Pingree, Chellie RSS Articles

King, Pingree Lead Push to Protect Federal Workforce at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard

Wed, 05 Aug 2026 04:00:00 GMT

U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), and U.S Representative Chellie Pingree (D-ME-01), are urging the administration to withdraw a proposed rule that would weaken longstanding civil service protections for federal employees, including the nearly 8,000 civilian workers at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY). In a letter to Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Acting Director Charles Ezell and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) Chairman Cathy Harris, the lawmakers warned that the proposal would make it more difficult to recruit and retain the skilled civilian workforce responsible for maintaining the Navy's submarine fleet, ultimately threatening national security.

"We write in strong opposition to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB)'s proposed rule 'Promoting Employee Accountability,’” the lawmakers began. “This proposed rule would weaken longstanding civil service protections that promote merit-based employment, due process and the recruitment and retention of skilled workers. Moreover, as Members of Congress who represent nearly eight thousand civilian workers at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, we are concerned about the proposed rule's impact on workers essential to our national security."

"By stripping away the procedures that keep discipline fair for civilian employees doing the work of naval readiness... the proposed rule introduces costly unpredictability in the workforce and needlessly undermines readiness. We are concerned this will increase attrition in the critical and experienced workforce that keeps our submarine fleet ready... We, therefore, ask you to withdraw OPM and MSPB's proposed rule," the lawmakers concluded.

Joining King and Pingree on the letter are U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH), and U.S. Representatives Maggie Goodlander (D-NH-02) and Chris Pappas (D-NH-01).

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

+++

Director Kupor and Acting Chairman Kerner,

We write in strong opposition to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB)’s proposed rule “Promoting Employee Accountability,” Docket OPM-2025-0012 (RIN 3206-AO91). This proposed rule would weaken longstanding civil service protections that promote merit-based employment, due process and the recruitmentand retention of skilled workers. Moreover, as Members of Congress who represent nearly eight thousand civilian workers at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, we are concerned about the proposed rule’s impact on workers essential to our national security.

OPM and MSPB’s joint notice of proposed rulemaking issued on July 2, 2026, unnecessarily weakens civil service protections and undermines workers’ rights to challenge removal. Current law provides agencies with the authority to address misconduct and poor performance while ensuring personnel decisions are appropriate, fair and consistent. This rulewould impose a short 30-day limit for performance improvement periods and make termination the default penalty. Theshortened window, coupled with termination as the default, could result in the loss of skilled workers who could have improved their performance if given sufficient time. Furthermore, the proposed rule weakens workers’ ability to challenge disciplinary measures by barring the use of union time to represent workers in removal proceedings.

Since the MSPB’s decision in Douglas v. Veterans Administration in 1981, agencies must consider 12 factors when examining the reasonableness of an agency’s proposed penalty for adverse action taken under 5 U.S.C. 7513. These include considering mitigating circumstances, rehabilitation potential and length of service. For nearly 50 years across Republican and Democratic administrations, these consistent standards have provided fairness to federal workers facing accusations of misconduct and created a framework for determining approportionate responses. OPM’s and MSPB’s proposal would instead require agencies to rely on an arbitrary, case-by-case examination of whether disciplinary action is reasonable given the “totality of circumstances” and explicitly states that “noparticular factors must be considered in every case.” This could allow agencies to ignore important mitigating factors and more easily remove skilled workers with strong rehabilitation potential from critical industries.

As you are no doubt aware, the men and women who work at our public shipyards are critical members of our defenseindustrial base, without whom the ability to repair, retrofit and refuel our country’s submarines would be in jeopardy. In our states, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY) has nearly eight thousand civilian employees, creating more than $1.5 billion in annual economic impact in surrounding communities. As our military’s “pacing threat,” the People’s Republic of China, is rapidly expanding its nuclear weapons programs, the role that our own submarines play in the survivability of our nuclear triad cannot be overstated. In fact, PNSY currently needs to hire over 700 workers annually to meet the Navy’s demand – which is an increase from 550 over the past two years. Further, policies that reduce workplace protections risk making federal service less attractive to qualified candidates. Due to civilian hiring quotas imposed by the Office of Personnel Management, PNSY has struggled to onboard workers and cannot risk additional delays or departures. If the Administration intends to retain this political litmus test at our public shipyards, the costs of unnecessarily losing more skilled workers through this proposed rule far outweigh any potential benefit.

By stripping away the procedures that keep discipline fair for civilian employees doing the work of naval readiness and refusing toconsider important factors, the proposed rule introduces costly unpredictability in the workforce and needlessly undermines readiness. We are concerned this will increase attrition in the critical and experienced workforce that keeps our submarine fleet ready, ultimately harming the shipyard’s ability to meet the Navy’s needs and threatening our national security.

We, therefore, ask you to withdraw OPM and MSPB’s proposed rule, “Promoting Employee Accountability,” and consider alternatives that preserve federal workers’ longstanding civil service protections.

Sincerely,

###

Reps. Pingree, Valadao and Sens. Ernst, Padilla Recognize American Producers During National Farmers Market Week

Wed, 05 Aug 2026 04:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representatives Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and David Valadao (R-Calif.), along with Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), reintroduced a bipartisan resolution designating August 2–8, 2026, as National Farmers Market Week. This resolution honors the critical role farmers markets play in bridging the gap between urban and rural communities, helping people better understand the realities of farming and ranching.

“Farmers markets have been a cherished tradition in communities across America for generations. A quarter of Maine farms sell directly to consumers, with more than 100 farmers markets currently operating in our state,” said Congresswoman Pingree, a longtime organic farmer and co-chair of both the Organic Caucus and the Food Recovery Caucus. “By connecting local growers with their communities, farmers markets not only help put healthy food on the table, but also strengthen local economies and help preserve Maine’s agricultural traditions for future generations. This bipartisan, bicameral resolution reminds us that, in red states and blue states alike, farmers markets can be a force for good—and an important part of building a stronger, more resilient food system for all Americans.”

“The Central Valley grows a quarter of our nation’s food on less than one percent of America’s farmland, yet too many people living in urban areas don’t realize what it takes to get food from field to table,” said Congressman Valadao. “Farmers markets provide a valuable opportunity to connect people with the hardworking producers who feed our nation, and they highlight the important role agriculture plays in our communities. I’m proud to join my colleagues in recognizing National Farmers Market Week and honoring the contributions of our CA-22 producers working to support food access, bolster local economies, promote healthy living, and foster sustainable farming.”

“California is home to more than 800 farmers markets that nourish our families, bolster the local economy, and cultivate thoughtful relationships between growers and consumers,” said Senator Padilla. “We cherish these shared spaces which are a vibrant, dependable source of nutrition for our state. I’m proud to lead this Senate resolution celebrating National Farmer’s Market Week to support our local farmers who feed our families and strengthen our communities.”

“Agriculture is the heart of Iowa, and farmers markets make it easier for Iowans to buy fresh, locally grown food in communities across our state,” said Senator Ernst. “I’m proud to lead a bipartisan resolution designating Aug. 2-8 as National Farmers Market Week to recognize the tireless work of our farmers, ranchers, and producers who put nutritious food on Americans’ tables every day.”

Read the resolution here.

###

Pingree Urges MaineHealth to Preserve Labor and Delivery Services at Lincoln Hospital in Damariscotta

Mon, 03 Aug 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) is urging MaineHealth to preserve labor and delivery services at Lincoln Hospital in Damariscotta, warning that closing the unit would have far-reaching consequences for families, health care workers, and communities throughout the Midcoast.

In a letter to MaineHealth President and CEO Dr. Andy Mueller and MaineHealth Chair of the Board of Trustees Marie McCarthy, Pingree acknowledged the challenges facing rural hospitals, while encouraging them to do everything in their power to keep the unit open.

"Lincoln Hospital has a long history of providing safe and quality care to maternity patients," Pingree wrote. "I sincerely appreciate that there are structural challenges to the continued delivery of that care, but the consequences of a closure—on patients, hospital staff, and the surrounding towns—could be devastating. I urge you to explore every possible avenue to preserve access to labor and delivery services in Damariscotta."

She also raised broader concerns about the steady decline of maternity care across Maine, noting that the state has lost 10 birthing units over the past decade, while warning that continued closures could jeopardize the ability of families to live and raise children in rural Maine.

Maine has lost 10 of its 23 hospital-based labor and delivery units over the past decade. Nationally, a 2024 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 52.4% of rural hospitals no longer offered obstetric care in 2022, contributing to growing maternity care deserts across the country.

In the U.S., maternal mortality remains far higher than in most other high-income countries, with persistent racial and geographic disparities in outcomes.

Pingree acknowledged that addressing the crisis will require stronger federal support for rural health care—including protecting Medicaid, expanding the rural health care workforce, and improving reimbursement rates. She pledged to continue advocating for those priorities in Congress, while working with Maine providers to preserve access to maternity care.

On Saturday, dozens of community members, health care providers, patients, and local leaders gathered outside the MaineHealth headquarters in Portland to raise awareness about the impacts of the closure.

The MaineHealth Board of Trustees is expected to vote on the proposal this week.

The full text of Pingree's letter is available here and copied below.

+++

Dear Dr. Mueller and Ms. McCarthy,

I understand that MaineHealth is currently deliberating over the future of labor and delivery services at MaineHealth Lincoln Hospital. As that process continues, I’m writing to echo the deep concerns I’ve heard from constituents about the potential impact that closing the unit would have on families and communities across the Midcoast.

Lincoln Hospital has a long history of providing safe and quality care to maternity patients, guiding new parents through all kinds of childbirth experiences. I sincerely appreciate that there are structural challenges to the continued delivery of that care, but the consequences of a closure – on patients, hospital staff, and the surrounding towns – could be devastating. I urge you to explore every possible avenue to preserve access to labor and delivery services in Damariscotta.

Beyond the specific circumstances at Lincoln Hospital, I fear the continued erosion of maternity care access statewide. I delivered all three of my children at hospitals in the Midcoast that no longer provide labor and delivery care. In total, Maine has lost 10 birthing units in just the past decade. We must decide to draw a line somewhere, or risk sending the message that you cannot raise a family in Maine outside of our biggest cities.

Rural maternity care that is truly sustainable will require substantial policy change – from restoring the historic cuts to Medicaid in President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, to training more providers across rural settings, to boosting reimbursement rates. I’m committed to advocating for that change on the federal level, and I welcome your continued partnership in that fight.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Chellie Pingree

Member of Congress

###

Pingree Backs Scarborough Town Council's Call for Federal Review of ICE Facility

Wed, 29 Jul 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Ahead of the Scarborough Town Council's special meeting Wednesday evening, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) sent the Council a letter supporting their proclamation calling for a federal review of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility at 40 Manson Libby Road. In the letter, Pingree urged the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to seriously reconsider whether the facility should continue operating in Scarborough if its presence is undermining public trust and making residents feel less safe.

“The facility at 40 Manson Libby Road has become a symbol of fear, uncertainty, and intimidation for many immigrant families and their neighbors,” Pingree said. “That should concern every one of us.”

In her letter, Pingree emphasized that the Town of Scarborough has every right to question whether continuing to host the ICE facility serves the interests of the community. She called on DHS and ICE to conduct a serious review of the facility's continued operation and to give meaningful weight to the concerns raised by local residents and elected officials.

“When a federal facility reaches the point where its very presence undermines the public confidence and leaves residents feeling less safe, the federal government has a responsibility to reconsider if that facility belongs there at all,” she said.

Pingree also reiterated that her office has been conducting aggressive oversight of ICE's activities in Maine following the fatal shooting of her constituent, Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, in Biddeford. She has demanded answers from DHS, called for a transparent investigation, pursued legislative and appropriations oversight, and remains committed to holding the agency accountable to the communities it serves.

“Federal agencies must carry out their responsibilities in a manner that respects human dignity, civil rights, due process, and the communities in which they operate. When they fail to do so, local communities have not only the right but the responsibility to speak out,” Pingree said.

The full letter is available here and copied below.

Pingree has conducted official oversight visits of ICE facilities in Scarborough, Burlington, Mass., and Dilley, Texas.

Earlier this month, Pingree sent a letter to DHS Secretary Mullin demanding answers about the fatal shooting of her constituent, Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, by ICE officers in Biddeford, Maine, on July 13.

Pingree also joined the other members of Maine’s Congressional Delegation in sending a letter to Secretary Mullin calling for a comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation. In addition, Pingree and Reps. Jayapal (D-Wash.), Garcia (D-Texas), Raskin (D-Md.), and Thompson (D-Miss.) led nearly 200 Members in calling for independent investigations into Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Johan Sebastian Guerrero’s deaths and demanded that ICE halt removal proceedings against the witnesses.

+++

Dear Council Members,

I write to express my support for your proclamation regarding the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility at 40 Manson Libby Road. I commend the Town Council for giving voice to the significant and growing concerns in Scarborough and across Maine about ICE’s presence in our communities.

The tragic death of Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero has profoundly shaken our state. While investigations into the shooting continue, many Mainers are once again confronting a larger and deeply troubling reality: ICE is operating in our communities with no transparency, accountability, or regard for the people who live here. The facility at 40 Manson Libby Road has become a symbol of fear, uncertainty, and intimidation for many immigrant families and their neighbors. That should concern every one of us.

Residents should not have to wonder whether heavily armed enforcement actions will occur in their neighborhoods, whether federal officers are operating under appropriate oversight, or whether a facility in their town is contributing to tactics that erode trust between neighbors and government. This affects whether people feel safe attending school, seeking medical care, reporting crimes, practicing their faith, or simply going about their lives.

The Town of Scarborough has every right to ask whether continuing to host this facility serves the interests of the community. In my view, that question deserves serious consideration from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). When a federal facility reaches the point where its very presence undermines the public confidence and leaves residents feeling less safe, the federal government has a responsibility to reconsider if that facility belongs there at all. I believe ICE and DHS should undertake a serious review of the continued operation of this facility and proceed in accordance with the community’s wishes.

Please know that I am exploring every available avenue to address enforcement operations and the continued presence of ICE in Scarborough. My office has been conducting aggressive oversight of ICE’s activities in Maine and demanding answers from DHS regarding the preventable circumstances that led to Mr. Guerrero’s death. I have demanded a transparent and collaborative investigation, pressed the agency to justify its actions, sought greater accountability, and continue to pursue legislative, appropriations, and administration options to challenge policies that undermine public trust. I remain committed to using every tool available to me as a Member of Congress to ensure that federal agencies are accountable to the communities they serve.

Your proclamation appropriately recognizes that the immigration process and community trust are not mutually exclusive. Federal agencies must carry out their responsibilities in a manner that respects human dignity, civil rights, due process, and the communities in which they operate. When they fail to do so, local communities have not only the right but the responsibility to speak out.

Thank you for your leadership and your willingness to stand with the people of Scarborough during these difficult times. I am proud to stand with you, and I will continue working alongside you to pursue every available opportunity to reevaluate the federal government’s continued operation of this facility.

Sincerely,

###

Pingree Demands Answers from DHS After Fatal ICE Shooting in Biddeford

Fri, 17 Jul 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) today sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin demanding answers about the fatal shooting of her constituent, Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in Biddeford, Maine, on July 13.

“[O]nce again, a family and community is grieving because a person is dead after an encounter with your officers,” Pingree said. “My constituents are being asked to trust that deadly force was justifiable and are left to confront the question of whether federal immigration officers are operating under policies that prioritize aggressive efforts to meet quotas over the preservation of human life.”

In light of recent reporting about the agent’s disturbing background, and DHS’s reported hiring push, Pingree asks Mullin how his agency is ensuring quality and experience of new hires and what information would be disqualifying in an agent.

ICE’s agents who spoke on the record with The Intercept said there were, in fact, agents equipped with body cameras on the scene, but that they weren’t active or recording video–information which contradicts the Secretary’s own statements to Pingree in their phone call on Wednesday. Her letter seeks clarity on this discrepancy and asks what other recordings exist, and when footage will be released publicly.

Pingree also asks DHS to explain whether the Biddeford operation was targeted and whether Durán Guerrero was its intended target; to detail the planning and risk assessment conducted beforehand; identify any witnesses; and more.

Her full list of questions is available in the letter here and copied below.

“The people of Maine deserve better than vague assurances after another fatal encounter involving immigration officers,” Pingree said. “We are a nation of immigrants. They are our family, friends, and our neighbors. A community is grieving and angry—as is our state. If that is not enough for the Department, immigrants are vital to Maine’s workforce; without them, our economy would crumble.”

Pingree also joined the other members of Maine’s Congressional Delegation in sending a letter to Secretary Mullin on Tuesday calling for a comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation. In addition, Pingree and Reps. Jayapal (D-Wash.), Garcia (D-Texas), Raskin (D-Md.), and Thompson (D-Miss.) led nearly 200 Members in calling for independent investigations into Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Johan Sebastian Guerrero’s deaths and demanded that ICE halt removal proceedings against the witnesses.

+++

Dear Secretary Mullin,

I write with profound outrage regarding the fatal shooting of my constituent, Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in Biddeford, Maine, on July 13, 2026. I appreciate you making yourself available for a call; however, the reality is that once again, a family and community is grieving because a person is dead after an encounter with your officers. My constituents are being asked to trust that deadly force was justifiable and are left to confront the question of whether federal immigration officers are operating under policies that prioritize aggressive efforts to meet quotas over the preservation of human life. As such, I am following up on several matters I brought up with you.

First, I question the justification your agents have relied on to arrest and detain my constituents. You told me your agents focus their enforcement efforts on individuals with final orders of removal, but, as my office has witnessed firsthand, and heard repeatedly from local lawyers and organizations, ICE is detaining Mainers who are lawfully pursuing asylum or other status through the proper channels. These are not people with final orders of removal at all; they are actively engaged in the legal process your agency claims to respect.

Beyond that, we also know a final removal order does not necessarily indicate the end of the legal process; due process allows for motions to reopen, petitions to review, and applications for humanitarian relief. Arresting and detaining individuals as though they have no legal recourse and their due process is complete ignores the complexity of immigration law, is a waste of taxpayer dollars, and risks needlessly engaging aggressive enforcement tactics. This intentional mischaracterization of the process ignores that immigration enforcement is largely a civil administrative process, not a criminal one. Yet we have seen a clear pattern of that distinction being ignored, with preventable deaths chalked up to “necessary” enforcement.

No family should have to wonder whether their loved one would still be alive had federal officers exercised better judgement, had received better training, or followed different procedures. Every use of deadly force demands rigorous oversight, complete transparency, and total accountability. Anything less is unacceptable.

For months, even in the past week, Americans have witnessed increasingly aggressive ICE operations conducted in their communities. Despite repeated warnings and calls for greater transparency after the deaths of Renee Good, Alex Pretti, and Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, another person has been killed during an immigration enforcement operation. Mainers demand and deserve accountability.

Congress has the responsibility and authority to determine whether ICE has created an enforcement culture that unnecessarily escalates encounters and places civilians at greater risk. Therefore, I need answers to the following questions:

Was the July 13th operation in Biddeford a targeted enforcement operation?
What planning and operational risk assessment occurred before the operation?

You told me officers involved in the operation were not equipped with or actively wearing body cameras. Recent reporting indicates there were officers at the scene equipped with devices capable of audio and visual recording..
- If that’s the case, what entities will have access to the footage, and when will it be made available to the public?
- Why were visual recording capabilities not utilized?
- Given that Congress has provided specific appropriations to acquire body cameras, what is the justification for the delay in deployment?
- Are there any additional recordings captured by DHS-owned devices, including dashboard cameras or cell phone recordings?

Were all officers conducting the operation local to the community or were some brought in from outside of Maine?
- If the officers were from out of state, why was it necessary for them to carry out this operation?
- Will the officers themselves be subject to an investigation?

What is the status of the officers involved in the incident?
- How long had the officer(s) been conducting enforcement activity and what training had they received?
- If they are on leave, how long is that leave period?
There have been credible and alarming reports about the officer who allegedly discharged the weapon that resulted in Mr. Guerrero’s death, including a history of “terrifying and violent” behavior. Further, DHS reported that ICE had hired 12,000 new officers and agents in less than a year. How do you ensure the quality and experience of these new hires?
- What information is reported from the background checks you require before hiring?
- What information would disqualify an applicant from being hired?
- What is the average time between an individual submitting an application and a final job offer being extended?

What training does DHS currently require for officers engaging with occupied or moving vehicles?
- How frequently is this training conducted?
- Are officers instructed to de-escalate rather than result in deadly force?
  - How did the officers use that training to de-escalate this situation to avoid the use of deadly force?
- Has this training been modified following the death of Renee Good or any other fatal officer-involved shooting?

Has DHS initiated an administrative review of the operation?
- If not, when will such a review begin?
- What office is/will be conducting the review?

The people of Maine deserve better than vague assurances after another fatal encounter involving immigration officers. We are a nation of immigrants. They are our family, friends, and our neighbors. A community is grieving and angry - as is our state. If that is not enough for the Department, immigrants are vital to Maine’s workforce; without them, our economy would crumble. To this end, I expect full cooperation between your department and Maine State Police and Biddeford Police Department in any independent investigation that they pursue, including full access to evidence and witnesses.

This needless death raises the question of whether DHS has learned anything from prior tragedies, or whether DHS has the decency to care. If DHS continues to ignore systematic failures and dismiss each fatal shooting as an isolated event, then the loss of trust in this institution is well and truly deserved, and we need to consider how to fundamentally change our approach to immigration enforcement.

I expect a complete written response to these questions no later than July 24, 2026. Given the gravity of this incident, I also request that DHS promptly brief my office on the status of its internal review and any immediate policy changes under consideration.

###

Maine Delegation Calls for Full, Expedited Investigation into ICE Fatal Shooting in Maine

Tue, 14 Jul 2026 04:00:00 GMT

U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Angus King (I-ME) and Representatives Chellie Pingree (D-ME) and Jared Golden (D-ME) are calling for a comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation into the fatal shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel in Biddeford. In a letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari, the delegation requested an independent review of the incident to ensure a full accounting of the facts and help maintain public confidence in the investigative process.

“We write to formally request that your office conduct a comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation into the fatal shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel that occurred [yesterday/earlier this week] in Biddeford, Maine,” the lawmakers began. “Along with our constituents, we are deeply saddened by this loss of life. The facts surrounding this tragedy remain a matter of significant local concern and necessitate thorough, objective accounting.”

“Given the gravity of the situation and the understandable anxiety within the Biddeford community, we urge you to prioritize this investigation,” they continued. “Timely and factual answers will be critical to providing closure for the grieving community and ensuring that federal law enforcement operations are conducted safely, lawfully, and in a manner that respects public safety.”

The full text of the letter can be found here and below.

+++

Dear Inspector General Cuffari:

We write to formally request that your office conduct a comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation into the fatal shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel that occurred yesterday in Biddeford, Maine.

Along with our constituents, we are deeply saddened by this loss of life. The facts surrounding this tragedy remain a matter of significant local concern and necessitate thorough, objective accounting.

To ensure public trust, transparency, and accountability, we request that your office include the following key areas in your examination:

The Sequence of Events: A detailed timeline of the encounter, including the specific actions taken by both the ICE agents and the individual involved prior to the discharge of a firearm.
Operational Protocols: An evaluation of whether the tactics, use, and degree of force utilized adhered strictly to current DHS and ICE use-of-force policies.
Recording and Documentation: Clarification on the availability of audio, dashcam, or body-worn camera footage of the incident, and the status of any evidence preservation.

Furthermore, we ask that you detail the extent to which DHS will collaborate with state or local agencies in carrying out the investigation.

Given the gravity of the situation and the understandable anxiety within the Biddeford community, we urge you to prioritize this investigation. Timely and factual answers will be critical to providing closure for the grieving community and ensuring that federal law enforcement operations are conducted safely, lawfully, and in a manner that respects public safety.

We look forward to your response and stand ready to work with your office to facilitate any necessary inquiries.

Sincerely,

cc: Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; David Venturella, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

###

Pingree, Massie Introduce ‘People Over Poison Act’ to Protect Americans’ Right to Hold Big Chemical Companies Accountable

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) introduced the People Over Poison Act, legislation to protect Americans’ right to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable under state law when they fail to warn consumers about the risks of their products. The bipartisan bill comes days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bayer—formerly Monsanto—in Monsanto v. Durnell, a case centered around Roundup, the company’s widely used glyphosate-based herbicide. In its decision, the Court held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims when those claims involve a warning not mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Pingree and Massie’s People Over Poison Act would reverse the Monsanto v. Durnell ruling by explicitly stating that FIFRA does not block or limit state tort claims related to pesticide labeling or packaging—preserving the right of people harmed by pesticides to seek accountability in court.

"The Supreme Court just handed Big Chemical the legal immunity its lobbyists and millions of dollars couldn't buy in Congress," said Pingree. "Federal pesticide law was never supposed to be a liability waiver for corporations, and not a permission slip to hide behind insufficient labels while people get sick. For all the Trump Administration’s talk about ‘Making America Healthy Again,’ it keeps siding with chemical companies in court, dragging its feet on long-overdue safety reviews, and even boosting glyphosate production. Enough with the empty slogans and broken promises. If this Administration won’t put people’s health over corporate profits, Congress must. The right to seek justice in court is one of our most foundational freedoms, ensuring that every American has a fair chance to be heard and hold powerful interests accountable.”

“The Supreme Court just ruled that Monsanto/Bayer can’t be sued for omitting a warning even if their herbicides do cause cancer,” said Massie. “Even if the legal reasoning of the court is sound in this case, it’s a blatant travesty of justice. Congress and the President can fix this and we absolutely should.”

State tort law has served as a critical backstop when federal regulators fail to fully protect the public from dangerous products. The Supreme Court’s ruling threatens to upend that balance by removing the ability to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable through state failure-to-warn claims.

The implications extend far beyond Roundup and glyphosate. The ruling could affect future claims involving other pesticides and chemical products, including cases where farmers, farmworkers, landscapers, groundskeepers, and consumers allege they were not adequately warned about serious health risks.

Pingree, a longtime farmer and member of the House Agriculture Committee, successfully removed a liability shield for Big Chemical from the FY2026 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill. After similar language appeared in the draft Farm Bill, Pingree led an amendment during Committee markup to strip the language. She and Rep. Massie introduced the same amendment when the Farm Bill came before the full House of Representatives. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s (R-Fla.) identical amendment passed with strong bipartisan support. Earlier this month, Luna and Pingree introduced the Paraquat Prevention Act, legislation that would ban the herbicide paraquat.

In February, President Trump signed an Executive Order to increase domestic production of glyphosate—a widely used weedkiller that has been linked to multiple health issues, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In response, Pingree and Massie introduced the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act, which would undo Trump’s Executive Order.

###

Pingree: SCOTUS Victory for Big Chemical Exposes Trump’s MAHA Hypocrisy

Thu, 25 Jun 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), a leading advocate in Congress in the fight to remove toxic chemicals from our food and environment and protect public health over corporate profits, released the following statement on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 7-2 ruling in favor of Monsanto:

The Supreme Court’s decision in Monsanto v. Durnell is a devastating setback for Americans who deserve the right to hold powerful companies accountable for serious health harms.

While we feared the Court’s decision might go this way—thanks in large part to the Trump Administration’s support—I held out hope that the growing, bipartisan opposition to this liability shield would make clear just how much is at stake. From the People vs. Poison rally outside the Supreme Court to our recent win keeping a pesticide manufacturer liability shield out of the Farm Bill, advocates, lawmakers, farmers, and families have been sending a clear message: No chemical company should be able to write the rules, dodge accountability, and leave people and communities to pay the price.

Let’s be clear: The Court did not decide whether Roundup causes cancer. Instead, it ruled that, because EPA approved Roundup’s label without a cancer warning, federal pesticide law blocks this kind of state-law failure-to-warn claim. People who believe they were harmed by Roundup now face an even steeper path to justice, while Bayer gets exactly what it has been fighting for—a powerful new shield from accountability.

This decision exposes the Trump Administration’s so-called “Make America Healthy Again” agenda for what it is: nothing more than a hollow political slogan.

You cannot claim to care about Americans’ health while sending your Justice Department to the Supreme Court to side with Big Chemical. When forced to choose between public health and corporate power, Trump chose the latter.

Giant chemical companies have been trying to rig the system in their favor for years. Republicans in Congress attempted to slip language into a key spending bill that would have shielded pesticide manufacturers from accountability. I successfully led the effort to strip it from the final bill that passed both the House and Senate. Republicans tried and failed again in the Farm Bill. Now, after President Trump put his finger on the scales, Bayer has won in court what it could not get through Congress.

If the Supreme Court is going to put even more weight on EPA’s pesticide review and labeling process, then Congress and the President have a responsibility to fix the dangerous gap this decision exposes. EPA must be transparent, science-based, independent, and accountable to the public—not the industries it is supposed to regulate.

The people of Maine, and all Americans, deserve a justice system and regulatory structure that puts human health before corporate profits. No chemical company should be powerful enough to write the rules, dodge accountability, and leave families to pay the price.

Pingree is a longtime farmer and member of the House Agriculture Committee. She and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) recently celebrated a win for the “Make America Healthy Again” movement after they successfully stripped dangerous, industry-written language from the Farm Bill that would pre-empt state rights to regulate pesticide usage or labeling and provide a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers. Last week, Luna and Pingree introduced the Paraquat Prevention Act, legislation that would cancel all registered uses of the pesticide paraquat under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and permanently prohibit its reregistration.

Earlier this year, President Trump signed an Executive Order to increase domestic production of glyphosate—a widely used weedkiller that has been linked to multiple health issues, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Pingree and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) introduced the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act, which would undo Trump’s Executive Order.

###

Pingree Blasts Republicans, Trump for Being “All Talk” on Supporting US Shipbuilding

Wed, 24 Jun 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today during the House Appropriations full committee markup of the FY2027 Defense funding bill, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) spoke out against Republicans’ outrageous $1 trillion bill that, despite it’s enormous price tag, fails to support American shipbuilding. In her opening remarks, Pingree contrasted the Trump Administrations’ claims to support American manufacturing and long-touted “America First” mantra, while at the same time seeding the prospect of buying ships overseas. She noted that as maritime competition is intensifying, especially in the Indo-Pacific, Republicans’ funding bill provides funding for only one DDG-51 destroyer, which are built at Bath Iron Works in Pingree’s district.

“These ships are the backbone of our Navy, and they are essential to preserving our military superiority. And only one of those ships is provided for in this bill,” Pingree said. “I often hear bipartisan agreement about how we need a larger, more capable fleet. And last year, the president himself said he wanted to ‘resurrect the American shipbuilding industry.’ But without investment or a strategy, that is just talk. And it's especially just talk in a bill that gets over $1 trillion. If we're serious about naval readiness, we cannot continue under investing in our ships and in our shipyards and the workforce that is needed to sustain that fleet.”

+++

I'm going to trust my colleagues because I know there have been a lot of opening remarks, and they'll continue to be to make sure that everybody understands the problems and challenges of this bill. But I do want to emphasize that it is $1 trillion. That's $1 trillion for the Pentagon.

At the same time, we're cutting and we've all been through a lot of subcommittee hearings here or markups. We're cutting over $13 billion for domestic programs that would actually support working families while we're spending this much on defense. And we all know what we've been cutting childhood cancer research farmers through the USDA, education, housing, childcare it's all on the chopping block. And every time we fight back, someone says, but there isn't enough money, but there's always enough money for this bill.

This bill also abandons our allies in Ukraine, continues the unchecked spending on unauthorized operations in the Middle East. It's got a lot of big challenges in it.

But I want to use my time just to focus on the impact on our Navy and on shipbuilding and that industry. You know, maritime competition is intensifying, especially in the Indo-Pacific. But this bill provides funding for only one DDG-51 destroyer.

These ships are the backbone of our Navy, and they are essential to preserving our military superiority. And only one of those ships is provided for in this bill. I often hear bipartisan agreement about how we need a larger, more capable fleet. And last year, the president himself said he wanted to “resurrect the American shipbuilding industry.” But without investment or a strategy, that is just talk.

And it's especially just talk in a bill that gets over $1 trillion. If we're serious about naval readiness, we cannot continue under investing in our ships and in our shipyards and the workforce that is needed to sustain that fleet.

I'm sure many of you remember, because I love to talk about it, that Bath Iron Works, one of our important defense shipyards is located in my district. We're very proud of the shipbuilders and the work that gets done there. And we love to say that “Bath built is the best built” because they do an amazing job building ships. And for all of you, when you take your vacation in Maine this summer to get a lobster roll and ride on a ferry, I hope you'll come by and get a tour of this shipyard, because it's an amazing thing. It's a miracle to watch these ships come together. They're complex. They require incredible skill and incredibly skilled workers. Stability in the prediction of how many ships are going to be built and having sufficient orders is what helps to recruit and retain a workforce. These workers can't just be reassigned if there's no ships to build until there's more money, or until there is sufficient procurement planning done.

Many of them are machine operators, highly skilled, highly specialized. They've been there for years, and not having ships impacts the production line. Multi-year contracts lower the cost, ultimately saving money. I know the chairman in his opening remarks, talked about advanced procurement and how critically important that is in these complex industries that happened in our country. It's especially difficult to hear about the lack of sufficient shipbuilding in this contract when you put it in a broader context, and that is Russ Vought in OMB now signaling that they're thinking about buying ships from foreign shipyards. I'm going to say that again. They're thinking about using their waiver authority to actually buy ships offshore. And we know how important our six shipyards here are here in this country. And it's antithetical to think that they would ever suggest that.

But a senior OMB official has said, if you look at the average cost of a destroyer construction in Japan or Korea, $1 billion of fairly nominal cost associated with destroyer construction. Just yesterday, I was driving in for votes and I turned on C-SPAN radio in my car, and I heard President Trump talking to a big Pennsylvania gathering, I think he was at a Mack truck facility saying how important American workers and American manufacturing was and how he's on top of that. And that's what we're going to do in this country. And in fact, when we got out of votes and I drove away, you'll not be surprised that the president was still talking to the Pennsylvania gathering, and he was still talking about American workers in American manufacturing.

Yet his official at OMB is now saying, we're thinking about building ships offshore in other countries. Really? Our defense industry? We're thinking of moving that manufacturing offshore? This bill's increase over FY 26 is more than the entire funding of Labor [Health and Human Services], and Education. And we're talking about buying destroyers from foreign nations rather than investing in our own shipyards.

I appreciate that this committee has put language in to curb the president's authority to do so. But the fact that it's even being considered is shameful. Adding this language while still selling our shipyards short doesn't make sense. We need to use this bill to make strategic investments in American readiness, which includes a skilled workforce, a skilled union workforce. And we cannot stand by where the administration drives decline of our industrial base.

I yield back. And I thank the chair.

###

Pingree Urges USDA to Look Beyond Cotton in Push to Rebuild American Textiles

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), a longtime organic farmer and leader in Congress for sustainable agriculture and reducing pollution from fast fashion, is calling on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to strengthen federal support for American-grown and American-made natural fibers. In a letter to USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, Pingree urged the Department to build on its recently announced “Great American Cotton Plan” by expanding its focus to include other plant- and animal-based fibers, including hemp, flax, wool, alpaca, and leather. Pingree also requested information on existing USDA programs, authorities, and data collection efforts that could support domestic natural fiber production and processing.

“As global trends have impacted the economics of producing textiles and apparel outside the U.S., there is a critical need to reshore production of American-made textiles and to ensure more sustainable textile production,” Pingree wrote. “The United States Department of Agriculture plays an important role in supporting these efforts and revitalizing the sustainable fibers industry in the U.S.”

According to the Textile Materials Market Report, synthetic fibers accounted for approximately 65 percent of global fiber production in 2022, with polyester ranking as the most widely used fiber. In contrast to synthetic fibers, which shed microfibers that pollute waterways, land, and air, natural fibers may have a lower environmental footprint and can also be grown and raised in ways that sequester carbon and provide additional co-benefits to producers, such as improved soil health and reduced inputs like pesticides.

“As global fiber production continues to increase, it is critical to support the production and processing of additional plant-based fiber crops, such as hemp and flax, and animal-based fibers such as wool, alpaca, and leather, as the USDA considers reshoring fiber production,” Pingree continued.

In the letter, Pingree noted that natural fiber production aligns with multiple USDA mission areas, including farm production and conservation, domestic and international marketing of U.S. agricultural products, rural economic opportunity, and providing farmers and ranchers with opportunities to compete in the global marketplace.

Pingree requested USDA provide information on:

Existing programs and authorities that can support natural fiber production and processing;
USDA data collection on fiber production in the United States, specifically whether the USDA Census of Agriculture includes data on fiber crops such as flax and hemp;
Examples of USDA funding supporting natural fiber production and processing;
Barriers to addressing existing gaps in the natural fiber textile supply chain;
Whether USDA is evaluating approaches to reduce the use of synthetic pesticides in fiber production, and how such considerations are being incorporated into current or future programs;
How the goals, tools, or findings of the Great American Cotton Plan may inform USDA’s strategies for other fiber crops and materials.

The full text of Pingree’s letter is available here and copied below.

Pingree has been a national leader in pushing for a more sustainable textile economy. She is the founder and chair of the Congressional Slow Fashion Caucus, which aims to raise awareness about textile waste, pollution, labor concerns, and develop policies that support circular, sustainable, and domestically produced materials.

+++

Dear Secretary Rollins,

I am writing regarding the production and processing of natural fibers, specifically plant and animal-based fibers. As global trends have impacted the economics of producing textiles and apparel outside the U.S., there is a critical need to reshore production of American- made textiles and to ensure more sustainable textile production. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) plays an important role in supporting these efforts and revitalizing the sustainable fibers industry in the U.S.

I appreciate USDA’s recently announced Great American Cotton Plan, which aims to strengthen domestic cotton production and provide new opportunities for American growers. As USDA proceeds with the implementation of this plan, I urge USDA to expand the plan to include additional natural fiber crops and materials. I also request USDA examine existing programs that can support natural fiber production and processing.

As global fiber production continues to increase, it is critical to support the production and processing of additional plant-based fiber crops, such as hemp and flax, and animal-based fibers such as wool, alpaca, and leather, as the USDA considers reshoring fiber production. According to the Textile Materials Market Report, in 2022, synthetic fibers made up approximately 65 percent of global fiber production, with polyester being the most widely used fiber. In contrast to synthetic fibers, which shed microfibers that pollute waterways, land, and air, natural fibers may have a lower environmental footprint and can also be grown and raised in ways that sequester carbon and provide additional co-benefits to producers, such as improved soil health and reduced inputs like pesticides.

Natural fiber production and processing is relevant to multiple USDA mission areas, including farm production and conservation, facilitating domestic and international marketing of U.S. agricultural products, supporting opportunity and economic security for people and communities in rural America, and providing our farmers and ranchers with opportunities to compete in the global marketplace.

In light of these priorities and USDA’s new initiatives, I request that the USDA provide the following information:

Existing programs and authorities that can be used to support natural fiber production and processing;
USDA data collection on fiber production in the United States, specifically whether the USDA Census of Agriculture includes data on fiber crops such as flax and hemp;
Examples of USDA funding supporting natural fiber production and processing;
Barriers to addressing existing gaps in the natural fiber textile supply chain;
Whether USDA is evaluating approaches to reduce the use of synthetic pesticides in fiber production, and how such considerations are being incorporated into current or future programs;
How the goals, tools, or findings of the Great American Cotton Plan may inform USDA’s strategies for other fiber crops and materials.

I appreciate learning more about existing support from the USDA to enhance natural fiber products and ask for your commitment to working with Congress to enhance the production and processing of natural fibers.

Sincerely,

###