Skip to main content

Featured

Trump Moves to Impose 10% Global Tariff After Court Setback

                                                        U.S. President Donald Trump In the wake of a major Supreme Court defeat, President Donald Trump announced that he will sign an executive order to impose a 10% global tariff on U.S. trading partners. The move comes just hours after the Court struck down his earlier sweeping tariff measures, ruling 6–3 that he had exceeded his authority under emergency powers.  Trump said the new tariff will be enacted under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows temporary trade measures to address balance‑of‑payments issues. He emphasized that the tariff would be added “over and above” existing duties, signaling his intent to continue pursuing aggressive trade policies despite the legal setback.  Defiant in tone, Trump insisted that the ruling would not constrain...

article

Defying Justice: White House Deportations Spark Controversy


The White House has come under fire for deporting hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador, despite a federal court order temporarily halting such actions. The deportations, carried out under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, have raised questions about the administration's adherence to the rule of law and the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg had issued a 14-day suspension on the deportations, citing concerns over the use of wartime powers to justify the removals. However, the administration argued that the court order was issued after the deportees had already left U.S. soil, rendering it inapplicable. Critics, including legal experts and human rights organizations, have condemned the move as a blatant disregard for judicial authority and due process.

The deportees, alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang, were transferred to a high-security prison in El Salvador under an agreement with the Salvadoran government. While the administration defends its actions as a necessary measure to protect national security, opponents view it as an overreach of executive power with potentially dangerous implications for constitutional governance.

This incident has ignited a broader debate about immigration policy, executive authority, and the treatment of migrants, particularly those fleeing crisis-stricken nations like Venezuela. The controversy underscores the complexities and tensions inherent in addressing issues of national security and human rights.

Comments