

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently agreed to abandon its attempt to delay a federal rule designed to provide greater housing opportunities for low-income renters. A federal court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, who are represented by a coalition of civil rights organizations who filed suit against HUD last year.
As a result of the lawsuit and the judgment entered, HUD is now implementing the Small Area Fair Market Rule (Small Area FMR), which promotes greater opportunity in housing choice for low-income and minority families and greater residential integration. The coalition of civil rights groups successfully challenged HUD's decision to abandon the rule last year, with U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell in late December issuing a preliminary injunction requiring HUD to restore the rule. The judgment that Judge Howell entered on Friday confirms that HUD will not challenge the court's ruling.
"HUD's announcement that it will drop its opposition to a carefully drafted fair housing rule is a victory for those working to promote greater access to housing opportunity for African-American, Latino and low-income families across our country. The Small Area Fair Market Rent rule promotes greater opportunity in housing choice for low-income and minority families and greater residential integration," said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "Our lawsuit challenging HUD's action is crucial to today's ongoing work to achieve a more racially integrated society. We will continue to turn to the courts to hold this administration accountable for actions that turn the clock back on important civil rights."
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), Relman, Dane & Colfax PLLC law firm, Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC) and Public Citizen Litigation Group brought the suit last year against HUD for suspending the Small Area FMR rule, which allows low-income families using housing vouchers to access a broader market of rental units. The suit was filed on behalf of two individuals who wanted to move to improved residential areas and the Open Communities Alliance, a Connecticut-based organization devoted to creating such opportunities for mobility.
In an opinion issued in December, Judge Howell ruled that HUD and Secretary Ben Carson unlawfully suspended implementation of the Small Area FMR rule without providing a reasonable justification for the delay. She also held that HUD failed to follow federal law requiring the Department to provide notice and an opportunity for public comment before acting.
"This is a win for low-income American families who deserve equal access to safe and affordable housing," said Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF). "HUD must not delay restoring the Housing Choice Voucher program and we will continue to hold the Administration accountable. Blacks, Latinos and low-income Americans have an equal right to economic prosperity including the ability to choose where to live."
HUD issued the Small Area FMR rule in 2016 after years of study and notice and comment. The rule changes the housing voucher formula in 24 carefully selected metropolitan areas, which collectively cover more than 200,000 voucher families. In those areas, voucher values that were previously calculated based on typical private rents for an entire area (despite enormous differences in the prevailing rents from neighborhood to neighborhood) now are to be based on fair market rents for each zip code. The new formula, in effect, raises the allowable rent amount for thousands of participating families should they choose to move to higher-rent, higher-opportunity areas.
"We expect HUD to implement this new program in good faith, and we are pleased to see that they have already issued guidance in response to the court's ruling," said Philip Tegeler, PRRAC's Executive Director. "We look forward to working with local housing authorities to ensure that the program is as successful as it was intended to be."
"HUD's decision not to fight the court's holding that the agency acted unlawfully by delaying this important rule assisting low-income families in securing affordable housing is welcome news. Unfortunately, the resolution of this case does not indicate that this administration has embraced the agency's mission of creating strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. Instead, HUD recently delayed an important tool to assure compliance with the long-standing statutory duty to affirmatively further fair housing," said co-counsel Allison M. Zieve, of Public Citizen Litigation Group.
"Entry of a judgment in plaintiffs' favor preserves an important housing program, allowing voucher holders the chance to live and raise their children in high-opportunity neighborhoods," said John Relman, managing partner of Relman, Dane & Colfax. "This litigation also sends an important message to the Trump administration, that its lawlessness will be met with swift and powerful resistance from the civil rights community."
A copy of the court's order is available here. The district court's December 2017 order is available here, and the court's opinion is here. The complaint, filed last October, is available here.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000"This administration’s failure to investigate or even acknowledge that these indiscriminate immigration raids are canceling the rights of US citizens is dangerous."
Days after new reporting revealed that at least 170 US citizens are among those who have been detained by federal immigration agents under the Trump administration, which Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal called "absolutely shocking," the Washington Democrat joined Rep. Jamie Raskin in demanding answers from top homeland security officials on the report.
Jayapal and Raskin (D-Md.) noted that they previously wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons in February, just weeks into President Donald Trump's second term, when the detention of US citizens ensnared in Trump's mass deportation operation was already raising alarm.
At that point, NBC News had reported on the detentions of US citizens including Native tribe members, which raised concerns about racial profiling—but in their Monday letter to Noem and Lyons, Jayapal and Raskin said the response they got in February was "flippant and unserious," with the officials simply reiterating existing policies that prohibit ICE from detaining US citizens—"without providing any assurance" that agents were "actually following that policy."
"This administration cannot hide behind a broad policy statement, as it continues to unlawfully detain US citizens as part of indiscriminate immigration raids," wrote Jayapal and Raskin.
The lawmakers emphasized that numerous arrests of US citizens by ICE and other immigration agents have been violent.
Raskin and Jayapal drew attention to four specific cases, including those of:
Other cases not mentioned in the letter include those of Job Garcia, a photographer who was tackled and held on the ground by ICE agents during a raid at a Home Depot in Los Angeles and then detained for more than 24 hours, and Debbie Brockman, a news producer in Chicago who was handcuffed by agents who accused her of throwing an object at them, and then hauled into an unmarked vehicle that crashed into another car as it sped away—only to be released later that day with no charges.
Raskin and Jayapal accused Noem and Lyons of overseeing a "lawless 'detain first, ask questions later' approach to immigration
enforcement" that is "terrorizing communities across the country."
"Masked, armed agents are snatching people on the street and refusing to identify themselves," said the lawmakers. "US citizens are now afraid to speak Spanish in public and are carrying their passports everywhere they go. This administration’s failure to investigate or even acknowledge that these indiscriminate immigration raids are canceling the rights of US citizens is dangerous."
Jayapal and Raskin demanded that Noem and Lyons provide an accounting of all the US citizens who have been detained with their identities, the length of time they were held, and their criminal records if they had any—which, according to an analysis by the CATO Institute in June, a majority of people arrested by ICE this year have not.
"We once again demand that you immediately provide a full accounting of all cases in which US citizens have been detained since January 20, 2025," said the Democrats, "and explain any concrete steps your agencies are implementing to prevent such abuses from continuing."
"Donald Trump and Republicans are selling out America's seniors," said one advocate.
A major pharmaceutical industry handout that Republicans—with the support of one Senate Democrat—included in President Donald Trump's signature legislative package is expected to cost US taxpayers nearly twice as much as originally expected, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in an updated analysis released Monday.
The CBO initially projected that the provision, known as the ORPHAN Cures Act, would cost around $5 billion over the next decade. But the office said Monday that its earlier assessment did not take into account several major, high-priced drugs that will be exempted from Medicare price negotiations as a result of the Trump-GOP law.
The budget office said it now expects the provision of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act to cost $8.8 billion over the next 10 years.
Among the drugs included in the new CBO analysis is Keytruda, a cancer medication sold by Merck that carries a list price of $24,062 every six weeks. The Trump GOP-budget law delays Keytruda's eligibility for Medicare price negotiations by at least a year, postponing significant potential savings for taxpayers and patients.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, said in response to the updated CBO analysis that "the ORPHAN Cures Act is a wildly expensive handout to Big Pharma that will harm patients, drain taxpayer dollars, and weaken the government's ability to rein in high drug prices."
Basey noted that the "insatiable" pharmaceutical industry is not satisfied with the enactment of the ORPHAN Cures Act, which restricts Medicare price negotiations for drugs that treat more than one rare disease. Big Pharma, Basey said, is "spending record sums this year to advance additional carveouts like the EPIC Act, which would exempt even more blockbuster drugs from negotiation."
"Any support for these bills goes against the will of the 90% of Americans who want Congress to go further to lower drug prices—not facilitate another handout to Big Pharma," said Basey.
"This isn't about helping lower costs—it's about doing the bidding of big drug companies, and Trump and the GOP are all too happy to oblige."
The deep-pocketed pharmaceutical industry has waged war on the popular Medicare price negotiation program since its inception during the Biden administration.
While pharmaceutical giants' efforts to gut the program have been stymied in court, the industry-friendly Trump administration and Republican lawmakers have done pharma's bidding through legislation and executive action. Earlier this year, as Common Dreams reported, Trump signed an executive order aimed at delaying price negotiations for a broad category of medications despite the president's repeated promises to bring down costs.
"Trump and Republicans are selling out America's seniors," said Brad Woodhouse, president of the advocacy group Protect Our Care. "Instead of letting Medicare negotiate lower prices for more drugs, they carved out a loophole to protect the industry's most profitable drugs."
"Not only does the GOP tax bill throw over 15 million Americans off their healthcare and hike costs for millions more, but it also forces older Americans to pay more for life-saving medicines while CEOs and billionaires line their pockets with more money than they know what to do with," Woodhouse continued. "This isn't about helping lower costs—it's about doing the bidding of big drug companies, and Trump and the GOP are all too happy to oblige."
Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said Monday that "instead of transferring $10 billion from taxpayers and cancer patients to drug corporations that are already extremely profitable, President Trump and members of Congress must work to strengthen and expand Medicare drug price negotiations."
"Instead of gutting the law through bills like the ORPHAN Cures Act, EPIC Act, and MINI Act so Big Pharma can block negotiations on blockbuster treatments," Knievel added, "Congress should pass legislation to empower Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices on all costly medicines and allow all patients to access lower, negotiated prices, even if they don't have Medicare."
"Healthcare costs are skyrocketing and federal workers aren’t getting paid. What is Trump doing? Building his gold plated ballroom."
A demolition crew on Monday began tearing down the East Wing facade of the White House in order to make way for President Donald Trump's luxury ballroom, in a project that one journalist said "captures" the president's approach to leading the country.
As reported by The Washington Post, workers used a backhoe to rip down the facade, and Trump later described the destruction as the start of a "much-needed project" at the White House.
“For more than 150 years, every president has dreamt about having a ballroom at the White House to accommodate people for grand parties, state visits, etc.,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, without citing any evidence that "every president" has wanted such a ballroom.
The cost of the ballroom is estimated at $250 million, and Trump is financing it by soliciting donations from some of America's wealthiest corporations—including several with government contracts and interests in deregulation—such as Apple, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Palantir. The president held an exclusive White House dinner for some of the largest donors to the ballroom last week, in a move that many critics decried as a "cash-for-access" event.
This is Trump’s presidency in a single photo: Illegal, destructive, and not helping you. pic.twitter.com/KOqk4mADpE
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) October 21, 2025
The destruction of the East Wing facade comes as the federal government is three weeks into a shutdown that began when Democrats refused to join Republicans in voting for a continuing resolution that would allow crucial healthcare subsidies expire for millions of people, and Trump has shown little urgency in working to end the standoff—during which he's worked to purge the federal workforce.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) shredded Trump for working on a vanity project while government workers have been missing paychecks.
"We are 20 days into the Republican shutdown—healthcare costs are skyrocketing and federal workers aren’t getting paid," she wrote in a social media post. "What is Trump doing? Building his gold plated ballroom."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also blasted Trump for focusing on his ballroom instead of on the needs of the American people.
"Oh, you're trying to say the cost of living is skyrocketing?" she asked rhetorically. "Donald Trump can't hear you over the sound of bulldozers demolishing a wing of the White House to build a new grand ballroom."
Former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich also linked Trump's focus on the ballroom to his lack of urgency in reopening the government.
"Trump hosted a dinner last week for donors helping fund his ballroom project," he wrote Monday. "Today, crews are starting construction and literally tearing down parts of the White House. It's day 20 of the government shutdown and this is what he's prioritizing?"
Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) shared an old photo of his family at the White House East Wing before it was torn down and expressed sadness about the president's destruction of the historic building.
"We didn’t need a billionaire-funded ballroom to celebrate America," he said. "Disgusting what Trump is doing."
Prem Thakker, a reporter for Zeteo, added that the destruction of the East Wing was highly symbolic of what the president is doing to the country.
"Trump demolishing the White House to build a $250 million ballroom funded by Amazon, Lockheed Martin, and Palantir," he wrote. "All during a government shutdown, and as he covers up the Epstein files—captures it all pretty well doesn't it."