Grupos advierten que la decisión de una ciudad de Idaho de declararse ciudad no santuario podría tener repercusiones de gran alcance.

Las consecuencias de la decisión adoptada en julio por la ciudad de Eagle, cerca de Boise, todavía se sienten. Las ciudades santuario limitan su cooperación con el gobierno federal en materia de leyes de migración. La resolución de Eagle establece que la ciudad no prestará servicios a personas indocumentadas. Esto podría ser especialmente perjudicial para los miembros vulnerables de la comunidad, como los que han sufrido violencia doméstica o abusos sexuales.

Sarah Sheehan, de la clínica de Alianza de Mujeres y Niños de Boise, dice que la resolución podría impedir que la gente reciba ayuda.

"Puede generar mucho miedo buscar ayuda de servicios comunitarios en ciudades que no son santuario," asegura Sheehan.

El ayuntamiento de Eagle aprobó la resolución en una agenda de consentimiento sin comentarios públicos. Dice que el objetivo de la resolución es "mantener la seguridad, el bienestar y los recursos de sus residentes". Los críticos llaman al ayuntamiento a anularlo.

Algunos Estados, como Florida, han prohibido que las ciudades se declaren ciudades santuario, pero es poco frecuente que se declare que no lo son. Sin embargo, en febrero, el condado de Mesa, en Colorado, se declaró no santuario.

Nisha Newton, de la Coalición de Idaho contra la Violencia Sexual y Doméstica, dice que los daños de esta resolución podrían extenderse más allá de Eagle.

"Me preocupa que esta decisión promueva o potencie otras prácticas y políticas discriminatorias en todo el estado," dice Newton, "y que no seamos capaces de alcanzarlas como proveedores de servicios y defensores."

Newton afirma que la gente debe defenderse mutuamente y que ésta es una táctica equivocada si el objetivo real es mantener la seguridad de las personas.

"Se requiere que todos construyamos comunidades más seguras y que nuestra seguridad y bienestar no provengan de la opresión de otras personas y de que se les nieguen servicios a otros," concluye Newton.

By Savana Capp / Broadcast version by Farah Siddiqi reporting for the Kent State NewsLab-Ohio News Connection Collaboration.

Ohio legislators are considering increasing the penalty for repeat voyeurism in Ohio, as newer technology and smaller cameras makes it easier for voyeuristic crimes to be committed. 

The current charges for voyeurism, acts of invading someone else’s privacy typically for the purpose of sexual gratification, range from a misdemeanor to a fifth-degree felony. House Bill 110 introduced Feb. 18 by state representatives Josh Williams, R-Sylvania Township, and Cecil Thomas, D-Cincinnati, would increase the penalty from a misdemeanor of the first degree to a felony of the third degree if the offender has previously pleaded guilty to or been convicted of two or more of the same voyeurism violation. 

“I think the individual's right to privacy should always be paramount,” Williams said. “I think the state has an interest in preserving an individual’s right to privacy especially in their most intimate moments.” 

The case that got him interested in this legislation came from his own district near Toledo. A man was arrested after allegedly putting a camera in a toilet at St. Vincent Medical Center. There was another recent case in Kent where a man was arrested and charged with voyeurism for allegedly taking photos of a woman in a store’s fitting room.

While using hidden cameras is already criminal in Ohio, Williams said the penalties are not high enough. 

“For voyeurism, recording someone for your own sexual gratification, violating their privacy, making them feel so violated in their most vulnerable moments,” Williams said, “we need to increase those penalties, so individuals that are trying to perpetrate those types of crimes in the state of Ohio understand that that type of deviant behavior is not going to be permitted.” 

Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the designated sexual assault coalition for Ohio, supports this bill. The OAESV works to support all of the rape crisis centers in Ohio and advocates for more protective legislation.

Emily Gemar, OAESV director of public policy, said voyeurism can be a part of a larger abuse pattern. With the evolution of technology, she has seen a lot more voyeuristic and digital crimes. 

“We know that it’s not always a one-and-done type of offense, it can be very repetitive,” Gemar said. “It can involve a lot of surveillance of somebody and multiple violations of their privacy over a long period of time.” 

Gemar explained that while it often starts with something like spying, it can lead to stalking and physical sex offenses. 

In a sexual assault in Ohio study from 2016-2023, the Department of Public Safety found voyeurism and importuning, soliciting a minor under the age of 13 to engage in sexual activity, to be the lowest reported offenses of all sexual assault. 

Gemar said voyeurism, like most sexual offenses, is not commonly reported and leads to feelings of helplessness during and after the incident. 

“This crime, like many sex crimes, can cause really deep feelings of violation and powerlessness and the trauma can be long-lasting,” Gemar said. 

If the act of voyeurism involved taking pictures or images, the victim can feel even more powerless because of the difficulty in working to truly remove them from the internet, Gemar said. 

Williams said there has also been an increased market for invasive hidden camera videos on OnlyFans and other adult websites. 

Along with public restrooms, hidden cameras have been found in smoke detectors, shower heads, dorm rooms, phone chargers and light switches in Airbnb’s. 

“Victims can become distrustful of others, especially in settings that they once believed were private or intimate,” Gemar said. “It can affect their sense of safety at home, at work or in public places, and that really isolates victims.” 

As it stands, the current statute says no matter how many times someone violates section A (no person for the purpose of sexual gratification shall surreptitiously invade the privacy of another) or B (no person shall surreptitiously film or photograph another person in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy), it is only a misdemeanor. 

With a rise in voyeuristic and digital crimes, other states have also been reevaluating their penalties, Williams said. South Carolina and New York are among them. 

“I don't think this is a controversial bill at all,” he said. “So as soon as it gets moving, it’ll move fast.”


This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.

Advocates are urging Ohio lawmakers to preserve critical funding for rape crisis centers in the upcoming state budget.

The request comes amid deep federal cuts and growing demand for services across the state.

Supporters of House Bill 96 say the $15 million state allocation it provides would fund emergency hotlines, hospital accompaniment, legal advocacy, and education efforts.

Rosa Beltré, president and CEO of the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, said thousands could be left without help if the bill doesn't pass.

"This is about telling survivors, 'we are here, we believe you,'" said Beltré. "'And when everything fails, we will continue to support the programs that are giving you, your autonomy, your voices, your visibility back, because it was lost in a rape.'"

Between October 2023 and September 2024, Ohio's rape crisis centers responded to over 40,000 hotline calls and provided more than 5000 hours of legal advocacy each week.

Beltré added that a gap created by a 77% drop in federal funds provided by the Victims of Crime Act could leave centers struggling to meet demand.

She said the impact of sexual violence ripples far beyond the immediate trauma.

"Within their families, within their household," said Beltré, "their mental health, their ability for sustaining a job, their ability for healing. They won't be able to contribute financially to society."

Ohio lawmakers are considering the final version of the 2026 budget in coming weeks. Advocates say preserving the full $15 million will safeguard essential services and show survivors they are not alone.

A new report showed programs serving domestic violence survivors in Ohio are stretched thin, with hundreds of people who need help being turned away due to lack of shelter.

Their advocates said maintaining state funding is critical to meet the growing demand for services.

Mary O'Doherty, executive director of the Ohio Domestic Violence Network, said the latest 24-hour census highlighted the strain on programs across the state.

"During that time, our program served 2,701 victims," O'Doherty reported. "Our programs did not have enough resources to meet 347 requests for help. Most of the people who (were) turned away were looking for emergency shelter."

According to the 19th annual Domestic Violence Counts report, conducted by the National Network to End Domestic Violence, 100% of Ohio's 75 identified domestic violence programs participated in the national count on Sept. 4 of last year, providing shelter and services to thousands statewide.

The Ohio Domestic Violence Network reported one in every two people seeking help in the state was turned away during the count due to lack of funding. O'Doherty acknowledged Ohio lawmakers are under pressure to cut state spending this session but said advocates are pushing for funding to help survivors.

"There currently is $20 million in the Ohio budget for domestic violence services," O'Doherty pointed out. "Right now, there's an extraordinary amount of pressure to cut spending, public spending, and we are working hard to make sure that the Legislature keeps those funds in the budget."

As lawmakers debate the state budget, she added concerned Ohioans can contact their state senators to express support for maintaining funding for domestic violence shelters and survivor services at current levels.