by Nancy Lavin, Rhode Island Current, Arkansas Advocate
May 13, 2025

There’s no reason why money for road repairs and flood protections should hinge upon states’ cooperation with federal immigration policies, contend 20 Democratic states attorneys general.

That’s why the AGs, including Rhode Island’s Peter Neronha, are asking a federal judge to stop federal agencies from a “grant funding hostage scheme” that requires detaining undocumented immigrants who don’t commit crimes in order to receive key federal grants and aid.

Two new federal lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island Tuesday against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) aim to protect and preserve billions of federal dollars already awarded to states for emergency preparedness, disaster relief and infrastructure projects.

Directives issued in April by DHS and DOT secretaries informed states that their federal funding required compliance with federal immigration policies. The AGs — representing Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, and Vermont — allege this violated constitutional protections for separation of powers.

“By hanging a halt in this critical funding over States like a sword of Damocles, Defendants impose immense harm on States, forcing them to choose between readiness for disasters and emergencies, on the one hand, and their judgment about how best to investigate and prosecute crimes, on the other,” the lawsuit against DHS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Coast Guard, and their leaders, states.

“Defendants’ grant funding hostage scheme violates two key principles that underlie the American system of checks and balances: agencies in the Executive Branch cannot act contrary to the authority conferred on them by Congress, and the federal government cannot use the spending power to coerce States into adopting its preferred policies. Defendants have ignored both principles, claiming undelegated power to place their own conditions on dozens of grant programs that Congress created and bulldozing through the Constitution’s boundary between state and federal authority.”

The AGs say state and local public safety officials have more important work to do than cater to the whims of a new administration, which stand in contradiction to state-level directives like, for example, authorizing licenses for undocumented immigrants. Rhode Island lawmakers granted driving privileges for undocumented residents in 2022, with a July, 1 2023 effective date, joining 19 other states and D.C.

Federal protocols followed by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other agencies could force state and local police to use state license laws as a way to find and detain undocumented immigrants.

“As a former U.S. Attorney and former federal prosecutor, I know how many ICE agents are in Rhode Island and it’s under 10,” Neronha said during a virtual press conference Tuesday. “What they need in order to carry out their agenda is for us to do the work for them, pulling us away from important law enforcement work in Rhode Island.”

More uncertainty for Washington Bridge

No state has seen federal funding cut off since directives were issued by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. Not yet.

States’ abilities to respond to natural disasters and security threats, and complete key infrastructure projects, including the much-anticipated rebuild of the westbound Washington Bridge in Rhode Island, hinge upon a continued flow of congressionally authorized federal grants and aid.

The $221 million Biden-era infrastructure grant awarded to Rhode Island for the Washington Bridge project only became accessible in late March, after weeks of uncertainty in the wake of the administration change. Gov. Dan McKee’s office and the Rhode Island Department of Transportation did not immediately respond to inquiries for comment Tuesday regarding continued access to the funds in the wake of Duffy’s April 24 directive tying federal infrastructure grants to compliance with federal diversity and immigration policies.

The Duffy directive fails to provide any statutory or legal explanation for why transportation funding relates to immigration enforcement. The new requirements  jeopardize more than $628 million in federal funding in Rhode Island, and billions of dollars more across the country, the AGs argue in their lawsuit against Duffy and DOT.

“If Plaintiff States reject Defendants’ unlawful Immigration Enforcement Condition, they will collectively lose billions in federal funding that is essential to sustain critical public safety and transportation programs, including highway development, airport safety projects, protections against train collisions, and programs to prevent injuries and deaths from traffic accidents. The loss of this funding will cause state and local providers to scale back or even terminate many of these programs and projects,” the complaint states. “More cars, planes, and trains will crash, and more people will die as a result, if Defendants cut off federal funding to Plaintiff States.”

Similarly dire predictions accompany the loss of security and disaster funds, which includes $3 billion in FEMA money to states each year, according to the lawsuit against DHS. Rhode Island received more than $45 million in FEMA grants in 2024 alone, according to the lawsuit.

The new complaints reprise language of the 20 state AG lawsuits against the Trump administration that preceded them, calling the executive agencies’ actions “arbitrary and capricious” and in clear violation of constitutional separation of powers and spending clauses.

Neronha during the press conference pointed to the success that AGs have had in other lawsuits, temporarily preserving funding and policy protections for education, immigration, research funding, public health, and grants and aid to state governments, among others.

Not that he expects the frenzy of legal activity will abate anytime soon.

“As we stack wins against the Trump administration for violation of the Constitution and other federal laws, what we are seeing is a creeping authoritarianism in this country,” Neronha said. “The president is trying to take power for himself. He’s trying to sideline Congress, and now, he’s attempting to undermine the judiciary.”

Neronha likened the latest federal directives attempting to force states to redirect their own law enforcement to serve federal civil immigration policies to “holding a gun to states’ heads.”

Rhode Island, home to four of the 20 federal lawsuits against the Trump administration already, was again picked as the setting for the latest complaints due to the “strong team” within Neronha’s office, he said.

Neronha and other AGs bringing the two cases against the administration also stressed the sum of their collaborative parts.

“We’ve built the best and biggest law firm in the country, and we’re fighting for all Americans,” Neronha said.

The U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.

The lawsuit against DOT was assigned to U.S. District Chief Judge John Jr. McConnell Jr., while the case against DHS was assigned to Senior District Judge William E. Smith, according to the public court docket.

Rhode Island Current is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Rhode Island Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janine L. Weisman for questions: info@rhodeislandcurrent.com.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post 20 state AGs sue feds for tying transportation and disaster funding to immigration enforcement appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content reflects a center-left political bias, primarily because it highlights opposition from Democratic state attorneys general against federal directives perceived as coercive and harmful, particularly regarding immigration enforcement tied to infrastructure funding. The article emphasizes constitutional concerns, state sovereignty, and protections for undocumented immigrants—positions typically aligned with center-left viewpoints. While it is critical of the federal administration’s policies, the tone remains focused on legal and constitutional arguments rather than partisan rhetoric, showing a measured approach consistent with center-left advocacy. The presence of Democratic officials and their legal challenges to federal immigration-linked funding conditions further underscores this leaning.

SUMMARY: The Arkansas Health Department is hosting a free measles vaccination clinic today at the Don Owens Sports Complex in Conway from 1 to 7 p.m. This comes after six confirmed measles cases in the state, including two in Conway. The clinic offers the MMR vaccine, with recommendations for children and adults depending on age and vaccination history. Health officials stress the importance of vaccination to prevent further spread, as the measles virus can linger in the air and spread quickly in unvaccinated populations. Insurance cards are requested but not required for the clinic. More details are available on the department’s website.

As measles cases continue to rise across the state, the Arkansas Department of Health is urging people to get vaccinated and …

Source

by Antoinette Grajeda, Arkansas Advocate
May 13, 2025

The focus on funding facilities for Arkansas prisoners shifts from the state to the counties this week as voters in Madison and Pope counties consider sales tax and bond proposals in special elections Tuesday. 

Madison County voters are considering adopting a 1% sales tax for operation and maintenance of a new county jail that’s scheduled to be complete in June. Meanwhile, Pope County voters are being asked to approve an $89.9 million bond issue to build a new county jail and 911 call center, and a 0.75% sales tax to pay off the bond debt.

During the 2025 legislative session that adjourned last week, lawmakers rejected a $750 million appropriation bill to fund construction of a 3,000-bed prison in Franklin County that supporters, including the governor, have said is needed to alleviate crowding in county jails, several of which are holding state inmates due to a lack of prison space.

Arkansas lawmakers consider other funding methods as they abandon sixth prison appropriation vote

Because Madison County only has a 24-hour holding facility, County Judge Larry Garrett said they ship prisoners to other counties, some as far away as Lafayette County in southeast Arkansas. 

“We’re hauling prisoners outside the county to be housed in other county jails and that has become very difficult,” he said. “Every jail is overcrowded and nowhere to go with them.”

Garrett estimated 50-60 Madison County prisoners are housed around the state, which costs the county $45-$70 a day per person. The lack of a jail is also costing Madison County manpower, especially on long hauls to Lafayette County, which Garrett said takes two deputies off the street for 12 hours. 

An effort to build a jail has been ongoing for years, according to The Madison County Record. Ballot measures to support construction of a county jail failed in 2008, 2013 and 2014. In 2022, a construction tax passed, but a 1.25% maintenance and operation tax failed by about 200 votes. A 1% maintenance tax failed by 40 votes last November.

Because he knew they “can only do it once,” Garrett said they tried to build for the future and used $16 million to construct a 148-bed jail, though he doesn’t expect the facility to open at full capacity immediately. Garrett estimated it would cost $1.9 million to return prisoners currently housed around the state to Madison County, which he said they can’t afford right now.

If voters approve the maintenance and operation tax Tuesday, Garrett said it will help run the new jail, which he estimated will cost around $2.5 million to operate annually. That would include the cost of food and medical services and the salaries of employees, which Garrett said would be around 15 people at full staff. 

Local officials have hosted town halls and tours of the new jail, the latter of which Garrett said was “very positive,” though he said he’s not sure how that will translate at the ballot box. 

“I think everybody wants a jail because we don’t have one and they know that the criminals are getting turned loose,” he said. “They want a jail, they just don’t want to have to pay to run it.”

Garrett said he understands the aversion to more taxes, but noted that everyone who purchases something in the county like gas or fast food will pay the sales tax, not just local residents. Additionally, he said the City of Huntsville sunset a 1-cent sales tax last year, so the jail’s maintenance and operation tax would basically take the place of that.

Pope County

In Pope County, officials have also hosted town halls to inform local voters about the proposed three-quarter-cent sales tax to construct, operate and maintain a new jail and 911 call center. New facilities are needed because the county’s population has doubled since construction of the current jail in 1981, Pope County Judge Ben Cross said. 

County officials started the year with 11,000 active misdemeanor warrants, but because of overcrowding, the current 172-bed jail is only being used to hold felons and people who’ve committed violent misdemeanors like domestic violence, Cross said. 

If officials receive approval from voters Tuesday, Cross said the county owns 26 acres north of Exit 83 along I-40 where the new facility can be built. Because “you get more bang for your buck,” officials would construct one building that would house a 400-bed jail and 911 center, as well as the county’s sheriff’s office and office of emergency management, he said. 

The acreage would provide space to expand in the future, and the tax, which wouldn’t sunset, would provide a revenue source to continue operating the facility, Cross said. 

“You can’t put a price on public safety, and that’s one reason this is not a sunset tax because you have to have that money for generations to come to operate a facility like this,” he said. “If you sunsetted it and you built this facility, then you don’t have money to maintain and operate it. Somewhere in the future you’re kicking that can down the road.”

The special elections in Madison and Pope counties are two of the elections taking place around the state Tuesday. The University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture’s Cooperative Extension Service has a list of elections on its website. 

You can also check your voter registration, and find polling locations and sample ballots here.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Two Arkansas counties consider jail sales tax proposals in Tuesday’s special elections appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

The article provides an objective overview of local ballot measures related to prison and jail construction in Arkansas, offering details about the proposals in both Madison and Pope counties. It outlines the challenges these counties face in managing overcrowded jails and presents the arguments for and against funding these projects, including the potential costs to voters. The article avoids leaning toward any particular ideological stance, presenting facts and viewpoints from local officials without editorializing. It maintains a neutral tone, with a focus on local governance and community concerns, without promoting or opposing the measures themselves.