Gov. Lamont eyes state homeschooling reforms
Lamont's remarks represent the first definitive signal that he's eyeing policy changes following the arrest of a Waterbury woman who was charged with a slew of crimes after her stepson told police he'd been held captive in her home for more than two decades.
Nearly $200,000 raised to help alleged Waterbury captive
'I'd like to talk with the legislature about ways we can stay in better communication – make sure those kids are being well protected, not just in school, but at home school as well,' Lamont said in response to questions from News 8 at a press conference on Tuesday.
'When they come into school, that's an early radar system,' Lamont continued. 'We have a better idea of how they're doing and what's going on at the home.'
But when students leave traditional public and private school systems, Lamont said, 'We lose a little bit of touch — as happened in this case over a period of, say, 20 years.'
News 8 also pressed Lamont on the status of internal inquiries into the actions of state agencies responsible for child welfare.
'I think that's ongoing,' Lamont replied. 'Look, DCF was there, they visited. I'm told the family said, 'DCF is bothering us,' and DCF referred it to the Waterbury Police. But you're right something dropped through the cracks and this went on for 20 years.'
The governor's suggestion that there should be changes to the state's system of homeschool regulations was met with sharp criticism by one of the state's leading Republicans.
'To turn this into a homeschool issue, to me is disingenuous,' State Rep. Vincent Candelora, the Republican leader in the state House of Representatives, said. 'It really – to me – smells of 'don't let a crisis go to waste.''
Candelora said he believed that the Waterbury case was being used to advance attacks on homeschooling.
'Democrats love bureaucracy,' Candelora said. 'So, the more people they can get into the government system to regulate – that's what they enjoy doing.'
As a political battle brews over the future of the state's homeschooling laws, some lawmakers are calling for public hearings on the Waterbury case.
'I can't see how this won't have a public hearing,' State Rep. Geraldo Reyes Jr., a Waterbury Democrat, said.
State Rep. Joe Polletta, a Republican who also represents part of Waterbury, has been outspoken along with many of his Republican colleagues calling for public hearings.
'I think the best thing we can do is have a public hearing,' State Sen. Heather Somers, a Republican, said. 'Air out what happened. Learn more information before we start accusing one particular group of being the problem.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows States Trying To Ban ICE Agents Wearing Masks
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. A growing coalition of Democratic-led states is pushing legislation that would prohibit federal agents from wearing face coverings during immigration enforcement operations. California, New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania have introduced bills that would require federal officers to display visible identification—with limited exceptions for safety or undercover purposes—as part of a progressive effort to increase transparency and limit the agency's expanded powers under the Trump administration. Why It Matters Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has come under increased criticism for deploying agents in plain clothes and face coverings during operations, a tactic officials say is necessary to protect agents and their families from threats. The agency's approach has drawn heightened scrutiny amid the Trump administration's aggressive push to deport millions of undocumented migrants, placing ICE at the center of a highly visible crackdown on immigration. What To Know At the federal level, House Democrats have introduced the No Anonymity in Immigration Enforcement Act, which would require ICE agents conducting enforcement operations within the United States to display clear identification—with limited exceptions for public safety threats. Exceptions would be permitted only in limited circumstances, such as when there is an imminent threat to the agent's life or risk of serious bodily harm or when protective gear is necessary for health or safety reasons. In any case where an exception is used, a supervisor must review and document the incident within 48 hours to assess whether it was justified and determine whether disciplinary action is warranted. Senate Democrats have introduced the VISIBLE Act, which mandates that agents from ICE and Customs and Border Protection wear legible identification showing their names and agency affiliations. It would also prohibit the use of most face coverings during operations. Democratic Senators Alex Padilla of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey introduced the bill, saying the measure seeks to increase transparency and accountability in federal immigration enforcement. Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons defended agents' continued use of face coverings, even as the agency faces mounting criticism for obscuring personnel identities during enforcement actions. "I've said it publicly before, I'm not a proponent of the masks. However, if that's a tool that the men and women of ICE to keep themselves and their family safe, then I will allow it," Lyons said on CBS's Face the Nation. Representative Laura Friedman of California said in a news release: "I am deeply concerned about the prospect of ICE agents continuing to go about immigration raids in plainclothes, masks, and without identifiers that indicate what agency they're representing. The rules governing law enforcement should extend to federal immigration agents." Federal agents in a hallway awaiting individuals exiting hearings at an immigration court in New York. Federal agents in a hallway awaiting individuals exiting hearings at an immigration court in New York. Andrea Renault/STAR MAX/IPx At the state level, California is leading the way with its No Secret Police Act, introduced in June by Democratic state Senators Scott Wiener and Jesse Arreguín. Senate Bill 627 would prohibit all law enforcement officers operating in the state, including federal agents, from covering their faces during enforcement actions unless in specific, limited circumstances such as SWAT deployments, medical masking or undercover work. The California Senate Public Safety Committee advanced the bill last week, but it faces a legal gauntlet, particularly over whether a state can dictate how federal officers dress. In New York, Democratic Assemblymember Tony Simone introduced the Mandating End of Lawless Tactics (MELT) Act earlier this week. The MELT Act mirrors California's SB 627 by banning masks for state, local and federal officers, and it would require law enforcement officers to clearly display their names or badge numbers and ban most mask use during public duties. Violations would constitute misdemeanors. In Massachusetts, Democratic state Representative Jim Hawkins filed a similar bill on July 9, focused specifically on ICE personnel. He argues that ICE's use of face coverings in routine operations blurs the line between law enforcement and intimidation. In Pennsylvania, Democratic state Representatives Paul Friel and Rick Krajewski are preparing to introduce the Officer Visibility Act in early August. The bill would ban face coverings during public enforcement operations unless medically required or part of a covert investigation. What People Are Saying Tom Decker, a former director of ICE's New York field office, told Newsweek: "President Trump and his administration are doing exactly what he promised in his campaign, strengthening our borders and removing public safety threats from our communities, to include aliens in violation of our immigration laws." Representative Laura Friedman of California said in a statement shared with Newsweek: "I'll keep fighting to pass commonsense legislation, like the No Masks for ICE Act, to keep our communities safe." Scott Mechkowski, a retired ICE agent who worked for the agency between the mid-1990s and 2019, previously told Newsweek: "I think everyone knows the reasons for the masks. Every agent knows they would be doxxed [publicly identified] as would their families." John Sandweg, who served as acting director of ICE under former President Barack Obama from August 2013 to February 2014, previously told Newsweek: "If you're getting arrested by an officer or agent in a mask, especially if at that point they've not yet identified themselves as a federal officer, it creates a risk of bystanders thinking, rushing in to help, which could create the risk of violence or harm caused to the bystanders." Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, previously told Newsweek: "ICE officers are being doxed, physically assaulted, and attacked—in some cases, their families are even being threatened. Instead of spending their time further demonizing heroic ICE officers, Democrat politicians should dial back the rhetoric and tell their supporters to stop attacking law enforcement." Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told CBS: "It's for the safety of those individuals or the work that they're doing as far as protecting their identity so they can continue to do investigative work."
Chicago Tribune
18 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
How US adults feel about legal abortion 3 years after Roe was overturned, according to AP-NORC poll
Three years after the Supreme Court opened the door to state abortion bans, most U.S. adults say abortion should be legal — views that look similar to before the landmark ruling. The new findings from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll show that about two-thirds of U.S. adults think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. About half believe abortion should be available in their state if someone does not want to be pregnant for any reason. That level of support for abortion is down slightly from what an AP-NORC poll showed last year, when it seemed that support for legal abortion might be rising. The June 2022 Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and opened the door to state bans on abortion led to major policy changes. Most states have either moved to protect abortion access or restrict it. Twelve are now enforcing bans on abortion at every stage of pregnancy, and four more do so after about six weeks' gestation, which is often before women realize they're pregnant. In the aftermath of the ruling, AP-NORC polling suggested that support for legal abortion access might be increasing. Last year, an AP-NORC poll conducted in June found that 7 in 10 U.S. adults said it should be available in all or most cases, up slightly from 65% in May 2022, just before the decision that overruled the constitutional right to abortion, and 57% in June 2021. The new poll is closer to Americans' views before the Supreme Court ruled. Now, 64% of adults support legal abortion in most or all cases. More than half the adults in states with the most stringent bans are in that group. Similarly, about half now say abortion should be available in their state when someone doesn't want to continue their pregnancy for any reason — about the same as in June 2021 but down from about 6 in 10 who said that in 2024. Adults in the strictest states are just as likely as others to say abortion should be available in their state to women who want to end pregnancies for any reason. Democrats support abortion access far more than Republicans do. Support for legal abortion has dropped slightly among members of both parties since June 2024, but nearly 9 in 10 Democrats and roughly 4 in 10 Republicans say abortion should be legal in at least most instances. Seeing what's happened in the aftermath of the ruling has strengthened the abortion rights position of Wilaysha White, a 25-year-old Ohio mom. She has some regrets about the abortion she had when she was homeless. 'I don't think you should be able to get an abortion anytime,' said White, who calls herself a 'semi-Republican.' But she said that hearing about situations — including when a Georgia woman was arrested after a miscarriage and initially charged with concealing a death — is a bigger concern. 'Seeing women being sick and life or death, they're not being put first — that's just scary,' she said. 'I'd rather have it be legal across the board than have that.' Julie Reynolds' strong anti-abortion stance has been cemented for decades and hasn't shifted since Roe was overturned. 'It's a moral issue,' said the 66-year-old Arizona woman, who works part time as a bank teller. She said her view is shaped partly by having obtained an abortion herself when she was in her 20s. 'I would not want a woman to go through that,' she said. 'I live with that every day. I took a life.' The vast majority of U.S. adults — at least 8 in 10 — continue to say their state should allow legal abortion if a fetal abnormality would prevent the child from surviving outside the womb, if the patient's health is seriously endangered by the pregnancy, or if the person became pregnant as a result of rape or incest. Consistent with AP-NORC's June 2024 poll, about 7 in 10 U.S. adults 'strongly' or 'somewhat' favor protecting access to abortions for patients who are experiencing miscarriages or other pregnancy-related emergencies. In states that have banned or restricted abortion, such medical exceptions have been sharply in focus. This is a major concern for Nicole Jones, a 32-year-old Florida resident. Jones and her husband would like to have children soon. But she said she's worried about access to abortion if there's a fetal abnormality or a condition that would threaten her life in pregnancy since they live in a state that bans most abortions after the first six weeks of gestation. 'What if we needed something?' she asked. 'We'd have to travel out of state or risk my life because of this ban.' There's less consensus on whether states that allow abortion should protect access for women who live in places with bans. Just over half support protecting a patient's right to obtain an abortion in another state and shielding those who provide abortions from fines or prison time. In both cases, relatively few adults — about 2 in 10 — oppose the measures and about 1 in 4 are neutral. More Americans also favor than oppose legal protections for doctors who prescribe and mail abortion pills to patients in states with bans. About 4 in 10 'somewhat' or 'strongly' favor those protections, and roughly 3 in 10 oppose them. Such telehealth prescriptions are a key reason that the number of abortions nationally has risen even as travel for abortion has declined slightly.
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Benson raises over $3.5M in Michigan governor's bid
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's (D) gubernatorial campaign said it has raised over $3.5 million since its launch in January, according to figures first shared with The Hill on Thursday. Benson's campaign reported receiving over 27,000 individual contributions from the state's 83 counties during the period, with over 95 percent of them under $100. According to her campaign, Benson has over $2.4 million cash-on-hand. The fundraising haul is more than double the $1.5 million Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D), raised at this point in 2017 after announcing her first gubernatorial bid in January of that year. The haul also puts Benson ahead of her opponents in the state's Democratic gubernatorial primary. Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist's (D) campaign said he raised over $750,000, while former Genesee County, Mich. Sheriff Chris Swanson (D) said his campaign has raised over $1 million. Gilchrist jumped into the primary in March, while Swanson announced his bid in February. 'The numbers make it clear: Jocelyn Benson is the best person to take on any candidate, Republican or Independent, in November 2026,' Benson's campaign manager Nikki Goldschein said in a statement. 'This record-breaking haul not only showcases the strength of this campaign, it tells the story of the movement we are building.' A poll commissioned by the Detroit Regional Chamber and released in May showed Benson leading the Democratic primary field with 59.3 percent support from registered Democratic voters. Gilchrist and Swanson trailed at 6.9 percent and 8.1 percent respective. Nearly 26 percent of registered Democrats said they were undecided. 2024 Election Coverage Republicans are also facing a crowded gubernatorial primary in the state. Rep. John James (R-Mich.), state Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R ), former state House Speaker Tom Leonard (R ), and former state Attorney General Mike Cox (R ) are vying for the party's nomination. Cox, who jumped into the race in April, said his campaign has raised $2.4 million and has $1.9 million in the bank. Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan announced earlier this year that he is running for governor as an Independent. Michigan's governor's race is slated to be one of the most competitive races in 2026. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates the race as a 'toss-up.'
