Skip to main content

Featured

Ukraine Faces Deepening Power Shortages After Russian Strikes

A resident shows a journalist where a Russian drone struck the roof of an apartment building, depriving its residents of water, heat and electricity, in Kyiv. Ukraine is confronting one of its most severe energy shortfalls since the start of the full‑scale invasion, with the country currently able to supply only about 60% of its electricity needs. A new wave of Russian missile and drone attacks has heavily damaged power plants and transmission infrastructure across multiple regions, pushing the grid to the brink. Officials report that nearly every major power‑generating facility has been hit in recent weeks. Cities such as Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, and Dnipro have experienced rolling blackouts, leaving millions of residents coping with limited heating, lighting, and communications during the winter season. Ukraine’s government has warned that the situation remains extremely challenging. Engineers are working around the clock to repair damaged facilities, but repeated strikes have slowed...
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