A 'wake-up call': State lawmakers are fearful after Minnesota shootings expose lack of security
State lawmakers across the country say they are deeply concerned about the lack of security they receive in the wake of the targeted shooting of two Minnesota legislators, even as local officials attempt to ramp up some safety measures.
Outside of their state capitol complexes, state legislators have little to no security protection. No state offers proactive security to members of its legislature, though law enforcement will typically step in if there are credible threats.
And despite the renewed attention to the issue, lawmakers fear little will ultimately be done that can make a meaningful difference, given that in many states, such positions are effectively part-time jobs with small budgets.
Democratic Minnesota state Rep. Emma Greenman, who was a close colleague of this weekend's shooting victims, said the attack in her state would almost certainly have to serve as a 'wake-up call' around the lack of safety measures for state lawmakers, but that solutions remained sparse.
'I think a lot of us are going through this,' Greenman told NBC News in an interview. 'We are normal people in normal neighborhoods.'
'What does this mean now for part-time legislators?' she added. 'We are not members of Congress, who have a lot more resources. Frankly, there's just been a lot more thinking about how to protect members of Congress, or a governor, probably even a mayor.'
The safety concerns following the Minnesota shootings have also extended to members of Congress. Only a handful of federal lawmakers receive 24-hour protection from Capitol Police security details, though members may ask for extra protection.
Still, that level of protection goes far beyond what is available to state legislators. Like Greenman, Arizona state Rep. Stephanie Simacek, a Democrat, said she receives no security outside of her state Capitol complex.
'We are constantly out there, vulnerable. Whether I'm volunteering somewhere, knocking doors for someone, starting to run my own campaign, I'm out there, vulnerable,' Simacek said.
In Simacek's home state, then-Rep. Gabby Giffords, D-Ariz., was shot in the head while she was meeting with constituents in 2011.
Simacek, who makes $24,000 annually as a state representative, said there is no appetite to fund a security apparatus for legislators.
'I don't see any path for that,' she said. 'And that's so frightening, considering the circumstances right now.'
So Simacek is taking matters into her own hands. She said she's already started the process of installing cameras on her home property, which she is paying for herself, not with campaign funds.
Kansas state Sen. Tory Marie Blew, a Republican, also said she doesn't receive any security protection after she leaves the state Capitol building in Topeka.
She also said she has no hope for a legislative path that might fund added safety measures.
'It would be expensive, obviously, and we'd have to have a budget item for it,' she said. There are also logistical complications, especially in larger states, Blew noted.
'I live three hours away from the state capital. I don't think we'd even know where to start for all these lawmakers who live far [away],' she said.
Blew and her family have a Ring security device on their door at home, 'but we can't afford a massive security system,' she said.
Authorities said the Minnesota shooting suspect, Vance Boelter, visited the homes of four elected officials early Saturday, impersonating a police officer. Authorities allege he shot and killed state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband at their home, shortly after, they say, he seriously wounded state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife in a separate shooting at their home.
Like Greenman, Simacek and many others serving in state government, Blew has been on the receiving end of threatening emails and somewhat regularly gets 'yelled at' in public.
'It's part of the job,' she said. 'More and more, it's nerve-wracking.'
A number of state officials in recent days have attempted to take some additional steps to protect lawmakers.
Wisconsin officials announced increased security at their state Capitol on Monday as lawmakers look to continue their legislative session. New Hampshire officials did the same.
In Colorado, officials paused public access to the state's campaign finance database. Campaign finance filings in every state almost always require a candidate to list their home address, making it publicly searchable for anyone. Legislators in Minnesota, New Mexico and North Dakota took similar actions, The Associated Press reported, removing lawmakers' home addresses from state government websites and databases where they are listed or searchable.
Elsewhere, other actions to ensure lawmaker safety marked a clear interruption in what have typically been mundane legislative procedures.
For example, following the shooting, lawmakers in one state postponed the unveiling of at least one bill that was expected to receive a lot of attention politically while they evaluated whether proper security protocols were in place for its release, an operative in that state said.
In the meantime, lawmakers NBC News spoke with said they're not taking any chances with their home safety.
Simacek said she 'makes sure the door is always locked' and reminds her children 'that we don't open it when anybody knocks — we see who it is first.'
Greenman, who was forced to shelter in place throughout the weekend as law enforcement officials frantically searched for the Minnesota suspect, said she remains fearful.
'Even now that this guy's caught, there is going to be a worry about copycats,' she said. 'We all feel much more vulnerable now.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
War Powers Act Explained as Thomas Massie, Ro Khanna Push House Resolution
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 bipartisan group of House lawmakers, led by Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California introduced a War Powers Resolution Tuesday, just days before President Donald Trump authorized a military strike on three key nuclear facilities in Iran. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was enacted to limit the president's ability to commit U.S. armed forces to hostilities abroad without Congressional consent. The current legislative push invokes the act's provisions and highlights persistent congressional frustration over what many see as executive overreach in the deployment of military force. Khanna called for Congress to return to Washington, D.C., to vote on the measure, which he said Sunday had up to 50 co-sponsors across both parties. Why It Matters The House resolution spotlights a critical debate over constitutional war powers at a moment when U.S. involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts risks escalation. Lawmakers are seeking to reinforce Congress's authority to declare war amid rising tensions between Iran and Israel and amid U.S. military actions that, according to critics, may exceed presidential powers. The House initiative mirrors concurrent moves in the Senate, where Democratic Virginia Senator Tim Kaine and others have advanced parallel resolutions to restrict executive military action in Iran without legislative consent. This legislative surge reflects mounting concerns about the scope and legality of recent U.S. military activity abroad. United States Capitol Building, Washington DC, October 27, 2024. United States Capitol Building, Washington DC, October 27, 2024. Getty What To Know Massie introduced the War Powers Resolution on Tuesday, emphasizing that the U.S. Constitution vests the power to declare war with Congress, not the President. Massie invited participation from lawmakers across the aisle, underscoring bipartisan concern about unauthorized military actions, Newsweek previously reported. Khanna quickly co-sponsored the measure and publicly called for Congress to reconvene and vote. "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution," Khanna said in a press release. "Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," Khanna said. "Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." "Americans want diplomacy, not more costly wars. We need to deescalate and pursue a path of peace," Rep. Khanna concluded. The resolution has garnered support from 50 House members, including Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Pramila Jayapal. The list remains heavily Democrat, though more Republicans may break with the party in the coming days as the aftermath of Trump's military strikes continue to play out. What People Are Saying Rep. Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, said in an official statement "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution. Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk. Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation. Americans want diplomacy, not more costly wars. We need to deescalate and pursue a path of peace." President Donald Trump wrote in a Truth Social post, in part: "Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is. Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him. He is a negative force who almost always Votes "NO," no matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded "grandstander" who thinks it's good politics for Iran to have the highest level Nuclear weapon, while at the same time yelling "DEATH TO AMERICA" at every chance they get." What Happens Next The House War Powers Resolution is scheduled for a mandatory floor vote within 15 days under the chamber's rules. Parallel debates are ongoing in the Senate. As U.S. lawmakers weigh the resolution, the outcome may set new precedents for executive military authority and the balance of war powers between Congress and the White House.
Miami Herald
38 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Full List of Congress Members Backing War Powers Resolution Against Trump
Representatives Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, introduced a bipartisan House resolution last week in a bid to curb President Donald Trump's ability to escalate tensions with Iran. After the U.S. military carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday, Massie told CNN that he believed the resolution would have enough co-sponsors to "be able to force a vote unless [House Speaker Mike] Johnson pulls some shenanigans." Trump on Saturday evening announced what he described as a "very successful attack" against three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan The president's decision came after Israel and Iran have exchanged consistent strikes since June 13. Israel had urged the U.S. to target Iran's nuclear facilities, saying that Tehran was moving close to creating a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes—not for weapons. The strikes have sparked concerns from some Democrats and some Republicans about a wider war breaking out—with some lawmakers accusing the president of violating the U.S. Constitution with the strikes. Massie and Khanna introduced their War Powers Resolution in an effort to prohibit U.S. military involvement in Iran last Tuesday, amid the backdrop of escalating tensions with Iran. "The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States," Massie said in a press release announcing the resolution. "Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution." Khanna shared similar concerns in a statement emailed to Newsweek on Sunday after the strikes on Iran moved forward. "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution. Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk," the congressman said. "Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation." Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, introduced companion legislation to the House resolution the day before his House colleagues. "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict," the senator said in a press release. Representative Ro Khanna, a California DemocratRepresentative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky RepublicanRepresentative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York DemocratRepresentative Val Hoyle, an Oregon DemocratRepresentative Rashida Tlaib, a Michigan DemocratRepresentative Pramila Jayapal, a Washington DemocratRepresentative Donald Beyer, a Virginia DemocratRepresentative Lloyd Doggett, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Greg Casar, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Ayanna Pressley, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Delia Ramirez, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Summer Lee, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota DemocratRepresentative Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Nydia Velazquez, a New York DemocratRepresentative James McGovern, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Chellie Pingree, a Maine DemocratRepresentative Mark Pocan, a Wisconsin DemocratRepresentative Veronica Escobar, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Paul Tonko, a New York DemocratRepresentative Becca Balint, a Vermont DemocratRepresentative Bonnie Watson Coleman, a New Jersey DemocratRepresentative Henry "Hank" Johnson, a Georgia DemocratDelegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Washington, D.C., DemocratRepresentative Sara Jacobs, a California DemocratRepresentative Janice Schakowsky, an Illinois DemocratRepresentative Lateefah Simon, a California DemocratRepresentative Christopher Deluzio, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Gwen Moore, a Wisconsin DemocratRepresentative Mike Thompson, a California DemocratRepresentative Yassamin Ansari, an Arizona DemocratRepresentative Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi DemocratRepresentative Luis Correa, a California DemocratRepresentative Betty McCollum, a Minnesota DemocratRepresentative Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio DemocratRepresentative Mark DeSaulnier, a California DemocratRepresentative Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts DemocratRepresentative Andre Carson, an Indiana DemocratRepresentative Mary Gay Scanlon, a Pennsylvania DemocratRepresentative Joaquin Castro, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Maxwell Frost, a Florida DemocratRepresentative Al Green, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Debbie Dingell, a Michigan DemocratRepresentative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland DemocratRepresentative Melanie Stansbury, a New Mexico DemocratRepresentative Sylvia Garcia, a Texas DemocratRepresentative Teresa Leger Fernandez, a New Mexico DemocratRepresentative Diana DeGette, a Colorado DemocratSenator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat Jennifer Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities told Newsweek: "Iran has several options when it comes to retaliation, but will need to weigh them carefully. A stronger response may be useful for signaling Tehran's continuing resolve to internal and external audiences but it could also bring further U.S. military action and deeper U.S. involvement. Iran could target U.S. military bases and personnel in the Middle East." President Donald Trump on Truth Social on Saturday evening: "ANY RETALIATION BY IRAN AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILL BE MET WITH FORCE FAR GREATER THAN WHAT WAS WITNESSED TONIGHT. THANK YOU!" Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday: "The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations. The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior. In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people." Iran's foreign minister said after the attack that his country reserves "all options to defend its sovereignty." The U.S. military is preemptively preparing for any attack from Tehran in response. It's unclear whether the War Powers Resolution sponsored by Khanna and Massie, which aims to curb Trump's ability to take military action against Iran, will move forward in the House. However, with Republican control of both chambers of Congress, it is not widely expected to succeed. Related Articles Video of Bernie Sanders Reacting to Trump's Iran Strike Live Goes ViralJD Vance Issues Warning on Trump Admin's 'Biggest Red Line' for IranPutin Ally Says Countries Now Ready to Supply Iran With Nuclear Weapons'Operation Midnight Hammer': What We Know About the Iran Strikes 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Miami Herald
38 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
US attack against Iran hinged on misdirection and decoys
The U.S. strikes that targeted Iran's nuclear sites involved a decoy mission aimed at drawing attention from flight trackers while the largest-ever deployment of B-2 stealth bombers delivered 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs for the first time in combat. The operation - dubbed "Midnight Hammer" - was detailed by top Pentagon officials on Sunday morning. They described an extensive operation that included 125 aircraft overall, strikes by Tomahawk missiles launched from a U.S. submarine, and the use of 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs. The heart of the 37-hour operation was a feint in which a group of B-2 bombers flew west across the Pacific Ocean as decoys to maintain tactical surprise, according to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. News reports on Saturday morning that picked up on flight-tracker data suggested those planes were being deployed as a way to strong-arm Iran into fresh talks on its nuclear program. While those planes got all the attention, another group of B-2s flew east carrying the bunker-busters. The officials said dozens of air-refueling tankers, a guided missile submarine, and fourth- and fifth-generation fighters were involved in the attack, which struck nuclear strikes at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz. The briefing helped explain other data points that emerged in recent days, including a massive move by midair refueling tankers last week that was widely reported at the time. The White House had promised on Thursday that President Donald Trump would make a decision on a strike "within two weeks," suggesting there might be more time. In the end, the Saturday night operation was deemed a success by the Pentagon. No U.S. servicemembers were lost, and Iran didn't fire at any of the U.S. military assets, according to the officials. Hegseth said members of Congress were only notified after the planes were out of danger, contradicting earlier reports that Trump had informed Republican congressional leadership beforehand. The flights to deliver the targets amounted to the second-longest flights in the B-2's operational history, according to Hegseth and Air Force General Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The longest was a 40-hour round trip in October 2001 in the initial phase of the Afghanistan war. "This is a plan that took months and weeks of positioning and preparation, so that we could be ready when the president of the United States called," Hegseth said. "It took a great deal of precision. It involved misdirection and the highest of operational security." The officials said 75 precision-guided weapons were used and the operation involved some 125 aircraft. Caine said the battle damage would take time to assess but "all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction." Prior to the B-2 strikes on Fordow, a submarine with the Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group in the Arabian Sea fired 24 Tomahawk cruise missiles, according to Caine and a graphic released by the Pentagon. Addressing the nation late Saturday, Trump said Iran's "key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." "It would not be a surprise to me if, after an assessment period, we went back in and re-struck some of these targets to make sure that we achieved the effect," said Joseph Votel, a former commander of the U.S. Central Command and now a fellow at the Middle East Institute. "That actually is a normal part of our military targeting process, is to strike, assess, and then if necessary, strike again to achieve the results that we're looking for." Hegseth said the mission was focused on destroying Iran's nuclear program and not regime change in Tehran. "The mission was not, has not, been about regime change," he said. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio made clear that Iran needs to clearly abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions. "At the end of the day, if Iran is committed to becoming a nuclear weapons power, I do think it puts the regime at risk," Rubio said Sunday on Fox News. "I really do. I think it would be the end of the regime if they tried to do that." While the damage assessments are still coming in, U.S. Vice President JD Vance said he's confident the U.S. strikes on Iranian sites "have substantially delayed their development of a nuclear weapon - and that was the goal of this attack." Iran's nuclear program has been pushed back "by a very long time," he said in an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press." "I think that it's going to be many, many years before the Iranians are able to develop a nuclear weapon." _____ (With assistance from Eric Martin, María Paula Mijares Torres and Natalia Drozdiak.) _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
