmed that Trump had made disparaging comments about military veterans and fallen troops during his presidency, reinforcing earlier reporting that sparked widespread backlash.
Later Wednesday night, Collins addressed the clash during her CNN program “The Source,” pushing back against the suggestion that coverage of the fallen soldiers was politically motivated.
“Needless to say, our coverage of Americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country is not about the president, and it’s not about CNN either,” Collins said.
“It’s about the people that you’re looking at here.”
She then read the names of the six U.S. service members killed so far during the conflict with Iran: Captain Cody Khork, Sergeant First Class Noah Tietjens, Sergeant First Class Nicole Amor, Sergeant Declan Coady, Major Jeffrey O’Brien and Chief Warrant Officer 3 Robert Marzan.
The tense exchange underscored the administration’s increasingly combative posture toward the press as the Iran conflict stretches into its fifth day and questions continue to swirl about the costs and consequences of the military campaign.
Abortion rights supporters protest outside the supreme court in Washington in June last year. Photograph: Aashish Kiphayet/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
Congratulations to Sonny and his legal team, his family, and to all who had a hand in creating this moment!
Scottie's Playtime 