SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
donald trump
‘Stunning Admission’: Trump Admin Targeted Democrats by Canceling Clean Energy Grants
"It is despicable that the administration is taking away funding from states that did not vote for Trump," said US Sen. Dick Durbin.
Jul 24, 2026
President Donald Trump's administration has admitted in court that it chose to cancel certain grants for clean energy projects because they were set to benefit Democratic-voting states.
The New York Times reported on Friday that attorneys representing the US Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged in court documents filed earlier this month that decisions about canceling grants were based "solely on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State."
The Times described this as a "stunning admission" that "offered an unvarnished glimpse into the way President Trump has weaponized the provision of federal education, energy, health, housing, and infrastructure aid in his second term."
According to the Times, the DOE last year recommended canceling more than 600 grants awarded for energy projects under former President Joe Biden's administration.
However, the White House Office of Management and Budget only made 284 of the recommended cuts while leaving the rest of the grants in place.
After a group of California researchers challenged the terminated grants in a lawsuit, the DOE acknowledged that "with one exception, the 284 terminated grants had a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a state that awarded its electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing senators."
The DOE also admitted that there was no "programmatic, statutory, cost-reduction, or performance-based factor" to justify the cuts.
In a social media post, New York Times reporter Tony Romm noted that the DOE made these admissions "as part of a process meant to avoid discovery" and "perhaps spare it from sharing more damaging records" in its possession.
The Times report drew a sharp reaction from Trump administration critics.
"This is corruption," said Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Calif.). "It’s how this administration has acted since day one: punishing states, businesses, and ordinary Americans who push back on Trump. It’s a major betrayal of our nation that will lead to higher energy prices and should be condemned by people of all political parties. It’s un-American and despicable."
Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) accused the administration of "the weaponization of government" with its selective grant cancellations.
"This administration shows us time and time again they only care about one person," Kim added, "and that person only cares about himself."
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) argued that the filings prove "what we have long known, that their grant cancellations were not based on 'waste' or sound policy but vindictiveness."
"It is despicable," Durbin emphasized, "that the administration is taking away funding from states that did not vote for Trump."
Jennifer Victory, political scientist at George Mason University, described the administration's scheme as "violations of the rule of law that would be sufficient for impeachment in any other American presidency but aren't in this one because pathological partisan loyalty has rotted the constitutional order."
Sam Stein, managing editor at The Bulwark, said that the DOE's admission about targeting Democratic states was "something we all knew and saw at the time and yet still breathtaking to read... in print."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Coalition Rejects Trump Admin Push to Let Kalshi, Polymarket 'Bypass State Gambling Regimes'
"We urge the commission to withdraw this proposal, enforce the rules already on the books, and return its attention to the derivatives markets it was created to protect—and which genuinely need its attention."
Jul 24, 2026
A coalition of consumer advocacy groups on Friday forcefully condemned the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's move to give prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket "a green light to bypass state gambling regimes."
Users of these platforms can bet on future events, from the outcome of a sports game to the language of a political speech, by buying "shares," or "contracts." The Trump administration claims the platforms are not gambling operations, but derivatives markets because, as Chair Michael Selig has noted, "Congress has entrusted the CFTC with the sole authority to regulate" those.
Various state leaders and organizations have pushed back, arguing that "calling a sports wager an 'event contract' does not transform it into a legitimate tool for managing economic risk," as Demand Progress Education Fund communications director Eric Naing said Friday. "The CFTC should not allow federal derivatives law to become a back door for nationwide gambling."
However, the CFTC has stuck to its position, publicly backed by President Donald Trump, who has declared that the agency must have "exclusive authority" over this "major industry," which "we must protect." The Republican—who infamously bankrupted multiple casinos—notably has a company exploring how to cash in on the sector.
The CFTC announced its proposed rules for prediction markets in March, followed by an update last month. In a Friday letter to the agency chair, Demand Progress Education Fund and 10 other organizations wrote that "we oppose the proposal in its entirety. It fails as a matter of law, as a matter of policy, and as a matter of institutional competence, and we emphatically urge the commission to withdraw it."
"When Kalshi and Polymarket launched just five years ago, they were curiosities; today Kalshi alone is valued at $22 billion and processes an annualized volume of $178 billion in trades every month," the coalition detailed. "This proposal should be understood for what it is: a green light for these immense and largely unregulated financial speculation platforms to offer sports betting nationwide and aggressively market it to the public, bypassing the community and mental health protections that states and tribal authorities have spent generations building to address the risks present in this type of speculative activity."
The fact that 89% of Kalshi's total fee revenue comes from sports-related contracts "should settle the question of whether these companies are derivatives exchanges or sportsbooks," according to the coalition, which also includes Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, Better Markets, Center for Digital Democracy, New Jersey Appleseed Public Interest Law Center, Open Markets Institute, Oregon Consumer Justice, Oregon Consumer League, Protect Borrowers, Public Good Law Center, and Revolving Door Project.
However, the organizations also challenge the CFTC's interpretation of the Commodity Exchange Act, writing that the proposal's "framing inverts the statute's logic and Congress' intent, by treating contracts as presumptively allowed unless found contrary to the public interest through a case-by-case inquiry."
If the agency charges ahead with its current plans, "ordinary people will pay the price," the groups warned. "Expanded sports betting has increased personal bankruptcies, reduced household savings, and led to higher rates of domestic violence. Prediction markets supercharge these effects: they run 24/7 in your pocket and aggressively market to young adults, who may make low bets initially but ramp up their commitment over time. Seventy percent of users lose money, and 70% of all profits go to 0.04% of traders. Those outcomes define a casino that has figured out how to escape the regulations that casinos have to follow, like responsible gaming disclosures and financial stability protections for their customers."
"The proposal also does almost nothing to address the insider trading problem that makes prediction markets much more easily manipulated than the structures of ordinary gambling," the coalition wrote—just over a week after the White House had to address one of Trump's teleprompter operators allegedly using his access to the president's speech plans to make money on Kalshi.
The organizations further argued that "even if the commission were the right institution to police all of this, it is not capable of doing so. The CFTC, which oversees $400 trillion in US derivatives markets, has a budget frozen at $365 million... Adding nationwide responsibility for sports betting, entertainment wagering, and political gambling on top of that is not a proper expansion of the agency's mission, and it would mean that the farmers, manufacturers, and energy companies who depend on well-functioning commodity markets will pay the price."
"We urge the commission to withdraw this proposal, enforce the rules already on the books, and return its attention to the derivatives markets it was created to protect—and which genuinely need its attention," concluded the coalition. "The regulation of gambling and gaming belongs with the states and tribal authorities that have the experience, the tools, and the democratic accountability to do the job."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Slamming Trump’s Cuba Report as ‘McCarthyite Attack’ on Free Speech, Dems Vow to Fight Back
"We stand firmly against this report and other efforts by the Trump administration to weaponize the federal government against dissent, which is a patriotic tradition."
Jul 24, 2026
President Donald Trump's escalating claims that Cuba and its supporters poses a threat to US security have been denounced as "laughable" and "crazy," but progressive lawmakers are warning that the State Department's report alleging that the country of roughly 10 million people aims to "conquer" the United States and is backing "left-wing terrorism on American soil" represents a genuine attack on Trump's perceived political enemies.
"Trump appears hell-bent on taking America back 70 years to the height of Cold War McCarthyism, when hawkish foreign policy was paired with unsubstantiated accusations of communist subversion and political repression against dissidents at home," said a group of Democrats led by progressive Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Peace and Security Taskforce. “We condemn this report’s attack on Americans’ constitutional rights to free speech and assembly."
Omar on Thursday was joined by 10 other lawmakers, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), in speaking out days after the State Department released its report titled “Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism."
The report, said the lawmakers, was a "McCarthyite attack on Americans’ free speech rights."
The 100-page document claims that Cuba's communist government "has waged a sustained campaign of subversion against the United States" and recruited "generations" of activists in the US, listing by name people who have participated in solidarity campaigns in support of Cuban people as the Trump administration has imposed a destructive oil blockade on the island nation.
"Trump appears hell-bent on taking America back 70 years to the height of Cold War McCarthyism."
In January, Trump issued an executive order declaring that Cuba posed an "extraordinary threat" to US national security and threatened countries with tariffs should they provide oil to the Cuban government. The administration had already cut off Cuba's top source of energy by taking control of Venezuela's vast oil reserves. The blockade has left the Cuban healthcare and education systems and other daily public services struggling to operate.
US groups and citizens named in the report as having spoken out against the administration's blockade and its threats of military action against Cuba include commentator Hasan Piker, Amazon Labor Union founder Christian Smalls, the National Lawyers Guild, and campus activist Isra Hirsi—Omar's daughter.
"We denounce this administration’s irresponsible attacks against civil society organizations, activists, journalists, labor leaders, members of Congress, elected officials, and private individuals based on their advocacy for peaceful foreign policy and social justice at home," said Omar and the Democrats who joined her in the statement.
The lawmakers said they would use their "full oversight power as members of Congress and elected officials to stop the persecution of Trump’s perceived political enemies," including those who speak out publicly against the president's policies in Cuba—activity that is protected by the First Amendment.
"We stand firmly against this report and other efforts by the Trump administration to weaponize the federal government against dissent, which is a patriotic tradition," they said.
The report is the administration's latest attack on the free speech rights that are integral to the US Constitution and American history. The White House has pushed to deport foreign students who protested the US-backed Israel war on Gaza, designated anti-fascist organizers as "terrorists," and, nearly a year after issuing a presidential memo demanding a strategy to "disrupt" left-wing networks, recently convened a summit to launch a "global offensive against the transnational threat of Radical Left terrorism."
Meanwhile, said Omar on Thursday, Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio—the son of Cuban immigrants and a long-time proponent of regime change on the island—"are intensifying decades of economic war" against the people of Cuba and deliberately depriving "the entire island’s population of adequate food, fuel, and medicine."
Along with ending his attacks on those who oppose his policies, said Omar, "it is past time for Trump to obey the Constitution and end the dangerous, cruel, and illegal naval blockade causing collective punishment against Cuba.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Outcry Grows Over Data Centers, Trump Claims 'Smart' Towns Want the Energy-Sucking, Water-Guzzling Facilities
The president's comments revealed how he is "detached from the feelings of working-class communities, in many ways," said one progressive organizer.
Jul 24, 2026
Days after his own supporters organized 142 demonstrations against artificial intelligence data centers in 42 states, President Donald Trump claimed that "smart communities" across the US "really want" the facilities known for raising electricity bills, consuming millions of gallons of water daily, and creating few permanent job opportunities.
At an event promoting his "Ratepayer Protection Pledge"—a plan to secure deals with major tech companies to keep household utility bills down in communities with data centers, which experts say is unlikely to produce meaningful savings for families—the president suggested that recent polls showing 7 in 10 Americans oppose data centers in their towns are the result of "propaganda... trying to convince everybody that this isn't a positive thing."
"You have some communities that really want this," said Trump. "And frankly those are the smart communities, because it means a tremendous number of jobs... They're begging for them."
Trump claims that “smart” communities are “begging” for data centers.
Video via: @Acyn pic.twitter.com/mKXo9QlqyZ
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) July 23, 2026
Faiz Shakir, founder of the labor-focused media organization More Perfect Union and an adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has called for a moratorium on data centers, said the comments showed how Trump is "detached from the feelings of working-class communities, in many ways."
The Tennessee Holler pointed to a recent survey showing that even "cherry red areas" like Johnson City, Tennessee oppose the construction of the facilities that store and process massive amounts of data, for which Trump has pushed to slash regulations.
Trump's comments came as the climate advocacy group 350.org issued a call for a moratorium on new data center construction.
"Right now, ordinary families are paying more on their electricity bills so that data centers can get artificially cheap power, negotiated in secret with almost no accountability for the real costs," said Candice Fortin, US campaigns manager at 350.org. "That's backwards."
According to Consumer Reports, at least 1,489 new data centers are currently being planned or are under construction in the US.
But with grassroots protests in communities in Wisconsin, Michigan, and other states, about 100 data center projects were cancelled last year "or hit major roadblocks, and the rate of cancellations has quadrupled since 2024," said 350.org.
The group, like hundreds of others have recently, called on Congress to pass a national moratorium on data center construction. Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) unveiled a bill in March to halt construction of the facilities. Last week, New York's Democratic governor, Kathy Hochul, signed an executive order imposing a one-year state-level ban on the construction of “hyperscale” data centers that can consume 50 megawatts of power.
"A moratorium isn't about being anti-technology, it's about refusing to let communities and ratepayers be steamrolled into deals that benefit billionaires while everyone else pays," said Fortin. "Data centers are driving up our bills today and locking in fossil fuels for decades to come. That's not innovation. That's a bad deal being forced on every ratepayer in America."
Keep ReadingShow Less
If the Senate Confirms Todd Blanche, It Will Change Our Lives for the Worse
As deputy attorney general and acting attorney general, he’s turned the Justice Department into Trump’s personal favor factory; instead of protecting our rights, he’s lining Trump’s pocket, protecting his personal interests, and carrying out his revenge fantasies.
Jul 24, 2026
It’s summer in Washington, DC, but members of the Senate aren’t focused on beaches, hikes, and picnics. Instead, they’re focused on President Donad Trump’s nomination of Todd Blanche to run the Justice Department as attorney general.
It’s a fight worth paying attention to, because it will affect what kind of country we live in.
Attorneys general can change our lives for the better. In the 1960s, Robert Kennedy worked tirelessly to bring civil rights to the South and to dismantle organized crime. In the 1970s, Elliot Richardson resigned rather than carry out President Richard Nixon’s illegal order to fire the special Watergate prosecutor.
Todd Blanche is about as far as you can get from either of them. How do we know? Because as deputy attorney general and acting attorney general, he’s turned the Justice Department into Trump’s personal favor factory. Instead of protecting our rights, he’s lining Trump’s pocket, protecting his personal interests, and carrying out his revenge fantasies.
He has shown how much he is willing to bend the law to line Trump’s pockets.
Blanche was the one who pushed for the $1.8 billion “weaponization” fund that would have allowed taxpayer funds to be doled out, with very little public oversight, to anyone claiming that they’d been victims of the “weaponization” of justice. It looked like a slush fund for insurrectionists and other Trump allies, including those who assaulted police officers on January 6, 2021.
Some Republican senators apparently want assurances that this scheme is dead before they vote for Blanche. But even genuine assurances don’t matter. Blanche still pushed for this corrupt money laundering operation. Giving it up under torrential pressure doesn’t show that he has good judgment and can be trusted with immense power.
The same applies for another scheme Blanche proposed at the same time as the slush fund: An agreement to end a longtime audit of Trump’s taxes (possibly saving Trump $100 million) and a gift of immunity for the president and his associates from future liability for civil or criminal liability for anything they may have done up to that point.
Again, this is about as corrupt as you can get. And again, even if Blanche were to toss the idea in the shredder, it would be too late: He has shown how much he is willing to bend the law to line Trump’s pockets.
Blanche has also transformed the Justice Department into a partisan tool to go after Trump’s enemies. For instance, he’s launched a criminal prosecution against former FBI Director James Comey for posting a photo of seashells spelling out “86 47.” It will never stand up in court, but that’s not the point. The point is to harass Comey and, perhaps more importantly, intimidate other Trump critics from speaking out. It is an unacceptable abuse of power.
Then there are the Epstein files. Before Congress ordered the files released, Blanche was coming up with ideas to make it look like the administration was being open with the records when they really weren’t. He met with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving time for her role in sex trafficking for Epstein. Afterward, she got moved to a minimum-security prison, prompting a lot of questions about the deal they may have made.
Then late last year Congress ordered the files to be released, and Blanche was put in charge of making that happen. In February, media reports revealed that the Justice Department had unlawfully withheld multiple Epstein files containing allegations against President Trump. And just a few weeks ago, a federal judge held that Blanche had still not complied with the law.
It’s no surprise that Epstein survivors are urging the Senate not to confirm him.
This country is on the wrong path. Confirming Todd Blanche as attorney general will help Donald Trump’s bottom line. But it won’t do any good for the rest of us.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Socks It to the World
From the Iran War to the World Cup, President Donald Trump follows his destructive urges.
Jul 24, 2026
I want to play sockhim (oh, sorry, sockher) for President Donald Trump. In our world today, there’s nothing, it seems, he can’t fiddle with or kick around or, for that matter, sock. And whenever he feels it’s necessary (or simply has the urge to do so), he’s always been willing to sockthem, whoever they might be. If something then goes wrong, as with Iran and the global economy right now, thanks to his wild and wildly destructive acts, so what? He’s still Donald Trump and can do the equivalent again somewhere else in some other way the next second-minute-hour-day-week-month-year.
I’m thinking, of course, not just about his unbearable urge to bomb Iran for the 940th (9,400th?) time, as oil and gas prices surge once again, but about his relatively recent intervention in the soccer World Cup to ensure that one of the best players on the US team, who had committed a foul, was red-carded off the field by a referee, and then was denied permission to play in the next game against the Belgian team, could instead compete in that very game. And of course, since everything You Know Who does is headlined, you know just what happened next: The World Cup organization, FIFA, gave way instantly, that player was indeed in the next game, and the US team still lost to Belgium by a significant margin.
And Donald J. Trump just rolled right on. No matter what goes wrong, he never loses. (If you think otherwise, ask him and you’ll find out that you couldn’t be more off base!)
I sometimes try to imagine telling my parents, who died deep in the last century, about “our” president. The only way I could do so, I suspect, would be by comparing him to Sen. Joseph McCarthy, the Donald Trump of the early 1950s, who claimed that his opponents were “commies” and, in a distinctly Trumpian fashion, swore that he had a (fictional) list of 205 State Department employees who were members of the American Communist Party and later that the US Army, too, had been infiltrated by commies. His charges would be the focus of the 1954 televised Army-McCarthy Hearings, which did me the great favor (at age 10) of putting a television set in our apartment for the first time so that my mom, Irma Selz, then a well-known political and theatrical caricaturist, could draw McCarthy and crew for the New York Post.
At a time when this planet of ours needed rescuing (from us, of course), the American people reelected a man who continues to openly promise to send us—all too literally—to the blazes.
And yes, he was an all-American monster, distinctly clobbering various figures and destroying certain American lives. Still, in the end, he was condemned by the Senate and essentially drank himself to death, only affecting our all-American world for a few years and (at least in comparison with You Know Who) in a relatively modest way.
Historically speaking, Donald Trump, president (no less!) of the United States of America twice, puts him to shame. Of course, once upon a time (believe it or not), Joseph McCarthy and Donald Trump had the very same adviser (at different moments, of course), Roy Cohn, who, in the (all too literal) end, may have helped create a president from beyond the grave.
McCarthy only had a relatively brief moment at center stage before falling apart in a big-time fashion. Donald Trump, on the other hand, simply goes on and on and (yes!) on, whacking away at so many of the rest of us—Iran being at the top of his list, right now—day after day, week after week, year after year, while our world begins to disintegrate under us. (Oh, sorry, my mistake even to refer in passing to climate change when “our” president considers it a first-class “con job“!)
Joe McCarthy was functionally ejected from his political world and then essentially ejected himself from ours. Unfortunately, Donald Trump took our world by storm, two (out of three) times, while tossing out so many others in the process. And now, at least in climate terms, he seems intent on ejecting us all from Planet Earth.
“We Have a Score to Settle”
If I had told you his tale early in this century, you would never have believed me. In fact, you would have thought me an idiot and a half (maybe even three-quarters). Donald Trump, the president of the United States (at least) twice and so many others of us his apprentices? You must be kidding! Once upon a time, that would have seemed beyond inconceivable for even a second, no less at least eight years. You simply wouldn’t have believed that so much of the Republican Party (and all too many other Americans) would ever have become Trumpublicans.
Under the circumstances, can there be any question that we now live in an upside-down, gloom-and-doom version of a fairy-tale world? Why, just as I was writing this, President Trump decided to launch a new series of air strikes against Iran (yes, Iran!), claiming that “we have a score to settle.” And he’s certainly a big-time score-settler, though who really knows what he’s doing or why—probably not even him. He just seems to get the urge to sockittothem and we’re off to the races.
Isn’t it strange that the man who, once upon a time, wrote The Art of the Deal can’t quite seem to imagine making a deal with anyone anymore? Actually, as he said recently when it comes to Iran: “We’re going to have a deal. We may just do it without a deal, because you know what, it’s easier.” Perhaps he should now change the title of his book to The Art of Doing Without a Deal.
And, of course, that shouldn’t be surprising when the people he’s dealing with there are, as he put it recently, “scum. They’re sick people. They’re led by sick people, and they’re vicious, violent people,” He summed things up this way when it comes to Iran, “Far as I’m concerned, it’s just a waste of time dealing with them. They’re liars… there’s something wrong with them. They’re cuckoo. As far as I’m concerned, it’s over.” (No matter at all that, only weeks earlier, he had praised them as “very rational people,” “nice to deal with.”)
And what do you do when you’re dealing with sick scum? You bomb the crap out of them. Or, to put it in sports terms, you sockthem to hell.
At a time when this planet of ours needed rescuing (from us, of course), the American people reelected a man who continues to openly promise to send us—all too literally—to the blazes. He’s simply hot, hot, hot, the very word he used for Trumpian rapper and “White House Barbi” Nicki Minaj. (”We also have a woman that is so respected and so hot and so great and such a great friend of, I don’t say conservative, I say of common sense.”)
You, of course, could say the very same thing about Donald J. Trump. He’s so hot, and the one thing he seems determined to do on this overheating planet of ours is heat ever more of it (which war, of course, accomplishes in a particularly striking fashion).
So, here we all are with a president determined to play sockher, sockhim, sockthem, and sockplanetEarth for at least another two and a half years. And where will we all be then? Sockme if I know?
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Deadly, Cruel Immigration Policy May Be a Political Failure As Well
As more information comes out about lives lost, communities harmed, and an economy hobbled by the loss of critical workers, previously supportive voters may turn against Trump's mass deportation agenda.
Jul 24, 2026
The Trump administration is doing everything it can to get rid of what it considers to be “undesirable” people.
The administration has removed temporary protected status (TPS) for more than a million people from over a dozen countries. It is sending people back to active war zones in Sudan and Somalia. It is deporting people to Myanmar, a country under a military dictatorship. In the case of Venezuela, it is returning people to a country struggling to deal with the aftereffects of an earthquake.
Some holders of this status have been in the country for a long time. Nearly 90% of the 170,000 Salvadorans who have TPS, first granted 25 years ago, participate in the US labor force, contributing over US$5 billion to the US economy.
The administration makes no exceptions in its campaign to deport anyone and everyone. Even as it has promised to fight a war on behalf of the people of Iran, it has reportedly provided information about Iranian asylum-seekers to the Iranian government. These details about their lives, such as their sexual orientation and religious beliefs, make it even more likely that they will be persecuted on return. Dozens of Russians, who don’t enjoy TPS, were flown back to Russia, where several were immediately slapped with draft notices.
The administration has tried to tout the successes of its deportation program. But the deaths of citizens and noncitizens alike have put supporters of the president on the defensive.
There is no length to which the administration won’t go to deport people, even American citizens like the children born in the United States who were kicked out of the country along with their parents. So far, the Supreme Court has blocked the administration’s attempt to overturn the “birthright citizenship” clause in the US Constitution. But President Donald Trump is still pushing his allies to take up the fight in Congress to change the law.
The administration even tried to add 2.7 million living people to the “Death Master File,” which is a database of dead people maintained by the Social Security Administration. Trump’s plan was to make life so difficult for people declared “dead” that they would self-deport or, if they showed up to dispute their “death,” to detain them in preparation for deportation. It was only because of a whistleblower that this plan didn’t go into effect.
But the most visible effort by the US government has been to target the approximately 14 million “unauthorized immigrants” who, as of 2023, constituted over 4% of the US population. Such immigrants keep the American economy afloat by picking fruit, slaughtering cows, building houses, and taking care of the elderly.
Trump’s mass deportation campaign, in other words, would wreck the US economy. The undocumented don’t take away jobs from native-born Americans because the latter generally don’t want the jobs that immigrants fill. But the administration is willing to risk economic disaster in its effort to keep America a predominantly white country.
Trump’s anti-immigrant plan has not just evicted people. It has not just locked them away in detention centers. It has killed them.
In recent weeks, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents were involved in two killings. Joan Sebastian Durán Guerrero, a 25-year-old Colombian national living with his wife and young daughter in a small town in Maine, was not the subject of an ICE raid, but ICE agents killed him anyway. Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a Mexican immigrant, was a businessman and father of three on his way to work in Houston when agents stopped his car and shot him.
More than a dozen people have died in these kinds of interactions with ICE, including two US citizens—Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good—protesting ICE actions in Minnesota.
The number of detainees who have died in custody is even higher. Tens of thousands of people are being held in detention facilities that the Trump administration has established around the country. Despite administration claims that it is only deporting dangerous criminals, more than 70% of those detained have no prior criminal convictions.
More than 50 people have died in the detention facilities, a rate that is more than twice as high as Trump’s first term. They have died because of conditions inside the facilities or because they didn’t receive sufficient medical care. Several have died by suicide.
The Trump administration has pledged to deport a million people a year. It hasn’t quite reached that benchmark, with the administration itself claiming around 900,000 deportations as of mid-May. It has also claimed that more than 2 million people have self-deported. However, without transparent data from the Department of Homeland Security, it is difficult to verify the administration’s claims.
These numbers are critical to the administration’s approval rating. On virtually all other policies, Trump is losing popularity. Inflation numbers remain high, and the economy is failing millions of Americans. The war in Iran continues to push up gas prices. The administration is still dogged by controversies around budget cuts, corruption, anti-vaccine policies, and connections to Jeffrey Epstein. The overall approval rating for the administration is around 37%, with a large percentage of independent voters now adopting negative views of the president.
The one issue where a sizable number of Americans still approve of administration policies, however, is immigration. Compared to the economy at 33% and the war in Iran at 29%, 40% of Americans approve of his immigration policies. But even here the numbers are declining, since half of Americans supported his approach to immigration when he took office in 2025.
The administration has tried to tout the successes of its deportation program. But the deaths of citizens and noncitizens alike have put supporters of the president on the defensive. The detention and deportation of key members of communities—hard workers, religious leaders, even those espousing the same conservative family values of the administration—have led to a significant decline in anti-immigrant sentiment among Republicans.
Still, with the economy on the rocks and the war in Iran nowhere near an end, the Republicans will likely try to emphasize the “success” of the administration on immigration policy in the upcoming midterm elections in November. It will be a desperate strategy. As more information comes out about lives lost, communities harmed, and an economy hobbled by the loss of critical workers, the administration’s deportation strategy may turn out to be a failure politically as well for the president and his party.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Unveils Sweeping New Tariffs Expected to Cost Americans $100 Billion a Year
"These new tariffs are more of the same: a nationwide sales tax that will make life even harder for families already struggling under the costs of Trump’s reckless war in Iran."
Jul 24, 2026
President Donald Trump on Thursday unveiled a new package of tariffs targeting 60 countries that account for over 99% of US imports, a move that—if upheld in court—would cost Americans an estimated $100 billion per year in the form of higher costs.
The duties, ranging from 10% to 12.5%, were announced as part of the president's effort to maneuver around repeated court rulings against his sweeping tariffs, including by the conservative-dominated US Supreme Court. Jamieson Greer, the Trump administration's top trade official, pointed to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to justify the new tariffs, introduced with the purported goal of penalizing countries "for their failure to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor."
Observers questioned the administration's pretext. "Magically, the US tariff probe on forced labor practices is done perfectly in time to replace the generalized but expiring Section 122 tariffs," noted Bloomberg's Josh Wingrove, referring to the legal authority Trump cited for earlier tariffs.
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) acknowledged that "Section 301 is a law Congress passed," but added, "What was passed in 1974 was authority to respond to specific unfair trade practices after investigation."
"What is being done with it now is a tariff on 99% of American trade, set by Trump, with no expiration, no vote, and no ceiling," said Levin. "If a delegation that broad is lawful, then the tariff power in Article I means very little. The Supreme Court struck down the last version of this policy in February. The response was to avoid Congress and find a different statute and rebuild substantially the same tariffs, effective the same minute the old ones lapsed."
The list of countries targeted by the Section 301 tariffs includes Canada, Australia, Brazil, China, Mexico, Russia, Norway, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam.
Between the start of his second administration and January 2026, Trump's tariffs cost American families $1,700 each on average as importers passed burdens onto consumers in the form of higher prices. The tariffs have also hammered small businesses, increased hardship for farmers, and failed to arrest the decline of American manufacturing jobs.
The Progressive Policy Institute said Thursday that the new tariffs would "likely cost Americans $100 billion a year" collectively—though the group's trade director, Ed Gresser, said the administration's order "looks vulnerable to challenge, and courts would have good reason to strike it down."
"Its vague claims about forced labor abroad do not hold up," said Gresser. "Constitutionally, it is likely impermissible as an attempt to use a law designed for problem-solving abroad to impose a general tariff increase. And legally, Section 301 requires administrations to demonstrate ‘unreasonable acts, policies, or practices’ which impose a burden on US commerce, which this executive order fails to do. While making emotive claims about forced labor, it neither presents evidence that the listed countries are buying goods made with the use of forced labor, nor demonstrates that if they were, this would impose the statutorily required ‘burden on US commerce.’"
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said in a statement that "these new tariffs are more of the same: a nationwide sales tax that will make life even harder for families already struggling under the costs of Trump’s reckless war in Iran."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Abuse of the USGS, the Environment, and Our Intellects': Trump Admin Uses Public Lands Report to Push Coal
One critic of the president recently said that he's "forcing higher power bills" on Americans while "fattening the wallets of his cronies—all with billions of our tax dollars."
Jul 23, 2026
President Donald Trump's administration has dedicated over $1 billion to boosting the coal industry, and on Thursday announced a report about reserves beneath federally managed public lands, with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum claiming that the polluting fossil fuel "is more important than ever to the production of electricity."
The US Geological Survey (USGS) publication, titled Coal Beneath Federal Lands in the United States—Mines, Reserves, and Resources, says that "in 2024, the 34 coal mines on Federal lands produced more than 261 million short tons of coal." A short ton, the standard unit of measurement for coal in the United States, is equal to 2,000 lbs.
"These 34 coal mines control more than 4.2 billion short tons of reported coal reserves. Most of the coal mines (31) and more than 98% of the reported coal reserves are on federal lands west of the Mississippi River," according to the report. "Of all the states, Wyoming has the most coal mines on federal lands (14) and produces the most coal from federal lands."
"The USGS estimates that more than 355 billion short tons of available coal resources remain beneath federal lands in the conterminous United States," the document details. "Alaska contains substantial quantities of coal resources. The USGS estimates that Alaska has at least 140 billion short tons of identified available coal resources but may ultimately have as much as 5.5 trillion short tons of coal resources."
A US Department of the Interior statement announcing the report highlights that if the reserves accounted for in the document were produced, "that would be enough coal to supply all the nation’s needs for at least 600 years at the current rate of consumption."
Scientists have long argued that the international community must stop burning coal—plus oil and gas—to prevent a worst-case scenario future as the planet's inhabitants already face a fossil fuel-driven climate emergency and its related extreme weather.
However, climate crisis-denying Trump—who returned to the White House backed by Big Oil's campaign cash—and his Cabinet have spent his second term pushing polluting sources of energy, particularly as his illegal war on Iran drives up global prices, with oil surpassing $100 per barrel on Thursday.
Staying on message, Burgum declared in Interior's Thursday statement that "American Energy Dominance is more important than ever, and so is beautiful clean coal's role in the production of electricity needed to fuel our future prosperity."
"Thanks to the USGS's rigorous and independent assessment, we're better equipped to manage America's vast public lands responsibly while supporting energy security and economic opportunity," he continued.
Sharing the statement on the social media platform Bluesky Thursday, science journalist Emily Willingham said, "What an abuse of the USGS, the environment, and our intellects."
An ore deposit geologist named Elizabeth also ripped the statement on Bluesky, writing: "There is a lot messed up with this press release, but the thing that bothers me the most is how poorly it is written. What an embarrassment!"
The USGS report came just two days after the Energy and Labor departments signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) creating a framework to accelerate the deployment of artificial intelligence, automation, and other emerging technologies in the mining sector.
Acting Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling said, "It is our commitment to you that this MOU will further President Trump's promise to restore coal as a key driver of America’s energy supply chain and American coal will again be the envy of the world for generations to come."
While attacking clean energy initiatives, including offshore wind projects, the administration "has bolstered coal, the dirtiest and most expensive fossil fuel," The Guardian reported earlier this month.
According to the newspaper:
In September, the Department of Energy announced it would spend $625 million to "expand and extend the life of" coal-fired power plants, allocating $350 million to "modernize" coal plants, $175 million to fund coal projects powering rural communities, and $50 million to upgrade wastewater management systems to extend coal plants' lifespans.
Last month, the agency also set aside up to $500 million from the Defense Production Act to “expand and reinvigorate” the capacity of 13 coal plants, and to help build a coal export terminal in Oakland, California. A week later, the department announced an additional $3.6 million to "refurbish or retrofit" nine existing coal plants.
Former Democratic Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a climate advocate and Trump critic, told the paper that the president is "forcing higher power bills" on Americans "by blocking clean energy, then he's fattening the wallets of his cronies—all with billions of our tax dollars."
"We pay more," he said, "Republicans rubber-stamp it, and Trump's donors walk off with the bag."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Again Votes to Stop Trump’s Iran War—but GOP Senators and Fetterman Sink Similar Resolution
"We cannot allow this illegal, unconstitutional war in Iran to continue," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who introduced the House resolution.
Jul 23, 2026
For the second time in as many months, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives narrowly passed a war powers resolution directing President Donald Trump to end his illegal war on Iran, but later on Thursday GOP senators and Democrat John Fetterman blocked a similar measure in the upper chamber.
H.Con.Res.89, introduced by Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and sponsored by 15 Democrats and one Republican, passed by a vote of 214-208, with co-sponsor Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and three other GOP lawmakers—Reps. Tom Barrett (Mich.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.)—breaking ranks to cast "yes" votes.
“Today’s bipartisan vote on my war powers resolution to end this war in Iran was a big victory for the vast majority of the American people who want President Trump to end this illegal war and focus on their lives right here at home," Jayapal said in a statement. "A majority of this Congress voted to end the war yet again, and sent yet another clear order to the president that Congress will not continue to tolerate this illegal war."
"The vote also put pressure on Republicans to stand up for their constituents and the Constitution," the congresswoman continued. "Out of respect for our US servicemembers, civilian lives in Iran and Lebanon, the American taxpayers, and our Constitution, we cannot allow this illegal, unconstitutional war in Iran to continue."
Massie said ahead of Thursday's vote: "American servicemen and women are dying, and gas and fertilizer prices are soaring. It’s time to end this war."
At least 18 US troops have been killed and more than 430 others have been wounded during the 145-day US-Israeli war of choice. Iran's Health Ministry said earlier this week that more than 3,500 Iranians, including at least 496 women and 384 children and infants, have been killed by US and Israeli attacks. More than 26,500 Iranians, including at least 4,000 women and 1,621 children, have been wounded.
Around 30 people have been killed by Iranian counterattacks targeting US-allied Mideast nations, while a simultaneous Israeli war on Lebanon has killed or wounded upward of 15,000 people, according to Lebanese officials.
"Trump needs to end his illegal war now," Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) said on social media.
Jayapal said in her statement: “From the beginning, this war has had no clear mission, no strategy, no end goal. Congress has not been consulted. And hostilities have been driven over and over again by a president who won his election by promising to end forever wars. This administration has clearly gotten us into a war they have no clue how to get us out of."
Later on Thursday, US senators voted 47-49 against advancing a similar war powers resolution introduced by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) crossed the aisle to vote with nearly all Democratic caucus members, while Fetterman (D-Pa.) joined all other present Republicans in voting against the measure. GOP Sens. Katie Britt (Alabama), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), and Rand Paul (Ky.) missed the vote.
"When are Senate Republicans going to stand up?" Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said on the chamber floor. "Senate Republicans lose credibility with the American people with every vote they take against ending Trump's war."
Minority Leader @SenSchumer (D-NY) urges GOP to support Iran war powers resolution: "When are Senate Republicans going to stand up? … Senate Republicans lose credibility with the American people with every vote they take against ending Trump's war." pic.twitter.com/XyCTq1TdKj
— CSPAN (@cspan) July 23, 2026
During his second term, Trump has ordered US military attacks or operations in Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen and a campaign of high-seas boat bombings in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. The self-described "peace president" has ordered attacks on 11 countries through his two terms in office—the aforementioned nations, plus Afghanistan, Libya, and Pakistan during his first administration.
Trump has also threatened to attack, seize, or acquire by other means Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, and Mexico. He is also reportedly weighing strikes on Mali targeting al-Qaeda-affiliated militants.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops to military action and limit such action to 60 days, with a 30-day withdrawal period, unless lawmakers declare war or issue an authorization for the use of military force.
Congressional Democrats and legal experts have rejected Trump’s dubious argument that quitting his negotiated ceasefire with Iran resets the War Powers Resolution’s 60-day limit; absent congressional authorization, the statutory clock generally starts from the first US strike and continues uninterrupted until military action ends.
The first war powers resolutions passed during Trump's presidency came in 2019, when the House and Senate ordered the president to end unauthorized US military involvement in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. The Senate subsequently failed to override Trump's veto of the directive.
Last month, both the House and Senate passed resolutions directing Trump to halt his war on Iran. The president has almost entirely ignored the directives, prompting Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY)—who authored both an unsuccessful war powers resolution in a bid to stop the US boat bombings and the successful Iran order passed last month—to say Thursday that he will try to sue the administration for failing to obey Congress.
"I'm dropping a resolution today... that we should be suing the administration for not following... the resolution that was passed in both the House and Senate," Meeks told reporters outside the Capitol, where lawmakers are set to go on summer recess.
"When we get back next week, I'm going to force a vote on that, so that we can now go to the courts and sue the administration for not following the will of Congress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy