Connect with us

Politics

US Supreme Court weighing presidential powers in new term

Published

on

US Supreme Court weighing presidential powers in new term


A view of the US Supreme Court in Washington, US June 29, 2024. — Reuters
A view of the US Supreme Court in Washington, US June 29, 2024. — Reuters

Donald Trump’s unprecedented expansion of the powers of the US presidency will be put to the test when the Supreme Court returns for its fall term on Monday.

“The crucial question will be whether it serves as a check on President Trump or just a rubber stamp approving his actions,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School.

If past is prologue, the Republican leader is in line to notch up more legal victories from a conservative-dominated bench that includes three of his own appointees.

On the docket are voting rights, state bans on the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ sports and a religious freedom case involving a Rastafarian who had his knee-length dreadlocks forcibly shorn while in prison.

But the blockbuster case this term concerns Trump’s levying of hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs on imports and whether he had the statutory authority to do so.

Lower courts have ruled he did not.

But the Supreme Court has overwhelmingly sided with Trump since he returned to office, allowing, for example, mass firing of federal workers, the dismissal of members of independent agencies, the withholding of funds appropriated by Congress and racial profiling in his sweeping immigration crackdown.

“You’ve seen the court go out of its way, really bend over backwards, in order to green-light Trump administration positions,” said Cecillia Wang, national legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

‘Legal equivalent of fast food’

Many of those decisions have come on the controversial emergency or “shadow” docket, where the court hands down orders after little briefing, without oral arguments and with paltry explanation.

US President Donald Trump delivers remarks in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, DC, US, April 2, 2025. — Reuters
US President Donald Trump delivers remarks in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, DC, US, April 2, 2025. — Reuters

Samuel Bray, a University of Chicago law professor, described it as the “legal equivalent of fast food”, and the court’s three liberal justices have condemned the increasing use of the emergency docket.

Chemerinsky noted in an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times that using the shadow docket, the six conservative justices have “repeatedly and without exception… voted to reverse lower court decisions that had initially found Trump’s actions to be unconstitutional.”

The high-stakes tariffs case, on the other hand, will involve full briefing and oral arguments and will be heard on November 5.

Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to unilaterally impose his extensive tariffs, bypassing Congress by claiming the country was facing an emergency due to the trade deficit.

“At least hundreds of billions of dollars or more are at stake and they may need to refund those billions of dollars if they lose in the Supreme Court,” said Curtis Bradley, a University of Chicago law professor.

Other high-profile cases involving the power of the president are to be heard in December and January when the court weighs in on Trump’s bid to fire members of the independent Federal Trade Commission and Lisa Cook, a governor of the interest-rate setting Federal Reserve Board.

Voting rights

On October 15, the Supreme Court will hear a voting rights case in which “non-African American” voters are contesting the creation of a second Black majority congressional district in Louisiana, claiming it is the result of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.

The US Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, US, October 2, 2022. — Reuters
The US Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, US, October 2, 2022. — Reuters

A victory for the plaintiffs in the case would deal a severe blow to a section of the Voting Rights Act that allows for creation of majority-minority districts to make up for racial discrimination.

“The stakes are incredibly high,” said the ACLU’s Sophia Lin Lakin. “The outcome will not only determine the next steps for Louisiana’s congressional map, but may also shape the future of redistricting cases nationwide.”

Another notable case on the docket concerns challenges to state laws in Idaho and West Virginia that ban transgender girls from taking part in girls’ sports.

A religious freedom case to be heard on November 10 has unusually brought together legal advocates on both the left and the right.

Damon Landor is a devout Rastafarian whose hair was forcibly cut while he was in prison in Louisiana.

He is seeking permission to sue individual officials of the Louisiana Department of Corrections for monetary damages for violating his religious rights.

The Supreme Court is generally hostile to approving damages actions against individual government officials, Bray said.

At the same time, he noted, the right-leaning court has tended to side with the plaintiffs in religious liberty cases.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Netanyahu says he was successfully treated for prostate cancer

Published

on

Netanyahu says he was successfully treated for prostate cancer


Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony commemorating Israel’s Yom HaZikaron at the Military Cemetery on Mount Herzl in occupied Jerusalem, April 21, 2026. — Reuters
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony commemorating Israel’s Yom HaZikaron at the Military Cemetery on Mount Herzl in occupied Jerusalem, April 21, 2026. — Reuters
  • Netanyahu does not disclose when treatment occurred.
  • Delayed release of medical report by two months: Israeli PM.
  • Move aimed at preventing Iran from spreading “propaganda”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday said that he had received successful treatment for early-stage prostate cancer, without specifying when the treatment took place.

In a statement on social media, as his annual medical report was released, Netanyahu, 76, said an early stage malignant tumor had been discovered during a routine checkup. He said “targeted treatment” had removed “the problem” and left no trace of it.

According to the medical report, which otherwise said the prime minister was in good health, Netanyahu was treated with radiation therapy for early-stage prostate cancer.

Neither the medical report nor Netanyahu said when the treatment occurred.

Israel’s longest-serving prime minister said that he had delayed the release of the medical report by two months to prevent Iran from spreading “false propaganda against Israel”.

In March, during the fighting with Iran, rumors that circulated on social media and aired on Iranian state media claimed that Netanyahu had died.

The Israeli leader recorded a video of himself visiting a Jerusalem cafe in March to refute the claims.

Netanyahu underwent surgery on his prostate in 2024 after he was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection resulting from a benign prostate enlargement. In 2023, he was fitted with a pacemaker. Elections are due to be held in Israel by October.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Strategic Assertion or Legal Breach? Deconstructing India’s Indus Waters Doctrine

Published

on

Strategic Assertion or Legal Breach? Deconstructing India’s Indus Waters Doctrine



India’s unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty under the pretext of security concerns constitutes a flagrant violation of international law , devoid of any legal basis within the Treaty framework. By invoking unsubstantiated claims surrounding the Pahalgam incident , India advances a dangerous doctrine that legitimizes treaty erosion and the coercive weaponisation of shared resources.

The Indus Waters Treaty is a binding bilateral instrument that contains no provision permitting unilateral suspension , reinterpretation, or conditional compliance, thereby rendering India’s decision to hold it in abeyance legally untenable and inconsistent with the principle of pacta sunt servanda. The attempt to justify this breach through allegations linked to the Pahalgam incident remains entirely unsubstantiated in international fora, exposing the claim as a politically motivated pretext rather than a lawful justification. By conflating disputed security narratives with treaty obligations, India not only undermines the integrity of a long-standing water-sharing regime but also sets a pernicious precedent that threatens the stability of transboundary agreements and the broader rules-based international order.

India’s unilateral move to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance is not a policy shift, it is a shameless act of legal defiance , openly violating the most basic rule of international law; pacta sunt servanda.

The weaponization of a water-sharing treaty exposes the dangerous ideological imprint of the RSS mindset , where majoritarian extremism overrides legal commitments India’s attempt to justify its conduct through the Pahalgam incident collapses under scrutiny even after a year; no evidence, no accountability, no credibility, only a politically convenient narrative weaponized to rationalize treaty violations.

Dragging terrorism allegations into a binding water treaty is not strategy, it is blatant and reckless escalation , dismantling decades of carefully insulated cooperation and replacing it with instability and mistrust.

By sidestepping proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration, India has revealed a pattern of selective legality , embracing international law when convenient and abandoning it when constrained. Moreover, India yet remains silent to the UN Special Rapporteurs queries even after 130 days.

The weaponisation of water by an upper riparian state is nothing short of hydro-political terrorism , targeting the economic and agricultural lifeline of millions and crossing the line from governance into coercion.

This conduct represents a shameful erosion of treaty sanctity , sending a chilling message to the world that binding agreements can be hollowed out by power politics and ideological rigidity.

Pakistan’s position remains unequivocal; treaties are not conditional favors but binding obligations, and no state has the authority to unilaterally rewrite or suspend them under the guise of security narratives.

The growing international concern surrounding India’s actions underscores a simple reality: Unilateralism is isolating, destabilizing, and fundamentally incompatible with a rules-based order.

At its core, this doctrine of “blood and water cannot flow together” is not a principle of justice, it is a dangerous precedent, legitimizing collective punishment and transforming a historic instrument of peace into a tool of strategic pressure.



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

India rebukes Trump for sharing ‘hellhole’ remarks on birthright citizenship

Published

on

India rebukes Trump for sharing ‘hellhole’ remarks on birthright citizenship


US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump tour the historic Taj Mahal, in Agra, India, February 24, 2020. — Reuters
US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump tour the historic Taj Mahal, in Agra, India, February 24, 2020. — Reuters
  • Trump shares commentary on birthright citizenship on his social media.
  • Conservative talk show host called China, India ‘hellhole’ places.
  • India says inappropriate comments do not reflect reality of India-US ties.

India has dismissed as “uninformed” comments shared by US President Donald Trump that described the country as a “hellhole”, saying they were inappropriate and inconsistent with the strong relationship between the two countries.

The comments were made by conservative commentator Michael Savage in an episode of The Savage Nation talk radio show. Trump posted a transcript of the show on his Truth Social account on Thursday without any comments.

“A baby here becomes an instant citizen, and then they bring the entire family in from China or India or some other hellhole on the planet,” Savage said, according to the transcript.

“That there’s almost no loyalty to this country amongst the immigrant class coming in today, which was not always the case. No, they’re not like the European Americans of today and their ancestors.”

Reuters could not immediately contact Savage.

Trump has issued a directive seeking to restrict birthright citizenship in the United States, a move that has been challenged in the US Supreme Court. Earlier this month, he attended a hearing on the issue in a historic visit to the court.

India’s foreign ministry late on Thursday reacted strongly to the comments.

“The remarks are obviously uninformed, inappropriate and in poor taste,” Indian foreign ministry spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, said in a statement.

“They certainly do not reflect the reality of the India-US relationship, which has long been based on mutual respect and shared interests.”

The US embassy in New Delhi said: “The president has said ‘India is a great country with a very good friend of mine at the top’.”

China’s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

India’s main opposition Congress party called the “hellhole” remark “extremely insulting and anti-India. It hurts every Indian”.

“Prime Minister Narendra Modi should take up this matter with the US President and register a strong objection,” the party said on X.

Indian government data shows nearly 5.5 million people of Indian origin live in the United States. Indian Americans and Chinese Americans are the two biggest groups of Asian origin in the US.

Trump and Modi enjoyed warm ties during Trump’s first term, but relations cooled after India was hit last year with some of the highest US tariffs, many of which were rolled back this year. India and the US are now working on a trade deal aimed at preventing any renewed increase in tariffs and boosting sales to each other.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending