Skip to main content

Featured

U.S.–Iran Strikes Escalate: What It Means for Your Gas Bill and Savings

  ⚡ BREAKING · MAY 8, 2026 By MoneySavings.ca Editorial Team   |  May 8, 2026  |  5 min read The Strait of Hormuz, photographed from space. Approximately 20% of the world's oil supply passes through this narrow waterway. (Image: NASA / Public Domain) American warships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz on May 7, 2026 — and the U.S. military fired back hard, striking Iranian ports at Qeshm and Bandar Abbas. For Canadians, this isn't just a distant war story. It's a pocketbook issue. 20% of global oil transits the Strait of Hormuz every day $94 projected WTI crude price per barrel if closure continues (CEPR, 2026) 5% of normal shipping traffic still moving through the Strait What Happened — and When The crisis didn't begin overnight. On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes against Iran, targeting nuclear infrastructure and senior military leadership — including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the strik...
Post a Comment
Read more

article

Labels

Supreme Court Decision Sparks Debate Over Alien Enemies Act


The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump, allowing the use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members. This decision, made in a 5-4 vote, has reignited discussions about the application of this wartime law in modern times.

The Alien Enemies Act, historically employed during wartime, grants the president authority to deport individuals deemed a national security risk. Trump's administration invoked this law to expedite the deportation of members of the Tren de Aragua gang. However, the court emphasized that detainees must be given notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal through habeas corpus claims.

Critics argue that the law's application in this context exceeds its intended scope, as it was designed for wartime scenarios involving foreign governments. Supporters, however, view the decision as a victory for national security and presidential authority.

The ruling has sparked legal and ethical debates, with dissenting justices questioning the legitimacy of using the Alien Enemies Act for non-state actors like gangs. The case continues to highlight tensions between executive power and judicial oversight in immigration policy.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment