Month: February 2026

Migrant Intimidation Masquerading as Consumer Protection

It came as quite a surprise to see a recent Justice Department press release announcing that its Civil Rights Division had secured a $68 million settlement from a real estate developer accused of targeting Hispanic borrowers through predatory land sales.

That’s because it stands in stark contrast to recent track record of the Division, which has seen a sharp drop in resolved cases under Trump 2.0 and most of those that have been completed have tended to target DEI and so-called reverse discrimination.

When you read the details of the announcement, the settlement with Colony Ridge LLC starts to look like less of an anomaly. First, it turns out that the case was originated by the Biden DOJ in 2023 along with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB, which is in limbo amid the Administration’s moves to dismantle it, dropped its claims in the case rather than participating in the settlement.

Second, the $68 million price tag of the settlement includes nothing in the way of a civil penalty. Most of the total ($48 million) represents the cost of infrastructure improvements required to be made by Colony Ridge, which was accused of deceiving buyers about the flood risks in its subdivisions outside Houston.

The remaining $20 million is supposed to pay for increasing the law enforcement presence at the subdivisions. This is highly unusual in a consumer protection case. What is even stranger is that the settlement agreement specifies that these funds should primarily be used by the local sheriff’s office to help federal agencies with immigration enforcement. Colony Ridge also agreed to tighten its buyer identification procedures and “work with law enforcement to confirm that buyers are not on a published terrorism watch list and are not known members of a transnational criminal organization.”

At this point, it should be noted that the DOJ was not the only party settling with Colony Ridge. The Texas Attorney General’s Office, which had sued the company separately, was also involved.

A press release issued by Texas AG Ken Paxton puts the immigration issue at the center of the case. In fact, it alleges that Colony Ridge was involved in “the development of a de facto illegal immigrant community.” Paxton goes on to make the incredible assertion that “Colony Ridge endangered American citizens by allowing illegal aliens to run rampant on its streets, in its schools, and in its community.”

These statements are the culmination of a rightwing campaign that since 2023 has depicted the Colony Ridge subdivisions as a haven for undocumented immigrants. While the Biden Administration had sued the company for exploiting Latino homebuyers, Texas officials depicted Colony Ridge as in effect a co-conspirator in a purported effort to create a an “illegal immigrant” town that was supposedly filled with gangs and cartel members.

The hysteria around Colony Ridge was fueled by unfounded allegations pushed by the likes of the immigrant-bashing Center for Immigration Studies and far-right U.S. Rep. Brian Babin. Once Trump was back in office, one of the first immigration enforcement surges occurred in Colony Ridge, apparently at the urging of Gov. Greg Abbott.

What all this indicates is that the settlement with Colony Ridge should not be taken as a sign that the Trump DOJ, much less the Texas AG, is now concerned about Latinos being targeted by predatory lenders. This case has little to do with consumer protection and is really just another way of demonizing and intimidating undocumented migrants, even when they are trying to live the American Dream by becoming homeowners.

Making America Corrupt Again

Among the many reasons why the people of Greenland would be better off sticking with Denmark rather than giving in to Donald Trump’s pressure campaign is the matter of public integrity. Transparency International (TI) has just released the latest edition of its Corruption Perceptions Index, and the country whose public sector once again ranks as the most honest in the world is the Kingdom of Denmark.

On a scale of zero to 100, Denmark gets a score of 89. Only four other countries score above 80: Finland, Singapore, New Zealand, and Norway. The United States, by contrast, drops to its lowest-ever score of 64, with a ranking of 29th place. That puts it behind nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, and Estonia.

This slide, which TI notes does not yet fully reflect 2025 developments, does not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying even limited attention to the news. Along with practices such as cruelty to suspected undocumented migrants and gunboat diplomacy, rising corruption has been one of the hallmarks of Trump 2.0.

The TI index, which is based on assessments by a dozen research institutions, measures not only direct corrupt practices such as the prevalence of bribery of public officials and the extent to which those officials may be using their position in other ways for improper personal gain. It also assesses the deterioration of laws and practices meant to discourage corruption. These include judicial independence and legal protection for whistleblowers and journalists who shine a light on misconduct.

Both direct and indirect corruption have proliferated since Trump retook office. He has obliterated norms regarding the pursuit of outside business interests, vastly enriching himself and his family to the tune of $1.4 billion, according to a New York Times analysis.

Trump has abused the powers of his office to extract payments from corporations that may not meet the strict definition of bribery but should nonetheless be regarded as corrupt. These include settlements paid by media companies to resolve baseless lawsuits filed against them by Trump and the extravagant sum paid by Amazon to Melania Trump for the rights to a vanity film the First Lady arranged to have made about herself.

Another form of corruption consists of payments not directly to the Trumps but rather contributions to his pet projects, such as the White House ballroom, by corporations seeking to influence federal policies.  

Trump’s indirect acts have included the dismissal of the inspectors general of 17 federal agencies, thus making it a lot less likely that corruption within agencies will be detected. The administration has also taken action against journalists, including the highly unusual raid of a Washington Post reporter’s home by the FBI. Other assaults on civil society include steps toward the criminalization of certain kinds of non-governmental organizations.

TI warns that when democratic institutions are weakened and corruption flourishes, it is more likely that government will come under the control of narrow vested interests. The United States is moving steadily in that direction as the result of an unholy alliance between large corporations and the interests of Trump and his family business. They are reaping the full benefits of the “golden age of America” Trump promised in his second inaugural address. The rest of the country is left with something a lot less gilded.

Real and Fake Solutions to Inflated Drug Prices

High prescription drug prices are one of the main components of the affordability problem that continues to afflict all but the most affluent Americans. Public officials are addressing the issue, but in two very different ways. One is a gimmick that will do little good; the other is a meaningful attack on pharmaceutical abuses.

On one side we have Trump’s approach, which is to create a web platform—named after himself, of course—that claims it will provide access to the lowest prices. TrumpRx, which at this point contains only a large photograph of its namesake in the Oval Office along with grandiose promises, is designed to inform consumers about special deals that will be available through purchases directly from drug manufacturers.

Like many of Trump’s initiatives, TrumpRx is characterized by misleading claims, conflicts of interest, and potential illegality. In many cases, the promised savings are illusory. The prices consumers pay when buying directly from the drug companies will be higher than what they would pay using insurance. Those without insurance may benefit, but the amount of the benefit is declining as the companies which signed up for TrumpRx have been raising their prices.

Concerns about a conflict of interest stem from the fact that the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., sits on the board of BlinkRx, a company which is positioning itself to profit from TrumpRx by helping drug companies set up direct-to-consumer systems linked to the program.

And concerns about illegality are linked to the possibility that TrumpRx may run afoul of the Anti-Kickback Statute by steering patients to higher-cost medications that they may end up receiving through Medicare and Medicaid.

Compare this mess to the recent announcement that attorneys general from 48 states and territories had reached a settlement with Bausch Health and Lannett Company to resolve allegations they conspired “to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade with regard to numerous generic prescription drugs.” The firms agreed to pay nearly $18 million and consented to a set of reforms designed to promote fair competition.

At the same time, 42 states and territories filed a new lawsuit against drug giant Novartis and its subsidiary Sandoz, accusing them of fixing prices, allocating markets, and rigging bids for 31 different generic drugs.

These are just the latest developments in a long-running legal battle against anti-competitive practices in the generic drug industry, which was once seen as a force that would drive down prices. Instead, many generic producers allowed themselves to be corrupted by entering into deals with brand-name manufacturers under which they were paid to delay introduction of low-cost substitutes. Pay for delay legal actions brought by federal agencies, state AGs, and private plaintiffs in class action lawsuits have yielded billions of dollars in settlements.

These cases have not yet made drug manufacturers paragons of competitive virtue, but they put continuing pressures on companies to end their abuses. That’s a lot more than what we can expect from TrumpRx and its dubious agreements with Big Pharma.