To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Local protests against plans to build immigration detention centers have been held in states including New Hampshire, New York, and Maryland in recent weeks.
Merrimack, New Hampshire over the weekend became one of the latest US communities to rally against Trump administration plans to use a local warehouse to detain up to 1,000 people at a time, and on Monday, federal lawmakers from the New England state unveiled legislation to ensure the Department of Homeland Security listens to the 1,500 people who showed up to protest.
In the US Senate, Democratic Sens. Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen introduced the Respect for Local Communities Act, while Reps. Chris Pappas and Maggie Goodlander, also Democrats from the Granite State, proposed a companion bill in the House.
The legislation would require DHS to open a public comment period and receive approval from state and local officials before building, acquiring, or operating any new Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers or processing facilities—at least two dozen of which ICE plans to open in order to hold up to 10,000 people at a time as part of President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign.
As Common Dreams reported earlier this month, the administration plans to spend $38.3 billion to acquire and retrofit warehouses in states including New Hampshire, Georgia, and New York to detain immigrants.
The plan has received pushback from both sides of the aisle. Although the Republican Party vehemently backs Trump's mass deportation and detention campaign—which has killed at least 26 people in the last year, including least three US citizens who were fatally shot—lawmakers including Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) have objected to plans to build detention facilities in their states and districts, citing "economic development" and "infrastructure" concerns.
The Democrats who introduced the legislation on Monday spoke about widespread opposition to the "secretive facilities" and the "stunning displays of violence and cruelty" that have been part of Trump's mass detention operation.
"At a time when so many Americans are struggling with high costs for things like healthcare and housing, the Trump administration is instead spending $38 billion in taxpayer money to purchase and operate these facilities,” said Shaheen. “Our new bill responds directly to the concerns we’ve heard from local officials in towns like Merrimack, New Hampshire and across the country: They were never consulted about ICE’s plans, and they don’t want the chaos of new detention facilities in their communities. By requiring DHS to secure approval from state and local officials, our legislation would ensure that Americans and Granite Staters have a say in what the federal government is planning in our own communities.”
The bill would also require DHS to notify Congress before setting up new detention centers.
Last week, Hassan noted in a hearing where acting ICE Director Todd Lyons testified that Wicker had successfully pushed DHS to cancel plans to open a facility in Mississippi.
“I would hope that I would get the same treatment that Sen. Wicker got—which is to say the town doesn’t want the dentition center, so please cancel it,” Hassan said. “And I would expect that my partisan affiliation shouldn’t make any difference to that determination.”
In Merrimack over the weekend, hundreds of locals lined the streets outside the town hall, holding signs that read, "Human rights are for everyone" and “ICE: bringing terror and cruelty to a community near you."
Communities in Tennessee, New York, and Maryland have also spokesn out about plans for new detention centers recent weeks, and in the latter state, Attorney General Anthony Brown sued the Trump administration in Monday over its purchase of a warehouse in Williamsport where it plans to detain up to 1,500 people.
“Federal law gives Marylanders the right to know when and how detention facilities are built in their communities,” said Brown. “That right was denied. Today, our office is taking them to court.”
"The president should work with Democrats and Republicans to actually lower prescription drug costs for families," said Sen. Maggie Hassan, "rather than helping Big Pharma line its pockets."
Democratic members of the congressional Joint Economic Committee on Friday released a report warning that US families could end up spending thousands of dollars more on prescription drugs because of a website recently unveiled by President Donald Trump.
Launched last week with pharmaceutical companies, TrumpRx.gov is marketed as an aggregator to help patients save on prescription drugs by using manufacturer coupons or buying directly from manufacturers.
However, as the new report highlights, "many of the brand-name drugs listed on TrumpRx have significantly cheaper generic alternatives, which are excluded from TrumpRx. This means that TrumpRx steers families to pay more to Big Pharma when they could be getting the same medication at a much lower price."
"No matter what the president says, the bottom line is that TrumpRx directs families to buy expensive brand-name drugs when generic versions are available elsewhere at a fraction of the cost."
The report provides a chart comparing TrumpRx and generic prices, both for one prescription fill and the full annual cost. It also notes the difference. In some cases, the president's option is $10-50 more a year. However, there are also examples in which families could save hundreds or thousands of dollars with generic drugs.
For example, Colestid, a medication that lowers cholesterol, would cost $2,771.21 a year through TrumpRx, compared with $856.70 for the generic option, a difference of $1,914.51. The antidepressant Pristiq is $2,401.20 on the president's website, versus just $320.88 for the generic, a potential yearly savings of $2,080.32.
The biggest difference featured in the document is for Tikosyn, which helps patients maintain a normal heart rhythm. The TrumpRx annual cost is $4,032, whereas the generic is only $192.68, a difference of $3,839.32.
The report also stresses how extra costs from the president's site could stack up for households in which multiple people need medication:
"No matter what the president says, the bottom line is that TrumpRx directs families to buy expensive brand-name drugs when generic versions are available elsewhere at a fraction of the cost," said Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), ranking member of the Joint Economic Committee and the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Health Care.
"The president should work with Democrats and Republicans to actually lower prescription drug costs for families," Hassan argued, "rather than helping Big Pharma line its pockets."
While the Trump White House responded defensively to the Democratic report, with spokesperson Kush Desai claiming to MS NOW that "product listings on TrumpRx.gov are in no way an endorsement for use of any prescription drug over another" and accusing Democrats of "resorting to idiotic or simply ignorant lines of attack instead of simply giving the president credit where it's due," the panel members aren't alone is highlighting such cost differences.
The added cost for US families also isn't lawmakers' only concern about TrumpRx. Last month, shortly before the site's launch, Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.) Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), and Peter Welch (Vt.) sent a letter to the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General raising concerns about the new direct-to-consumer (DTC) platform.
"There appear to be possible conflicts of interest involved in the potential relationship between TrumpRx and an online dispensing company, BlinkRx, on whose board the president's son, Donald Trump Jr., has sat since February 2025," they wrote. "Moreover, legitimate concerns about inappropriate prescribing, conflicts of interest, and inadequate care have been raised about the exact types of DTC platforms to which TrumpRx would route patients."
The trio also expressed alarm about high prices, noting that "pharmaceutical manufacturers who will reportedly be participating in TrumpRx have spent billions of dollars in combined advertising expenses for drugs sold on existing DTC platforms."
"The pharmaceutical industry's outrageous DTC advertisements fuel demand for specific medications, which balloon healthcare expenses," the senators wrote. "We are concerned that DTC advertising, including in relation to TrumpRx, will steer customers to prescriptions that may be reimbursed by federal health programs, creating the potential for unnecessary or wasteful spending."
"The president’s tax on American families is simply making things more expensive.”
As President Donald Trump persistently claims the economy is working for Americans, Democrats in the US House and Senate on Thursday released an analysis that puts a number to the recent polling that's found many Americans feel squeezed by higher prices: $1,200.
That's how much the average household in the US has paid in tariff costs over the past 10 months, according to the Joint Economic Committee—and costs are expected to continue climbing.
The Democrats, including Ranking Member Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), and Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), analyzed official US Treasury Department data on the amount of tariff revenue collected since the beginning of Trump's second term as he's imposed tariffs across the European Union and on dozens of other countries—some as high as 50%.
The White House has insisted the tariffs on imports will "pry open foreign markets" and force exporters overseas to pay more, resulting in lower prices for US consumers.
But the JEC combined the Treasury data with independent estimates of the percent of each tariff dollar that is paid by consumers, as companies pass along their higher import prices to them.
At first, US families were paying an average of less than $60 in tariff costs when Trump began the trade war in February and March.
But that amount shot up to more than $80 per family in April when he expanded the tariffs, and monthly costs have steadily increased since then.
In November, a total of $24.04 billion was paid by consumers in tariff costs—or $181.29 per family.
“While President Trump promised that he would lower costs, this report shows that his tariffs have done nothing but drive prices even higher for families."
From February-November, families have paid an average of $1,197.50 each, according to the JEC analysis.
“While President Trump promised that he would lower costs, this report shows that his tariffs have done nothing but drive prices even higher for families,” said Hassan.
If costs remain as high as they were over the next 12 months, families are projected to pay $2,100 per year as a result of Trump's tariffs.
The analysis comes a week after Republicans on a House Ways and Means subcommittee attempted to avoid the topic of tariffs—which have a 61% disapproval rating among the public, according to Pew Research—at a hearing on global competitiveness for workers and businesses.
"Rep. Jimmy Gomez [D-Calif.] read several quotes from [former Rep. Kevin] Brady [R-Texas] during his time in Congress stating that tariffs are taxes that impede economic growth. Brady, who chaired the Ways and Means Committee and drafted Trump’s first tax law in 2017 (and now works as a lobbyist), had no desire to discuss those quotes or the topic of tariffs," wrote Steve Warmhoff, federal policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. "Nor did Republicans address the point made by the Democrats’ witness, Kimberly Clausing, when she explained that Trump’s tariffs are the biggest tax increase on Americans (measured as a share of the economy) since 1982."
Clausing estimated that the tariffs will amount "to an annual tax increase of about $1,700 for an average household" if they stay at current levels, while Trump's decision to lower tariffs on goods such as meat, vegetables, fruits, and coffee last month amounted to just $35 in annual savings per household.
The JEC has also recently released analyses of annual household electricity costs under Trump, which were projected to go up by $100 for the average family despite the president's campaign pledge that "your energy bill within 12 months will be cut in half."
Last month the panel found that the average household is spending approximately $700 more per month on essentials like food, shelter, and energy since Trump took office.
“At a time when both parties should be working together to lower costs," said Hassan on Thursday, "the president’s tax on American families is simply making things more expensive.”