>> The following program is a PBS Wisconsin original
production. >> In a boon to one of the
Republicans running for governor, an endorsement
from President Donald Trump leads candidate Josh
Schoemann to bow out of the race and leaves Tom Tiffany,
the presumptive primary winner.
I'm Frederica Freyberg tonight on "Here& Now",
continued response to the events unfolding in
Minneapolis. What happens when freedom of assembly
and the right to bear arms collide? And although not a
surge, western Wisconsin is also seeing ICE filter into
their communities. And we continue our coverage of
candidates for governor. It's "Here& Now" for
January 30th. >> Funding for "Here& Now"
is provided by the Focus Fund for Journalism and
Friends of PBS Wisconsin. >> Known as the white House.
Border czar Tom Homan came to Minnesota late this week
to say the immigration enforcement mission is
going to improve, and that he is working on a drawdown
plan. Meanwhile, U.S. Senate Democrats demand
tighter rules for federal officers before voting to
extend funding to Homeland security, even as that
funding is part of a larger spending bill ahead of the
vote and compromise. Wisconsin U.S. senators
staked their positions on the matter. Speaking with
Wisconsin Public Radio, Senator Tammy Baldwin said,
quote, Americans agreed with Trump that we should
get hardened criminals, dangerous criminals who are
here undocumented, under arrest and out of the
country. But we are seeing Ice and other federal
agents behave in a much broader way. They're just
combing the streets, going door to door outside our
schools. It is out of control. Senator Johnson
told This week this is just a continuation of the
defund police movement. Democrats opened up the
borders, allowed millions of people to flood into
this country, including criminals, human sex drug
traffickers, resulting in these rapes and murders.
And now the very agency tasked with cleaning up
that enormous Democrat created mess they want to
defund, he said when considering Ice enforcement
in places like Minneapolis. What is the intersection
between the First Amendment, freedom of speech and
assembly and the Second Amendment? The right to
bear arms? Because Alex Pretti was in the crowd
protesting the enforcement surge and carrying a
legally permitted gun when U.S. Border Patrol agents
shot him dead. We turn to UW-Madison political
science professor and legal scholar Howard Schweber,
and thanks very much for being here.
>> Thanks for having me. >> So in your expertise are
crowds like we've seen protesting Ice legally
under the First Amendment? >> There's no straight
answer to that question. That is protected activity,
but it can be subject to regulation. And so for
example, there could be permitting requirements.
The crowd could be blocking traffic or any number of
specific fact questions could come into play.
There's no question the absolute core of the First
Amendment is protecting the right of crowds to gather
in protest. As always, the devil is in the details.
>> What about justifying shooting to kill if someone
was legally possessing a gun in the midst of a
protest? Clearly there's a difference between having a
weapon and brandishing it. >> Sure. So here's where we
get, I think, most notably the Kash Patel director of
the FBI Kash Patel statement. You don't have a
right to bring a gun to a protest. Kash Patel
statement would get a failing grade in a freshman
class in an undergraduate institution. He is not just
wrong. He is wildly and almost bizarrely wrong. For
someone who occupies a position in law, a senior
position in law enforcement in the United States, we
should mention the background politics here.
Generally speaking, liberals and progressives
don't love the fact that in recent years, the Supreme
Court has expanded Second Amendment rights. Generally
speaking, you know, stereotyping conservatives
have approved of that expansion. But there's no
question that the Supreme Court has made it very,
very clear that you have a right to carry a weapon in
public if you are otherwise lawfully permitted to do so.
And the fact that you're at a protest is utterly
irrelevant. The best formulation I've heard I
didn't make this up, I wish that I had is we are
allowed to exercise two fundamental rights at the
same time. You can engage in First Amendment protest
and exercise your Second Amendment rights at the
first time, and one does not somehow erase the other.
>> And yet, in the heat of a moment like the like the
chaos that we saw in these protests, how difficult is
it for police agents, federal agents, to know
about that gun and that protester?
difficult. The video evidence is very, very
strong that in this case, the answer is really easy
to break it down. The protesters were not
approaching the officers. protesters. They crossed
space to get to them. In the absence of any
interference or challenge, the officers initiated
pepper spraying of the protesters, and Pretti
moved to interpose himself between an officer and a
woman being pepper sprayed. He was then grabbed and
dragged to the ground, at which point officers
discovered his holstered weapon, removed it from him
and an officer walked away holding the weapon. All of
this before shots were fired. So you could have a
case where the facts are really complicated, and you
could have a case where the police judgment is a close
call and has to be debated. This is not one of them.
The evidence seems absolutely overwhelming
that this was in any other context. This would be a
murder. case be about Alex Pretti
without all of that cell phone video?
>> One of the big lessons of these events, and this
is not the first time we saw this in the Black Lives
Matters protests, we've seen it before is how the
ubiquity of video evidence obtained by private
citizens using cell phones is changing the
conversation. We would not know what had happened to
Alex Pretti without that evidence, we would simply
have no idea. We would have witnesses claiming
something. We'd have the government claiming they
were lying. We're going to be dealing with this for a
long time. We're going to start having to deal with
deepfakes and manufactured videos in addition to real
ones. There's all sorts of questions and all sorts of
both good and bad possible outcomes that could come
from this. Every person, a journalist phenomenon that
we're seeing at the moment, though it is by far the
most powerful, if not the only effective mechanism
that we have for holding government agents
accountable. >> All of that description
of what happened, how dangerous is it for
protesters to be on the streets exercising their
right to protest? >> So this morning I had a
conversation with someone who was thinking of
participating in protest in Madison today and is not
going to do so because they're afraid that person
may be overreacting or not. But the the the
intimidation and spreading of terror among protesters
and potential protesters is not only very real, it
certainly appears to be intentional. And that's the
from a constitutional perspective, the biggest
point of what's going on here is called the chilling
effect. The police are acting in a way that are
causing people to self-censor, to refrain
from engaging in speech they're entitled to engage
in because they're afraid of what might happen. And
it's very small comfort to say, you know, a year or
three down the line, a court might say the police
officer was wrong in killing you. That's not
really something that relieves us of that sense
of fear. And from my perspective or in my view,
absolutely no question that the operation in Minnesota
has crossed that line of chilling effect. And it's
far in the rearview mirror, and these operations are
wildly unconstitutional. >> And now, today, federal
agents have arrested two journalists who were
covering protests inside a church in Saint Paul.
That's also a chilling effect.
>> It can be this one is a little more complicated,
only because there are facts that I don't know. I
think we, the public, don't know. The facts that we do
know are deeply disturbing. But I think it's clear that
the Trump administration doesn't care about getting
convictions. What it cares about is bringing these
cases in order to harass journalists and political
opponents, to make them reluctant to exercise in,
well, in this case, journalism. Again, I
believe that this is this is now purely subjective.
But from looking at the facts that we know thus far,
it appears to me that this is an attempt to chill
journalists from doing their job, rather than any
serious attempt or serious expectation that any
criminal charges here will stick.
>> We'll leave it there. Howard Schweber, thank you
very much. >> Minneapolis is just over
the river from western Wisconsin. Communities like
Hudson, where immigration agents are also venturing
"Here& Now". Reporter Erica Ayisi this week took a look
at what's happening in Saint Croix County.
>> Someone personally messaged me and they said,
Kim ICE is downtown on Main Street taking somebody. Do
you know, can you get a hold of anyone?
>> Kimberly Solberg is a community advocate and one
of the moderators of the Baldwin Facebook Community
page. She says Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or
Ice, has been in Baldwin since early January.
Solberg says she sprang into action.
>> I started reaching out to what context? I had to
try to find out if people could get a hold of the
farm and let workers know, just to be alerted that Ice
is in the area, and to make sure that their families
are protected. >> About 4300 people live
in Baldwin, where farming is prevalent in this part
of western Wisconsin. >> We have a very thriving,
rich and diverse community of Hispanic and Guatemalan
people up here working at the farms and being part of
our community. >> Solberg says the
immigrant community is working in Baldwin legally.
>> To my knowledge, most of these families are here on
work visas. I know the people that sponsor them.
>> Baldwin is about 50 miles from the intense ice
activity in Minneapolis, but Solberg says Ice is
active in the area. Have you seen ice activity here
in Baldwin yourself? >> I've seen clusters of
Ice vehicles, maybe almost a dozen vehicles or more
clustered together, getting ready to do sweeps at
apartment complexes. >> Were their faces covered?
>> As far as I've seen, they've all, you know, they
haven't had their masks on. And that might just be a
different dynamic here in Baldwin, where they feel a
little more comfortable here than they do in
Minneapolis. >> Solberg says she's seen
local Baldwin police present in Ice raids.
>> I have seen personally local law enforcement
assisting Ice and Ice actions, not the actions
taking themselves, but they were local law enforcement
were present. >> She was asked to start a
group and connected with other organizations to
share resources for Baldwin families who are impacted
by Ice and afraid to leave their homes.
>> Most of the people I know who give rides, who
donate resources are terrified that their name
gets out there. As somebody who is helping.
>> The I-94 bridge behind me connects Hudson,
Wisconsin, to the Minneapolis, Minnesota area.
And according to Solberg, it's invoking fear amongst
local residents. She says they've seen Ice agents in
Hudson, Baldwin and Woodville.
>> For sure, those actions are going on in neighboring
communities. >> In Hudson, Kiva Sherr
says Ice detained an employee during his first
day on the job at a grocery store.
>> We have an Amazon drop off and pick up area. And
so ICE went to that particular part of the
store and detained an employee there.
>> Schauer says some employees feel they're
being profiled. She and other staff want to help
support them if Ice returns, but she says fear takes
precedence. >> Even though I want to be
a good person and help, there's that fear of what
are they going to do? Are they going to use tear gas?
>> The darkest time, I'm gonna let it shine.
>> Back in Baldwin, Solberg says the community is
holding a vigil for their Minneapolis neighbors, René
Good and Alex Pretti, who were killed by Ice.
>> It's about, you know, having a peaceful presence.
>> To help each other heal. >> And being there for each
other. It shouldn't be about politics.
>> In Saint Croix County. I'm Erica Ayisi for "Here&
Now". >> This week "Here& Now",
senior political reporter Zac Schultz sat down with
the two candidates for the Wisconsin Supreme Court
election, Appellate Court Judge Maria Lazar and
Appellate Court Judge Chris Taylor. Over the next two
weeks, we'll have extended interviews with the
candidates. But this week, we wanted to show you their
reactions to some questions about ICE enforcement in
Minneapolis. >> There's obviously a lot
of controversy over ICE's engagements in Minnesota
right now. There's speculation that that could
be moving to Wisconsin. What role would the
Wisconsin court system have when we've heard some local
law enforcement say they will not work with federal
officials, some say they will work with when it
comes to protesters rights. How do you see Wisconsin
courts getting involved in this, or is this strictly a
federal issue? the circumstances. You
never want to see anyone injured or lose their life.
That's a tragedy in all respects, in every case.
But I think that cooler heads have to prevail.
There is a right to First Amendment freedom of speech,
but I also believe that this is an excellent
example of why we need our courts. In this case, it's
probably federal courts, but why we need our courts
to be fair, impartial and independent, to look at the
facts, to make a reasoned, calm decision, and to do so
fairly, unjustly. >> Certainly. I will tell
you, Zach, as I go out around the state, I think
that Wisconsinites are really concerned by what
they're seeing in Minnesota. They're afraid, and I don't
blame them. Courts, state courts must make sure that
every person who violates the law is held accountable.
So in Minnesota, they should do their full and
fair investigation, and then they will make a
decision that state about whether criminal charges
will be brought and they should be able to do that.
So yes, state courts absolutely could be
involved because criminal charges are brought in
state courts. Typically nobody is above the law.
The Constitution applies to everyone. And so I think
that we will see some involvement or potentially
see involvement if there are criminal charges filed
in the Minnesota state courts. And that could
happen here in Wisconsin as well.
>> And there was a statement by the FBI
director, Kash Patel, over the weekend saying, you
can't bring a firearm loaded to any kind of
protest that you want. I want to get your reaction
to whether that is a true statement, in the sense
that the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.
>> I would have no idea what those rules are with
regard to federal rules about bringing a firearm. I
think you're violating possibly the Second
Amendment, where people have the right to conceal
carry their right to open carry. I wouldn't comment
on his statement at all whatsoever.
>> Well, I don't know all of the laws that the state
of Minnesota, but I believe they do have a concealed
carry law. So, you know, this investigation of what
exactly happened in this scenario will play out and
we will find out a lot more, and we will see if
Minnesota makes the decision on how they're
going to act. Are criminal charges going to be brought
or other charges going to be brought? But I don't
specifically know all the laws in Minnesota. But what
I would say is everyone should support a full and
complete investigation into what occurred and if there
has been unlawful activity. People need to be held
accountable. But I want to make sure that Minnesota
has that ability to do their investigation and
make their conclusions before I jump to any
conclusions. But my gosh, we should be standing in
support of them being able to do that.
>> Republican candidate for governor, Josh Schoemann,
dropped out of the race after President Donald
Trump endorsed Tom Tiffany this week. Tonight, Zac
Schultz talks with candidates about funding
for public education and what they would like to see
happen with the school voucher program.
>> Calling Wisconsin's school funding formula
broken is one of the oldest refrains in state politics,
but the sheer number and size of operating referenda
around the state show school districts and voters
agree the state is not providing enough money.
>> Well, you can't do it without money, and we've
been asking schools and teachers to do more and
more with less and less and less. Our kids haven't even
gotten an inflationary increase for 15 years. That
to me is unacceptable. So money is essential. But
it's not only money, right? Teachers also need
professional development time and training and the
respect that they deserve. As professionals, the
single most important factor in a kids success is
the quality of the teacher at the front of the
classroom. So investing in teacher retention so that
we have the most experienced, the most
capable, skilled teachers able to stay in the
classroom and stay in the education field and mentor
newer teachers, I think is absolutely essential.
>> I think, you know, we've got to make sure that we
look absolutely at how do we spend more on public
education in Wisconsin? One of the challenges, I think,
is that we're still working on a system. Tommy Thompson
took a snapshot of what things looked like in 1993,
and we're still looking we're still working with
that system 32 years later. I think it would be
courageous and necessary for us to look at exactly
what we need to do for 2026 and moving forward, rather
than trying to make the best of a 30 year old
systems. >> We used to fund our
public schools to the tune of two thirds, and we no
longer do that. And now, not just our teachers, but
our young people are hurting every single day.
And I think that we need to actually take a step back.
We need to take a step back and look at not just our
revenues, but how we're spending money. I think
that we should put in place a blue ribbon commission on
taxes. This isn't something. This is something that
hasn't happened since the mid 80s. But this gives an
opportunity for university officials to be at the
table. Business leaders, government folks, you know,
just the public to have a transparent conversation.
What's working in other states, what can we bring
here to make sure that we have a system of revenue
and spending that works for everyone and works to the
future? >> The reform is in our
inequitable school funding formula that pits
communities against one another, that raises
property taxes, but also makes it so that the
disparities among students, especially those who are
lower income, are not being addressed. And so
increasing special education for 90%
reimbursement at some sufficient levels and
making sure that we're increasing general aids.
Our schools have been defunded for over a decade
now, and if we do not prioritize public education,
which is one of our last remaining democratic
institutions, we as a state will not succeed.
>> We need to make sure that we are investing the
money, because what we see all across the state is
that there are all of these referendums, and people are
voting to increase their own taxes, not to pay for a
new science lab, not to pay for a new middle school,
but to pay for operational expenses, teachers salaries.
And that is just unsustainable moving
forward. So we have to put more dollars into the
public school system, but we also have to look at
reform to make sure that kids are getting the
education they need to be able to succeed.
>> I'm I would be fine if we put more money into
education. In fact, I expect that we will. But we
need to make sure that it goes to goes to children
and families. We should pay good teachers more, and I
think we should reward administrators that are
successful in their schools. We have to get back to
where we reward success in education. And I think
that's one of the ways we we fix this problem of us
falling behind Mississippi. And but I'm not averse to
putting more money in. But it there has to be
accountability. >> I believe that every
school in the state of Wisconsin can be a world
class school, but it takes the investments. If we
can't compare students who have every single need met
versus those who have hardly any needs met, we
have to invest in the whole child. And that's the kind
of overhaul that I'm looking at, ensuring that
all of our students are fed, all of our students are
housed, all of our students have the health care,
mental and physical health care and make sure that all
they have all their needs met. So when they're
showing up to school, they are ready to learn so that
when they go home, they have a foundation that
retains the education that they got in that school
building. Until we start looking at complete
outcomes for all of our children, then the
conversation about was, is it funding? Is it not
funding? It's immaterial. >> You know, right now
we're in this situation where we have said that
competition is good. We decades ago, we decided,
you know, competition is going to make our public
schools better. But one thing that we're not doing
is looking at the rating of how other schools are doing
that are receiving public funds, whether those are
charter schools or other types of choice schools. We
need to have a scale that helps us understand how are
they competing. It isn't necessarily that something
must be better than public schools. It's let's have a
real accountability. Make sure our kids are achieving
and getting the quality that they need in order to
succeed. >> Wisconsin School Voucher
Program was created in the 1990s in Milwaukee and
expanded statewide in 2011. As the cost of the program
has grown, the question we put to the candidates is
whether it should expand contract or stay the same.
>> I think that we need to look and make sure that we
have good accountability and transparency first,
before we start making decisions about stopping or
starting or eliminating, we need to understand what are
they providing for our children and our families,
because there are families that are counting on those
voucher schools. But at the same time, it can't come at
the cost of public schools, and it can't come at the
cost of making sure that we're funding special
education. accountability. That's the
most important thing we can do. That has to be
paramount. We have to ensure that there are
structures in place that don't create a playing
field, where some schools operate by one set of rules,
and another set of schools operates by a different set
of rules. Any public funding should come with
public accountability. And that's a that's the bottom
line. >> You know, we've had
choice in Wisconsin and it's worked for thousands
of families across the state of Wisconsin. And we
should continue to have that program. But I'm a
product of public schools as well as my seven
brothers and sisters. All three of my daughters went
to public schools up in the Minocqua area, and public
schooling has a long, proud history in Wisconsin. We
need to make sure that we have a strong private,
public, and parochial system. Regardless of how
you choose to educate, we've got to make sure we
have a strong educational system.
absolutely address the voucher system. We need to
make sure that the voucher system is what it was
originally intended to do, which was for low income
families to be able to have some choices. And right now
we do not have an income limit on the voucher system,
and we're going to be taking off the cap for the
vouchers. That is going to be funneling public money
into private schools. We cannot afford to have two
separate school systems within the state of
Wisconsin. So we're going to have to have some reform
in that area as well. >> I am very concerned
about public dollars going to private schools and a
system that is unaccountable and not
transparent in how they may or may not be serving our
kids. And so it's critical that we look at a program
that seems more and more to be like a scam.
>> I think one, we need to fully fund our public
school systems. You cannot get rid of the voucher
system unless our schools are in a place to actually
educate all of our students in every community across
Wisconsin, and that means fully funding our public
school systems. But any system that is receiving
public dollars should be held to the same standards
of our public schools. They need to be transparent,
they need to be held accountable, and they need
to make sure, again, to be held to the same standards
that public schools are held to, no matter what
community they're in. In Wisconsin.
>> The voucher system has now been in place for the
last 30 years. I'm not interested in a dramatic
expansion of it, but I also think there's challenges of
trying to put that genie back into the bottle. I
think the most fundamental thing for us is around
accountability for everybody in education,
making sure that we have the right investment in
kids and making sure that we're holding ourselves,
holding schools accountable for the challenges that we
have in education. But at the same time, you know, as
in anything with education, there are lots of problems
that come to the schoolhouse door that have
nothing to do with what happens inside that
schoolhouse. voucher system brought to a
responsible close. We simply cannot and should
not try to fund two different, separate school
systems. Their taxpayer money needs to be
accountable to taxpayers, and public dollars should
fund the public school system.
>> Reporting from Madison. I'm Zach Schulze for "Here&
Now". >> For more on this and
other issues facing Wisconsin, visit our
website at PBS Wisconsin. Org and then click on the
news tab. That's our program for tonight I'm
Frederica Freyberg. Have a good weekend.
>> Funding for "Here& Now" is provided by the Focus
Fund for Journalism and Friends of PBS Wisconsin.