American flag, gavil, and book titled: immigration law
MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin lawmakers from both parties are backing legislation that would allow recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program to apply for professional and occupational licenses, a change they say could help address workforce shortages across the state.
The proposal, Assembly Bill 759, is authored by Republican Rep. Joel Kitchens of Sturgeon Bay and Democratic Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez of Milwaukee. The bill has a companion measure in the Senate, SB 745. Under current Wisconsin law, DACA recipients, often referred to as Dreamers, are barred from receiving professional and occupational licenses, even though they are authorized to work under federal rules. AB 759 would create a state-level exception allowing DACA recipients to obtain licenses if they meet all other qualifications for a profession.
According to Spectrum News 1, supporters of the bill argue the change would help Wisconsin address persistent labor shortages in fields that require state-issued credentials, including health care, education and skilled trades. During a January public hearing, lawmakers cited unfilled jobs across the state as a key motivation for the proposal.
“They are Americans who know no other country as their home. They have proven their value to our society by working, paying taxes, and staying out of trouble,” said State Rep. Joel Kitchens, R-Sturgeon Bay, said in support of the bill during a public hearing.
Kitchens said DACA recipients have already demonstrated their contributions to Wisconsin’s economy through employment and tax payments, Spectrum News 1 reported. Ortiz-Velez said allowing access to professional licenses could help keep trained workers in the state rather than losing them to neighboring states with fewer restrictions.
The legislation has also been framed as a workforce measure rather than an immigration policy change. Fox 6 Now reported that supporters emphasized DACA recipients already live and work in Wisconsin but are prevented from advancing into licensed professions due to state law.
“It’s not going to encourage illegal immigration. These people actually are here, and they’re kind of stuck in the middle of some things that are going on at the federal level.” said State Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez.
Advocacy organizations have publicly backed the proposal. One example is the ACLU of Wisconsin, which said the bill would remove a state-imposed barrier that limits economic opportunity for thousands of residents. The organization estimates that roughly 8,000 DACA recipients live in Wisconsin and contribute tens of millions of dollars annually in state and local taxes.
“The 8,000 Dreamers who live in Wisconsin, along with the undocumented community as a whole, play a vital role in keeping Wisconsin running,” said the ACLU on their website. “According to a Dreamers of Wisconsin tuition equity policy brief, DACA-eligible residents of Wisconsin pay $48 million in local, state, and federal taxes and make massive contributions to our economy. The difference that DACA recipients make economically is so significant that without them the state would lose $427 million in GDP annually.”
AB 759, which was introduced in December 2025, has already cleared the Assembly Committee on Regulatory Licensing Reform. The next step is for Assembly leadership to schedule the bill for a floor vote. If it passes the Assembly, it moves to the Senate.
The measure is the latest in a series of attempts by Wisconsin lawmakers to change state licensing law for DACA recipients, an issue that has resurfaced periodically at the Capitol over the past several sessions.
If enacted, the legislation would align Wisconsin with other states, such as California, Illinois, and Nevada, that allow DACA recipients to seek professional credentials.
Wisconsin Bill Would Allow DACA Recipients to Apply for Professional Licenses was first published on Wisconsin Latino News and republished with permission.
Angeles Ponpa is a multimedia journalist from Illinois.
“We may never pass this way again” is the first line of Seals and Crofts' hit song by the same name. And so very true.
But Seals and Crofts got one word wrong in their lyrics. We “WILL never,” not “MAY never” pass this way again. It’s simply not possible.
Sure, memories, pictures, videos, and stories can evoke past moments, bringing them into the current moment to relive. But time does not travel backwards, at least in any dimension we have yet experienced on Earth.
Only once do we get to infuse any given moment with our own perceptions, embrace and influence that moment with our ideas, and mold it towards our definition of good and right. By stringing those moments together, we create the hours, making days, then years, ultimately shaping and filling our lifetimes. In the best of these moments, we generate gutsy ideas, undertake brave acts, even perpetrate heroic deeds, by playing them out. Immersing our time in living fully, we ultimately achieve the triumph of a life well-spent.
But lately, we are unhinged.
A year into Trump’s second presidency, and this underlying but sturdy belief in our own vigor has been shaken. Since last January 20, dizzying developments within our own borders and without have rocked our role in the world, torpedoed our stability. Agree or disagree with the current administration, we’ve been navigating unprecedented chaos and confusion.
We’re stressed. The world is too uncertain.
But remember, our president, although he has the microphone, is not the only voice of our nation. Albeit a loud one, his is only one of over 350 million voices. Sensationalism may make the headlines, but behind the scenes, there is work to be done. This national gloom is not part of the success formula of our vibrant democracy.
Our nation’s success rides on the crest of our belief that WE determine our future. While acknowledging we may often or even constantly be in flux, we have proven we can grow and change. We may get it wrong, but we can right those wrongs.
We can because we BELIEVE we can. We call it American exceptionalism.
Despite the possible perceptions of the rest of the world, we are still a nation of individuals with individual rights. We are each empowered, as no other citizens at any other time or place have ever been empowered, to affect change. Expressing our opinions, soliciting our representatives, voting for our beliefs, protesting what we think is unjust, practicing our rights.
So, a year into our 47th president’s term, and we’re ready to give up? It’s like trashing our New Year’s resolutions a month into the new year because we’ve missed a week at the gym, binged on office donuts, or neglected to call Aunt Maude even once, much less than our resolution once a week.
Oh, the luxury of resolve… and all those good intentions. But as the proverb warns us, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. A resolution is simply a good intention with a little more bite. It is not enough.
The magic is in the moment of action, and it can begin again at any time. It doesn’t have to be a new year or a new president. It doesn’t have to be preceded by a monumental resolution. Whether it’s our national psyche or our personal one, Nike had the right idea: “Just do it.”
Get back to the gym, avoid that box of doughnuts, call your Aunt Maude.
Pessimism and defeatism will never win the day. Belief in ourselves starts with believing we can. Belief in our country has, at its heart, the same dynamic. Like the storybook “The Little Engine That Could” because he thought he could, so can we.
As quickly and dramatically as the world seems to have changed, it can change again. And it will.
And far too soon, this collection of moments we call our lives will pass… we will not pass this way again.
Never on this side of the grave again, on this side of the river…
Ever while time flows on and on and on, that narrow, noiseless river…
(Christina Rossetti)
And time will flow on, impervious to our wishes. So, while we’re here, why not push forward and push hard? Why not live our lives with verve?
To do the useful thing, to say the courageous thing, to contemplate the beautiful thing; that is enough for one man’s life. (T. S. Eliot)
There are things we simply do not give up on. Topping that list are our children, ourselves, and our country.
Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."
In March 2024, the Department of Justice secured a hard-won conviction against Juan Orlando Hernández, the former president of Honduras, for trafficking tons of cocaine into the United States. After years of investigation and months of trial preparation, he was formally sentenced on June 26, 2024. Yet on December 1, 2025 — with a single stroke of a pen, and after receiving a flattering letter from prison — President Trump erased the conviction entirely, issuing a full pardon (Congress.gov).
Defending the pardon, the president dismissed the Hernández prosecution as a politically motivated case pursued by the previous administration. But the evidence presented in court — including years of trafficking and tons of cocaine — was not political. It was factual, documented, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the president’s goal is truly to rid the country of drugs, the Hernández pardon is impossible to reconcile with that mission. It was not only a contradiction — it was a betrayal of the justice system itself.
For the prosecutors and investigators who spent years building the case, the pardon was more than a legal reversal. It was a dismissal of their work. These are professionals who sift through evidence, protect witnesses, and risk their safety to bring traffickers to justice. To see a conviction erased and recast as “political” sends a chilling message: that justice is negotiable, and that the truth they fought to prove can be undone with a signature.
Days after pardoning Hernández, the president ordered a military strike in Venezuela, captured Nicolás Maduro and his wife on nearly identical drug-related charges, and declared that the United States would “run” Venezuela for the foreseeable future (Reuters). By making that declaration without acknowledging that Venezuela had a constitutionally designated vice president, the president dismissed the nation’s lawful succession process entirely. Meanwhile, Venezuela’s own Supreme Court directed Vice President Delcy Rodríguez to assume the presidency — a constitutional process the United States simply ignored. Members of Congress were not briefed beforehand, and several lawmakers said the strike lacked authorization or clarity about its purpose.
Venezuela, like the United States, has its own constitutional process for replacing leadership. For any American president to declare that he will “run” another sovereign nation is not only overstepping — it is a profound act of overreach. It disregards that country’s institutions, dismisses its lawful succession, and elevates personal authority above international norms. International law experts warn that the strike and capture likely violate the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force and the long‑standing rule that sitting heads of state cannot be seized by foreign governments — a warning Congress has yet to address. The most troubling part is not just that these actions occurred, but that Congress has yet to provide clarity, direction, or even assert its own constitutional power. Silence in the face of overreach is not neutrality. It is abdication.
Many Americans watching the president’s recent actions see not strategic leadership, but improvisation — a leader who treats governing like a personal performance rather than a constitutional responsibility. His public statements often contradict the Constitution or established U.S. policy, projecting confidence without knowledge or authority. World leaders recognize this gap. Some dismiss his claims, others exploit them, and adversarial nations such as China and Russia — countries he openly admires — understand the risks and opportunities created by erratic American leadership. This is not a moment for improvisation. It is a moment for constitutional discipline, and Congress must provide it.
This is not coherent strategy. It is selective enforcement. One foreign leader convicted of trafficking is pardoned. Another is pursued with airstrikes. The difference is not the crime. The difference is the president’s narrative.
The pattern is unmistakable. Strong, effective leaders do not crave praise. They do not demand gratitude. They do not measure success by applause. They act because the action is necessary, not because it flatters their ego. When any leader responds to criticism by asking why people are not thanking him, it reveals a deeper problem: decisions are being made for personal validation rather than national interest. That is not a strength. It is insecurity — and insecurity at the highest levels of government is dangerous.
Finding solutions is difficult when presidential decisions are driven by ego and impulse, and when Congress remains loyal, silent, or unwilling to perform its constitutional role. But that does not absolve Congress of responsibility. If our democracy is threatened or unsafe conditions emerge for the country or its citizens, responsibility will not rest solely with the president. It will rest with a Congress that failed to act, failed to check overreach, and failed to provide the clarity and direction the Constitution demands.
In recent weeks, Americans have watched in disbelief as bombs were dropped on ships and reports emerged of innocent people caught in the crossfire. Across communities, people asked basic questions — Why now? Under what authority? What is the plan? — and no answers came from Congress or the President. Instead of a nation projecting strength, we are rapidly becoming a nation defined by dysfunction and confusion. Melvin, an ex‑military relative, told me he is confused, frustrated, and desperate for transparency. He is not alone. When even those who have served this country cannot understand our actions or our objectives, something is profoundly wrong.
And the consequences of that dysfunction are already becoming visible. China has demanded Maduro’s immediate release and accused the United States of violating international law (Yahoo News). Russia has condemned the strike and warned of regional destabilization (NDTV). Venezuela’s vast oil reserves — among the largest in the world — make this more than a regional dispute. They make it a global flashpoint.
This is not a moment for applause. It is a moment for accountability.
There are steps we can take to restore guardrails and reduce the risks this moment has created. Congress must reclaim its constitutional war powers, require full briefings before any foreign military action, and reassert its authority over when and how the United States uses force. It must strengthen the independence of the Department of Justice so that prosecutions and pardons cannot be shaped by personal loyalty or selective justice. The president must stop sending mixed signals about national security, stop usurping authority that belongs to Congress, and stop pressuring the DOJ to serve political interests.
Congress must also reaffirm respect for the sovereignty of other nations and rebuild its oversight capacity by prioritizing accountability over loyalty. And the public must insist on that accountability — through letters, petitions, phone calls, town halls, and voting — because democracy only works when citizens demand clarity and courage from those who represent them. This is not a partisan worry. Americans across the political spectrum — Republicans, Democrats, and Independents — are united in their concern that both Congress and the President are drifting away from constitutional leadership.
Overreach abroad and silence at home are unacceptable — and the American people deserve leaders willing to confront both.
______________________________________________________________________________
Carolyn Goode is a retired educational leader and a national advocate for ethical leadership, government accountability, and civic renewal.
People visit the Nova festival memorial site on January 23, 2025 in Reim, Israel.
The United States and Israel maintain a "special relationship" founded on shared security interests, democratic values, and deep-rooted cultural ties. As a major non-NATO ally, Israel receives significant annual U.S. security assistance—roughly $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing and $500 million for missile defense—to maintain its technological edge.
BINYAMINA, NORTHERN ISRAEL — The Oct. 7 attack altered life across Israel, leaving few untouched by loss. In its aftermath, grief has often turned into anger, deepening divisions that have existed for generations. But amid the devastation, some Israelis and Palestinians are choosing a different response — one rooted not in vengeance, but in peace.
Maoz Inon is just one of them. An Israeli peace activist, Inon, lost both of his parents during the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas. Being raised in the communities of Kibbutz Nir Am and Netiv HaAsara, conflict was never unfamiliar to him. What he never imagined was that the final contact with his parents would come through a family WhatsApp group chat.
“No one answered us the entire morning,” Inon said. “Only in the afternoon were we able to reach a neighbor, who told us that my parents’ house had burned to ashes — and that there were two bodies inside.”
In the days following the attack, Inon and his family were confronted with a choice — one he believes many before them faced and failed.
“By choosing revenge, we’re only going to escalate the cycle of fear, hate, and bloodshed that Israelis and Palestinians have been trapped in for a century,” he said. “It didn’t start on Oct. 7.”
Still consumed by grief, Inon described feeling physically and emotionally shattered. For days, he said, he was “drowning in an ocean of sorrow and pain.”
It wasn’t till days later that he had a life-altering vision— one where collective tears healed bodies scarred by war and washed blood from the land, revealing what he described as “a path to peace and reconciliation.”
“When I woke up, I made a decision to walk on that path,” he said.
For Inon, the decision was not abstract or symbolic. He said choosing peace was the only way he could begin to heal.
A Life Built on Bridging Communities
Long before Oct. 7, Inon had dedicated his work to bringing people together across cultural and religious divides. He served as a tourism entrepreneur using it as a tool for understanding — one that could break down the physical and mental walls separating Israelis and Palestinians.
“I was very much involved and invested in tourism, but not just tourism for fun or for the experience,’’ Inon explained. “But tourism that was meant and created to bridge...between Jews and Arabs and local communities.’’
Inon said his approach was shaped by time spent living alongside Indigenous communities abroad, where learning came not from books or guides, but from sharing meals, homes, and daily life. That experience, he said, forced him to confront how little he knew about the Palestinian people living alongside him.
“When there is ignorance, there is fear,” Inon said. “And when there is fear, there is hate.”
For Inon, peace began with proximity — with knowing the other not as an enemy, but as a neighbor.
A Partnership Born From Loss….
Inon’s work eventually led him to partner with Aziz Abu Sarah, a Palestinian peace activist who also understands loss. Abu Sarah’s brother was killed during the first Intifada in the early 1990s after being tortured in an Israeli prison
The two men, Inon said, were meant to be enemies — divided by nationality, history, and grief. Instead, they found common ground in their refusal to let loss dictate hatred. In the days following Oct. 7, Abu Sarah reached out to Inon with a message that would deepen their shared resolve.
As long as he acted from anger and revenge, Abu Sarah wrote, he was living the life his brother’s killers had chosen for him. Only by rejecting hatred, he said, was he able to reclaim his freedom.
Together, the two began amplifying a message they believe is often overshadowed by violence: that reconciliation, even among those most affected by conflict, is possible.
Amplifying Peace on a Global Stage
As Inon’s work gained international attention, he and Abu Sarah met with Pope Francis in 2024, sharing their personal losses and calling for reconciliation amid ongoing violence. For Inon, the meetings were not symbolic, but a reminder that peacebuilding belongs on the global stage alongside political and military decisions.
“If we must differentiate,” Inon said, “let it be between those who believe in equality, dignity, justice, and peace — and those who don’t believe in those values yet.”
Their individual efforts have now come together in a book, The Future Is Peace, A Shared Journey Across the Holy Land (Crown Publishing Group), out April 2026. In September of last year, both came together at a NYC-area live event where they spoke about reconciliation and peace-building, themes they explore in their book.
In a moment defined by grief, fear, and division, Inon’s choice stands in quiet defiance of what history has repeated for generations. Rather than allowing loss to harden into hatred, he continues to walk a path he believes is the only one capable of healing — for himself, and for a land still searching for reconciliation.
“I don’t want to make my parents victims of terror,” said Inon. “I want to make them victims of peace.”
Marissa Muniz is a senior at Baylor University. She completed this piece as a media fellow with Fuente Latina.
