Connect with us

News

Wall Street-backed landlords a target for both Trump and Democrats

Published

on

Wall Street-backed landlords a target for both Trump and Democrats

An aerial view of a housing development in Las Vegas on Aug. 8, 2025.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Back in 2020, Ashley Maxwell and her husband were looking to buy their first home, near Indianapolis.

“We looked at over 80 homes in probably a span of two months,” she said.

The couple was in a tight spot. They had three kids and were forced to move because their landlord was selling their rental. That pressure made their search all the more frustrating.

Advertisement

“We would pull up to a house, our agent would get out and be like, ‘There’s 10 additional offers, sight unseen, all cash.’ Typically that means it’s an investor,” Maxwell recalled.

The couple, who eventually found a place, was one of many whose path to homeownership was stymied by a nationwide surge of institutional investors, then driven by record-low mortgage rates, snapping up single-family homes to rent out.

It’s an issue that President Trump now aims to take on. In a recent social media post, he said he wants to “ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes,” to help bring down housing costs.

It’s a popular idea, especially among some Democrats. But passing such laws has proved difficult, and economists say the link of investor-owned homes to high prices is not so simple.

A cap on investor rentals just took effect in this city

In Fishers, Ind., a suburb of Indianapolis, Republican Mayor Scott Fadness was taken aback when he saw new data in a housing report compiled by his team that showed the extent of investor landlords in his city.

Advertisement

“We have neighborhoods today that are now creeping up to 35, 38% of the homes have been purchased for investment purposes,” he said.

It got so bad, he recalled, that one of his employees who was house hunting sent letters to homeowners, explaining that they were going to work for the city “and would they please consider allowing them to buy the home” instead of an institutional investor.

To address the problem, Fadness last year proposed capping rentals at 10% per neighborhood to protect local homeownership.

“It’s been a source of generational wealth in our country for a very long time, particularly in the middle class,” he said. “I hate to see that go away.”

It’s also more difficult, he said, to deal with code enforcement and other issues when the property owner is an out-of-state corporation.

Advertisement

Realtor groups opposed a cap, arguing it infringed on private property rights and could deprive sellers of the highest bid, but the City Council backed the plan unanimously. The new law just took effect Jan. 1.

“It was the first time I had proposed an ordinance in our community where outside interests, business interests, came into town and spent money trying to kill the legislation,” Fadness said.

It was a rare win for such a proposal. Cities and states across the U.S. have debated restricting investor homebuyers, yet most measures have failed to pass. One proposal went nowhere in Congress, which Trump has said would need to codify any ban. California Gov. Gavin Newsom joined Trump this month in saying he’s determined to do something.

Economists say large investors are not the biggest factor driving home prices

But housing experts say it’s too easy to blame corporate landlords entirely for skyrocketing prices.

“People see the connection, but they don’t necessarily separate out the cause and effect,” said Laurie Goodman, an economist with the Housing Finance Policy Center at the Urban Institute.

Advertisement

Prices do go up where investors buy, but she said, “That is part of their strategy,” because the places they choose are already growing. And often, they buy serious fixer-uppers.

“Most of us don’t have the knowledge to do the repairs,” Goodman said. “[Even] if we did, we couldn’t get the financing.”

Nationally, the largest companies own about 3% of the single-family rental market, with larger shares in some places like the Sunbelt. And the institutional buying spree has cooled from its peak in 2022, as higher interest rates have made homes more expensive.

The main driver of rising prices is a housing shortage, Goodman said, and some investors are actually helping to ease that now, by building their own single-family houses to rent.

“The best way to make housing affordable is to simply build more of it — to increase supply,” she said.

Advertisement

The debate continues in Las Vegas

In Las Vegas, Democratic state Sen. Dina Neal still worries that the build-to-rent trend is undercutting people’s shot at homeownership. She pointed to one corporate investor near her district that built an entire neighborhood of houses to rent.

“They didn’t build the whole entire neighborhood to give it up,” she said. “They wanted to make sure they would secure rental income from 200 different families and keep it.”

What’s more, like Fadness in Indiana, Neal worries that investor rentals are priced so high it can become impossible for many people to save up for a down payment. She said her previous next-door neighbor sold to an investor believing she could trade up, but had to rent a place down the street — from a different corporate investor.

Neal has proposed a cap on corporate landlords three times, but Nevada’s Republican governor, Joe Lombardo, has blocked it, most recently last month.

Neal is surprised — and cautious — now that Trump is taking up her cause. “I am trying to figure out how I entered into a universe where I became aligned with a president who is a nemesis to the Democratic Party,” she laughed.

Advertisement

But if Trump’s interest can persuade more Republicans to join the push, she said she’ll take it.

News

Justice Department moves to dismiss Steve Bannon’s criminal case

Published

on

Justice Department moves to dismiss Steve Bannon’s criminal case

The Justice Department on Monday moved to dismiss its long-running criminal case against Steve Bannon, tied to his refusal to testify before the congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Bannon, a longtime ally of President Donald Trump, was convicted in 2022 on two counts of contempt of Congress for refusing to appear for a deposition before the House committee that investigated the insurrection and declining to produce documents requested by the committee.

Bannon served four months in federal prison in 2024.

The Justice Department wrote in its unopposed motion Monday to dismiss the case: “The government has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice.”

Bannon had asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal of his conviction last year, and the Trump administration’s response was due Monday. Instead of addressing the issues Bannon raised, Solicitor John D. Sauer, a former Trump personal lawyer, said the government now believes the underlying indictment should be dismissed.

Advertisement

He asked the high court to vacate the judgment against Bannon and send it back to a lower court to be dismissed.

At the same time, Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, submitted a filing with the lower court judge asking that the case be dismissed. The filing says “Defendant Bannon does not oppose this motion.”

Bannon did not immediately return a request for comment.

If the legal strategy works, it would be largely symbolic since Bannon already served his time.

The indictment and conviction against Bannon came after the House voted in 2021 to find him in contempt of Congress. The Jan. 6 committee wanted more information about comments he made the day before the riot.

Advertisement

“All hell is going to break loose tomorrow,” he said on his radio program Jan. 5.

Bannon refused to comply with the subpoena for his testimony and request for documents, citing Trump’s assertion of executive privilege.

After leading Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, Bannon served in the White House during Trump’s first term for less than a year as a senior counselor and chief strategist. He now hosts a popular podcast.

After a jury found Bannon guilty in 2022, the leaders of the Jan. 6 committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and then-Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said in a joint statement, “As the prosecutor stated, Steve Bannon ‘chose allegiance to Donald Trump over compliance with the law.’ Just as there must be accountability for all those responsible for the events of January 6th, anyone who obstructs our investigation into these matters should face consequences.”

Bannon sought several times to appeal his conviction, but those previous efforts had been unsuccessful.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

No, that wasn’t Liam Conejo Ramos in Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show

Published

on

No, that wasn’t Liam Conejo Ramos in Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show

Bad Bunny’s performance during halftime of the NFL Super Bowl 60 football game featured a moment in which the musician handed his Grammy to a little kid. Online speculation flared that the boy was Conejo Ramos.

Julio Cortez/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Julio Cortez/AP

Around the middle of Bad Bunny’s live NFL Super Bowl halftime performance, the Puerto Rican singer is seen handing a Grammy Award to a young Latino boy.

As he kneels down and rubs the boy’s head, he says: “Cree siempre en ti” (“always believe in yourself”). Almost immediately, rumors began spreading like wildfire on social media: the boy was none other than Liam Conejo Ramos, an immigrant who has made headlines in recent weeks.

While the concert was rife with symbolism and statement — this happens to not be true. A publicist for Bad Bunny told NPR Music that the little boy on stage was not Liam Conejo Ramos. A representative for the Conejo Ramos family also confirmed to Minnesota Public Radio that it was not the young boy.

Advertisement

Who is Liam Conejo Ramos?

Five-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos and his dad, Adrian Conejo, were detained by federal immigration agents on Jan. 20 at their Minneapolis driveway.

A photo taken of the boy carrying a Spider-Man backpack and wearing a blue bunny hat, went viral on social media, and has become one of the symbols of President Trump’s harsh immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

Liam and his dad were sent to a detention center in Dilley, Texas, meant to hold families with minors. They were released earlier this month.

The family, which comes from Ecuador, is claiming asylum. The federal government, however, is pushing to end their asylum claims.

The photo of the 5-year-old in his floppy-eared blue bunny hat being detained by immigration officers became a symbol around which anti-ICE protesters in Minnesota rallied.

The photo of the 5-year-old in his floppy-eared blue bunny hat being detained by immigration officers became a symbol around which anti-ICE protesters in Minnesota rallied.

Liz Baker/NPR

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Liz Baker/NPR

Advertisement

The Department of Homeland Security launched Operation Metro Surge in December, deploying nearly 3,000 federal immigration agents to Minnesota. It has led to hundreds of arrests, including of undocumented immigrants without criminal records, and the killing of two U.S. citizens by federal agents.

A concert filled with symbolism

Bad Bunny’s presence at the Super Bowl has been praised — and criticized — for being a predominantly Spanish-language concert, and because of his stance on Trump’s immigration enforcement campaign. During his acceptance speech at last week’s Grammy Awards, he stated “ICE out… we’re not savage We’re not animals. We’re not aliens. We are humans. And we are Americans.”

Sunday’s Super Bowl performance was filled with symbolism and contained several strong statements celebrating Latinos and immigrants in America, including when the singer said “God Bless America” and named all of the countries of North, Central, and South America.

Continue Reading

News

Video: ‘We Will Pay’: Savannah Guthrie Addresses Mother’s Captor in New Video

Published

on

Video: ‘We Will Pay’: Savannah Guthrie Addresses Mother’s Captor in New Video

new video loaded: ‘We Will Pay’: Savannah Guthrie Addresses Mother’s Captor in New Video

transcript

transcript

‘We Will Pay’: Savannah Guthrie Addresses Mother’s Captor in New Video

Nancy Guthrie’s children shared a new video message to their mother’s purported abductor on Saturday evening. In the video, posted to the “Today” show anchor Savannah Guthrie’s Instagram account, the siblings said they were willing to pay for their mother’s return.

“We received your message, and we understand. We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her. This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us, and we will pay.”

Advertisement
Nancy Guthrie’s children shared a new video message to their mother’s purported abductor on Saturday evening. In the video, posted to the “Today” show anchor Savannah Guthrie’s Instagram account, the siblings said they were willing to pay for their mother’s return.

By Cynthia Silva

February 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending