Scoop: Colorado pauses campaign finance database after Minnesota shootings
Why it matters: The unannounced decision — first learned by Axios Denver — comes after a gunman targeted at least four Minnesota state lawmakers at their homes over the weekend, killing one Democratic representative and her husband and injuring another and his wife.
Driving the news: The state's Transparency in Contribution and Expenditure Reporting database, known as TRACER, posts candidate filings that often include home addresses and personal phone numbers. Elsewhere in the system, it lists campaign contribution data that requires donors — including lawmakers — to list their names, full addresses and occupations.
Secretary of State Jena Griswold ordered the removal after consultation with state and legislative leadership, a spokesperson said.
The database went offline Saturday afternoon. It is expected to return after interested lawmakers file a request for the redaction of personal information, which is currently permitted in law.
What they're saying: "In light of the weekend's tragic events in Minnesota and out of an abundance of caution for the safety of Colorado's elected leaders, the Department of State made a determination to take the public-facing campaign finance reporting website (TRACER) down briefly," spokesperson Jack Todd told Axios Denver in a statement.
The big picture: The Minnesota shootings exposed the delicate balance between public safety and the personal privacy of state lawmakers and other top officials.
Other states moved quickly to increase security by adding patrols near the homes of state lawmakers and removing online personal information, according to multiple media reports.
The Minnesota state representative who was killed Saturday listed her home address on her campaign website. The other lawmaker who was injured put his home address on an official legislative web page.
Flashback: In 2013, a parolee assassinated Colorado corrections chief Tom Clements at his home in Monument.
Zoom in: The home addresses and contact information for Colorado lawmakers are not listed on the Legislature's website, which only discloses official phone numbers and email addresses.
And many don't list home addresses on their campaign sites.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
8 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Republicans Overperform in Major California Election
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Republicans scored an unexpectedly strong showing in a closely watched special election in California. Early returns in Tuesday's high-stakes runoff for the San Diego County Board of Supervisors show Republican candidate John McCann running significantly closer than many expected in a Democratic-leaning district that former Vice President Kamala Harris won by 20 points. Newsweek reached out to McCann via email for comment. Why It Matters The special election comes after widespread protests and unrest in nearby Los Angeles over Trump's immigration policies, which have seen Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out deportation raids in the city. But despite intense anti-ICE protests in California, that wave of activism does not appear to be translating into stronger support for Democrats. Chula Vista Mayor John McCann and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, who are running in a special election to fill the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.. Chula Vista Mayor John McCann and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, who are running in a special election to fill the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.. City of Imperial Beach and Mayor McCann via Facebook What To Know As of late Tuesday night, Paloma Aguirre, the Democratic mayor of Imperial Beach, held a narrow 6-point lead over McCann, the Republican mayor of Chula Vista, with 53 percent to 47 percent in the race for the District 1 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. Newsweek reached out to Aguirre via email for comment. So far, the ballots counted represent about 19 percent of the more than 370,000 registered voters in the district, according to the Registrar of Voters. District 1 includes much of the South Bay and parts of the city of San Diego, and is widely regarded as a pivotal swing seat on the influential five-member Board. Since the sudden resignation of Supervisor Nora Vargas last December, who stepped down citing "personal safety and security reasons," the Board has been split 2–2 between Democrats and Republicans. If Aguirre's early lead holds, she will become the next District 1 supervisor, tipping the balance of power back in favor of Democrats. The last time Republicans dominated the Board was before 2020, when Democrats secured a majority for the first time in a generation. San Diego County supervisors oversee an $8.5 billion budget and play a major role in administering state and federal programs, such as CalFresh and Medi-Cal, while also governing unincorporated communities throughout the region. Aguirre says she is running to "bring change to county government" and to fight for working people by tackling local crises head-on. Aguirre has focused much of her campaign on addressing the issue of sewage pollution at the United States–Mexico border, which has plagued South Bay beaches for years. She has pledged to push for new infrastructure funding, a Superfund designation from the EPA, and to treat the issue as a public health emergency. She's also promised to prioritize an audit of homelessness spending, expand treatment and shelter options, and address crime and high energy costs for residents. McCann, a U.S. Navy veteran, has emphasized his record on emergency response and public safety. His campaign focuses on increasing law enforcement funding, reducing government waste, and opposing new taxes, including the proposed mileage tax. McCann says he'll work to expand health care, job training, and other essential services for veterans, while also helping to secure funding to fix the border sewage crisis and hold responsible parties accountable. What People Are Saying Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre, in a Tuesday statement to KPBS: "Today belongs to the working-class people of District 1, a nuestra gente trabajadora, who now have a fighter at the county Board of Supervisors who will hold the line against the Trump administration." Chula Vista Mayor John McCann told ABC 10 San Diego: "Paloma and I actually went back to Washington, D.C., to help raise money at the White House and Congress together. I'm willing to work with anybody as long as we want to focus on results and having solutions." What Happens Next County officials expect to continue counting ballots throughout the week, with an official update on results scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday. The Registrar of Voters' Office has until July 31 to certify the election. The winner will fill the vacant seat for the remainder of the current term that ends in January 2029.
Miami Herald
24 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
California lawmakers struggle to find ways to hit back against Trump immigration raids
LOS ANGELES – It has been nearly a month since the Trump administration launched its no-holds-barred immigration enforcement campaign in Southern California, deploying federal forces on raids that have sparked massive protests, prompted ongoing litigation in federal court and triggered a flurry of bills from outraged state lawmakers trying to fight back. And yet - at least so far - nothing seems capable of deterring the White House or forcing a change in tactics. In both Sacramento and Washington, observers said elected officials are coming up with proposals that seem to lack teeth. Ahilan Arulanantham, co-director of the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy and former senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union in Los Angeles, said stopping the Trump administration from sending masked and unidentified immigration agents to snatch people off the street is proving difficult. "They detain everybody and interrogate them all and then just figure out afterward who's unlawfully present, and that's blatantly illegal," he said. "We can write more laws, but there's already perfectly good laws that say this is unlawful, and they're doing it anyway." A bill announced Monday by state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, D-Alhambra, would expand police impersonation laws and require all law enforcement, unless undercover, to wear a name tag or badge number. "While ICE has publicly condemned impersonations, the agency's use of face coverings and lack of consistent, visible identification creates public confusion and makes it difficult for the public to distinguish between authorized law enforcement personnel and dangerous criminals," Renée Pérez's office said in a news release. Another bill, introduced by state Sens. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, and Jesse Arreguín, D-Berkeley, also seeks to ban law enforcement from wearing face coverings. U.S. Representative Laura Friedman, D-Glendale, announced similar legislation Tuesday at the federal level, but the Republican majorities in both congressional houses mean it stands little chance of becoming law. The state bills have a better chance of passage in the Democratic-controlled Legislature, but they still face opposition. The Peace Officers Research Assn. of California, the largest statewide law enforcement union in the country, said banning face coverings could inadvertently put local cops - who are already required to wear badges, nameplates or badge numbers on their uniforms - at risk of losing access to personal protective equipment like face shields and respirators. "Using local law enforcement as a punching bag to grandstand against the federal government should not be an acceptable practice from our state leaders. It is misdirected, misguided, and intolerable," Brian R. Marvel, president of PORAC, said in a statement. Marvel said he doubted California had the authority to regulate the attire of federal officers. Arulanantham disagreed, saying that the state law could stand as long as the mask ban was neutrally applied to all law enforcement, not just federal actors. Other potential measures in the state Legislature, Arulanantham said, could expand on SB 54, the sanctuary policy that limits collaboration between state law enforcement and federal authorities on immigration enforcement. But even those protections are now under assault in the courts. The Trump administration sued the city of L.A. on Monday, arguing its sanctuary policy hampered the federal government's ability to enforce immigration law. "Our City remains committed to standing up for our constitutional rights and the rights of our residents," a spokesperson for the L.A. city attorney said in a statement. "We will defend our ordinance and continue to defend policies that reflect our longstanding values as a welcoming community for all residents." Other bills advancing through the state Legislature include measures that would restrict school officials from allowing immigration enforcement inside the nonpublic areas of schools and prohibit healthcare workers from sharing a patient's immigration status without judicial warrants. Democrats aren't alone in trying to get the White House to back off. A group of state Republican lawmakers authored a letter to Trump, arguing that widespread immigration raids are crippling the economy by taking away workers from key industries. "Unfortunately, the recent ICE workplace raids on farms, at construction sites, and in restaurants and hotels, have led to unintended consequences that are harming the communities we represent and the businesses that employ our constituents," the letter said. The Department of Homeland Security has insisted its agents are busy arresting "criminal illegal aliens" and said it will continue operations despite efforts by "rioters and politicians trying to hinder law enforcement." "As bad faith politicians attempt to demean and vilify our brave law enforcement, we will only double down and ramp up our enforcement actions against the worst of the worst criminals," Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a June 26 news release. Local city and county governments, civil rights groups and even individuals could step in to sue the government and ICE on the grounds that they are infringing upon citizens' constitutional rights and harming the local economy - but no notable cases have been filed. The city of Los Angeles is posturing for a suit and has already approved legal action against ICE, according to a proposal signed by seven members of the City Council. But early struggles in the state's challenge to Trump's deployment of federal troops do not bode well for future litigation. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals swiftly overturned a lower court decision that would've limited Trump's authority, and litigation over whether the troops can be used for immigration enforcement remains ongoing. While the court battle plays out, state Democratic leaders, including Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, say they are working to fast-track some bills through the legislative process. "The Speaker is deeply invested in protecting California's immigrant workers and families in the face of reckless ICE raids and Trump's abuses of power," Rivas' spokesperson Nick Miller said in a statement. Some observers said that, despite the struggles legislation may face in the near term, it may be up to Republicans to change focus from Trump's agenda to things that affect their electorates, said veteran Democratic political strategist Roy Behr. "The Republicans seem more focused on doing whatever Trump wants, but at least these votes force them to show where their loyalties really lie. And you know, maybe one day they will actually start to pay the price for these votes and ultimately feel the pressure to change their minds." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Boston Globe
26 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority strikes down 176-year-old abortion ban
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit that year arguing that the ban was trumped by abortion restrictions legislators enacted during the nearly half-century that Roe was in effect. Kaul specifically cited a 1985 law that essentially permits abortions until viability. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, defended the ban in court, arguing that the 1849 ban could coexist with the newer abortion restrictions, just as different penalties for the same crime coexist. Advertisement Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled in 2023 that the 1849 ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother's consent — but not consensual abortions. Abortions have been available in the state since that ruling but the state Supreme Court decision gives providers and patients more certainty that abortions will remain legal in Wisconsin. Advertisement Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Schlipper's ruling without waiting for a decision from a lower appellate court. It was expected as soon as the justices took the case that they would overturn the ban. Liberals hold a 4-3 majority on the court and one of them, Janet Protasiewicz, openly stated on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Democratic-backed Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel for an open seat on the court in April, ensuring liberals will maintain their 4-3 edge until at least 2028. Crawford has not been sworn in yet and was not part of Wednesday's ruling. She'll play pivotal role, though, in a separate Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin lawsuit challenging the 1849 ban's constitutionality. The high court decided last year to take that case. It's still pending.
