MADISON, Wis. - Late last week, a state Assembly committee advanced a bill that would prevent prosecutors from investigating politicians using a John Doe probe. The legislation could be taken up by the full Legislature this fall.

Opponents of the bill, including Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, say this is a particularly bad piece of legislation.

"Pretty shocking that politicians in Madison are trying to carve our something that will benefit them but no one else," Heck said. "If you're engaged in political shenanigans, the John Doe tool will not be available to prosecutors."

Twice, Gov. Scott Walker has been the subject of a John Doe probe, which prompts some to say the bill is political payback. The Republican authors of the bill say it will lead to greater accountability in government.

"How that makes politicians more accountable is just laughable," Heck said. "If anything, this will make them able to get away with stuff that they've not been able to get away with in the past."

Republicans say political crimes still could be investigated, but not within the framework of a John Doe probe.

Heck and other clean-government advocates point out that the state's John Doe law dates back to the days when Wisconsin was a territory. The law led to uncovering one of the biggest political scandals in state history, the so-called "caucus scandal" of 2001, which resulted in criminal charges against a number of high-profile Wisconsin politicians in both parties.

"There shouldn't be special treatment for people who are engaged in politics and are breaking the law, as opposed to people who are not engaged in politics and might be breaking the law," Heck said. "We should all be treated the same."

According to Republican supporters, the John Doe process has been abused. Heck said this bill is political payback, pointing out that the first John Doe probe involving Walker resulted in convictions of six of his associates when he was Milwaukee County executive.

"It's a little bit like saying, 'If you leave me alone, trust me, nothing bad will happen,' " Heck said, "and of course we know in politics that when people aren't being watched and there isn't transparency, that's when bad things do happen."

Details of the bill, 2015 AB 68, are online at docs.legis.wisconsin.gov.


get more stories like this via email

In Mississippi, where thousands of people are serving life sentences, the impact of long-term imprisonment falls disproportionately on Black communities. Their advocates are raising concerns about the state's sentencing practices. And they're urging legislative reforms to reduce what they call "extreme sentences" and to address racial inequities in the system.

Celeste Barry, program associate with The Sentencing Project, co-authored a new report on the effects of long-term imprisonment. She said in Mississippi, more than 2,300 people are serving life sentences - and nearly three-quarters have no opportunity for parole.

"We see in Mississippi some extreme racial disparities that are far greater than the national average. So, over 70% of the life sentence population is Black in Mississippi, and that's compared to the still troubling 45% nationally" she explained.

Groups like hers are pushing for reforms to address these disparities. Barry highlights Oklahoma as an example, where the state passed the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, allowing incarcerated individuals to seek reduced sentences if they can prove that abuse played a role in their crime.

Barry believes similar reforms could offer significant relief in Mississippi, especially given the state's disproportionately high number of women serving life sentences without parole.

"And this has the power to bring relief to hundreds of survivors in the state, and could be particularly meaningful in a state like Mississippi, where they have the largest share of their female life-sentenced population serving life without parole," she continued.

In 2021, Mississippi lawmakers passed a bipartisan bill to reduce the prison population by expanding parole opportunities for nonviolent offenders, but Gov. Tate Reeves vetoed it, citing public safety concerns.

Services for North Carolinians affected by the justice system is going mobile.

The Recidivism Reduction Educational Program Services mobile resource center is hitting the road today to provide reentry support across the state. It is the first effort of its kind.

Kerwin Pittman, founder and executive director of the organization, said the center will meet North Carolinians where they are, literally.

"What we wanted to do was bring a plethora of resources into these communities," Pittman explained. "Particularly communities that are highly impacted by recidivism and incarceration, and bring a wealth of resources to them to hopefully curb the recidivism rate."

The center had its unveiling and ribbon cutting on Tuesday and is starting in the Raleigh-Durham area today. Pittman pointed out it is the first of four units he hopes to have running by the end of the year. They will be located in different parts of the state and rotate throughout their region each week.

Pittman emphasized the units will be able to provide a long list of services.

"Some of those services range from social-benefit assistance to employment assistance to education and skill development to offering support and mental health services, substance misuse treatment and services, housing assistance, legal support, family and community support, digital literacy," Pittman outlined.

He added they will also provide inclement weather supplies, hygiene kits and local reentry resources through the organization's call center.

Places like NC Works Career Centers and other state services are able to provide local resources. But Pittman noted the services can be hard to access without a car, which can deter people.

"It's hard to walk in the cold to NC Works Center to sit in there and have to go through no telling what the intake process is, just to get whatever benefit that you may be trying to apply for or a resume or try to find a job," Pittman observed.

The battle over Jefferson County's 2021 redistricting maps heads to court this week with plaintiffs arguing the map violates the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution.

The case, McClure v. Jefferson County Commission, claims Black voters were unfairly packed into two districts, diluting their influence in others.

Zephyr Scalzetti, program specialist for Alabama Values, a nonprofit advocacy group focused on promoting civic engagement, pro-democracy policies and fair representation on issues such as voting rights and redistricting, said the case is about more than lines on a map; it is about ensuring every voter has an equal voice.

"You look at the map overall. Jefferson County residents are willing to elect Black representatives but it is impossible for a Black candidate to win in these three white districts," Scalzetti contended. "The plaintiffs are alleging that this is because those two supermajority Black districts are so packed with Black voters it is diluting their voice."

Jefferson County's five-district system was established in 1985. However, the lawsuit alleges that the 2021 maps are racially gerrymandered and haven't changed much since then. Districts 1 and 2 are still supermajority Black while Districts 3, 4 and 5 remain majority white, limiting influence despite the population of Black residents growing.

Scalzetti noted the case raises significant concerns about transparency in the redistricting process. The lawsuit alleges the commission failed to conduct analyses required by the Voting Rights Act, such as a racially polarized voting study. It also points to limited public input, with key meetings held during work hours and proposed maps only viewable in person at the commission's office.

Scalzetti emphasized the case highlights the importance of local redistricting in shaping representation and ensuring residents have a voice in decisions affecting their daily lives.

"Ultimately, this is about power," Scalzetti asserted. "This is about the power of a community, the power of an individual voter and a group of people to actually affect what is happening in their community."

The trial started on Monday and is taking place in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. It is expected to draw comparison to the landmark Supreme Court case Allen v. Milligan. Scalzetti added the case could have far-reaching impacts on redistricting, not only in other counties across Alabama but throughout the South.