Politics
White House takes tariffs fight to US Supreme Court


- Court says Trump exceeded powers in enacting tariffs.
- Trump cites longstanding US trade deficit as emergency.
- Tariffs remain in effect during appeal to Supreme Court.
Donald Trump’s administration asked the US Supreme Court on Wednesday to hear a bid to preserve his sweeping tariffs pursued under a 1977 law meant for emergencies, after a lower court invalidated most of the levies central to the Republican president’s economic and trade agenda.
The Justice Department appealed an August 29 ruling by a federal appeals court that the president overstepped his authority in invoking the law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, undercutting a major Trump priority in his second term.
The tariffs currently remain in effect as the appeals court paused its order to give the administration time to seek Supreme Court review.
The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to decide by September 10 whether it would hear the case. The Justice Department also proposed an accelerated timetable for resolving the litigation, with oral arguments in the first week of November, just a month after the start of the court’s 2025-2026 term.
Lawyers for small businesses challenging the tariffs are not opposing the government’s request for a Supreme Court hearing. One of the attorneys, Jeffrey Schwab of Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement they were confident they would prevail.
“We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients,” Schwab said.
The levies are part of a trade war instigated by Trump since he returned to the presidency in January that has alienated trading partners, increased volatility in financial markets and fueled global economic uncertainty.
Trump has made tariffs a pillar of US foreign policy, using them to exert political pressure and renegotiate trade deals and extract concessions from countries that export goods to the United States.
The litigation concerns Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose what Trump calls “reciprocal” tariffs to address trade deficits in April, as well as separate tariffs announced in February as economic leverage on China, Canada and Mexico to curb the trafficking of fentanyl and illicit drugs into the US.
IEEPA gives the president power to deal with “an unusual and extraordinary threat” amid a national emergency and had historically been used for imposing sanctions on enemies or freezing their assets. Prior to Trump, the law had never been used to impose tariffs.
Trump’s Department of Justice has argued that the law allows tariffs under emergency provisions that authorise a president to “regulate” imports or block them completely.
The appeals court ruling stems from two challenges, one brought by five small businesses that import goods, including a New York wine and spirits importer and a Pennsylvania-based sport fishing retailer. The other was filed by 12 US states — Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont — most of them governed by Democrats.
The Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the authority to impose taxes and tariffs, and any delegation of that authority must be both explicit and limited, according to the lawsuits.
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, agreed, ruling that the president’s power to regulate imports under the law does not include the power to impose tariffs.
“It seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the President unlimited authority to impose tariffs,” the appeals court said in its 7-4 decision.
The appeals court also said that the administration’s expansive view of IEEPA violates the Supreme Court’s “major questions” doctrine, which requires executive branch actions of vast economic and political significance to be clearly authorised by Congress.
The New York-based US Court of International Trade, which has jurisdiction over customs and trade disputes, previously ruled against Trump’s tariff policies on May 28.
Another court in Washington ruled that IEEPA does not authorise Trump’s tariffs, and the government has appealed that decision as well. At least eight lawsuits have challenged Trump’s tariff policies, including one filed by the state of California.
The administration’s appeal comes as a legal fight over the independence of the Federal Reserve also seems bound for the Supreme Court, setting up a potential legal showdown over Trump’s entire economic policy in the months ahead.
Politics
China criticises Australia, Canada warships in Taiwan Strait


China on Saturday said that its military monitored the passage of Australian and Canadian warships through the Taiwan Strait, criticising their presence in the sensitive waterway as “causing trouble”.
Beijing views Taiwan as part of its territory and claims jurisdiction over the body of water that separates the self-ruled island from the Chinese mainland.
“On September 6, the Canadian frigate ‘Quebec’ and the Australian destroyer ‘Brisbane’ transited the Taiwan Strait, causing trouble and provoking,” said Senior Colonel Shi Yi, spokesperson for the Eastern Theatre Command of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
The PLA “organised naval and air forces to monitor and supervise their entire transits, effectively responding and handling the situation”, Shi said in a statement.
“The actions of Canada and Australia send the wrong signals and increase security risks,” he added.
“[Chinese] troops remain on high alert at all times, resolutely safeguarding national sovereignty and security and regional peace and stability.”
Beijing has ramped up deployment of fighter jets and naval vessels around Taiwan in recent years to press its sovereignty claim, which Taipei rejects.
The United States frequently sends ships through the Taiwan Strait, and several of its Western allies have increased their presence with regular — though less common — transits.
In June, China criticised the United Kingdom for sending a navy patrol vessel through the waterway, saying it “undermined peace and stability”.
Politics
India’s fresh false flag drama to malign Pakistan exposed once again

Following setbacks in Operation Sundoor, the Indian government has once again resorted to leveling false allegations against Pakistan.
After the embarrassment of the Pahalgam false flag operation, another fabricated drama has surfaced in Indian media.
According to reports, Indian outlets have claimed—without evidence—that Mumbai Traffic Control Room received fake calls about bombs planted at various locations in the city.
In these baseless reports, attempts have been made once again to link Pakistan with terrorism. Analysts note that India is attempting to malign Pakistan at the international stage despite repeated embarrassments.
Observers believe such self-staged narratives are aimed at diverting attention from India’s internal failures, creating fear among the public, and exploiting the situation for political gain.
Earlier, Indian media had also falsely labeled three Pakistani citizens, traveling to Cambodia for employment, as terrorists. This propaganda, according to experts, reflects an effort to conceal domestic turmoil inside India.
Politics
Japan prince comes of age amid looming succession crisis


TOKYO: Japan on Saturday heralded the coming-of-age of Prince Hisahito with an elaborate ceremony at the Imperial Palace, where a succession crisis is brewing.
The nephew of Emperor Naruhito, Hisahito received a black silk and lacquer crown at the ceremony, which marks the beginning of his royal adult life.
“Thank you very much for bestowing the crown today at the coming of age ceremony,” Hisahito said.
“I will fulfil my duties, being aware of my responsibilities as an adult member of the imperial family.”
Although the emperor has a daughter — Princess Aiko — the 23-year-old has been sidelined by the royal family’s male-only succession rules.
“As a young member of the Imperial Family, I am determined to fulfil my role,” Hisahito said in March.
Second in line to become emperor after his father, the 19-year-old will appear at the Tokyo palace to pay his respects to gods and ancestors.
Although tradition dictates only a man can carry on the imperial line — which goes back 2,600 years according to legend — opinion polls have shown high public support for a woman taking the throne.
“It makes no difference to me whether a woman becomes the emperor or a man does,” said Tokyo bartender Yuta Hinago.
The 33-year-old felt there could be “room for more flexibility” in the succession rules.
Japan has debated the royal succession for decades, with a key government panel in 2005 recommending that it pass to the oldest child regardless of their sex.
That appeared to pave the way for the emperor’s daughter to rise to the Chrysanthemum Throne, but Hisahito’s birth the following year silenced the debate.
Politicians have been slow to act, “kicking the can down the road,” and delaying a solution with youthful Hisahito in view, said Kenneth Ruoff, director of the Centre for Japanese Studies at Portland State University.
Traditionalists have asserted that the “unbroken imperial line” of male succession is the foundation of Japan, and major changes would divide the nation.
Under the post-war constitution, the royal family holds no political power.
Pressure on women
With royal daughters forced to leave the family after marriage, one modernising proposal would see them continue their public duties after their nuptials.

Conservatives, meanwhile, are pushing for the royal household to bring distant relatives back to the fold.
But it is unclear if those men would be willing to give up their careers and freedom to continue the lineage.
Hisahito said this year he has “not yet thought deeply” about his own marriage prospects, which could be challenging.
Historically, women who wed royals have faced intense pressure to produce sons and have become constant subjects of gossip.
Empress Masako, a former high-flying diplomat, struggled for years with a stress-related illness after joining the household, which some have put down to the pressure to have a boy.
Emperess Emerita Michiko, Naruhito’s mother, also suffered stress-induced illnesses.
Hisahito’s sister, Mako, married her university boyfriend Kei Komuro.
She has faced intense tabloid reporting over claims that Kei’s family had run into financial difficulties, leading the former princess to develop complex post-traumatic stress disorder. The couple left for the United States, where they recently had a baby.
Other members of the royal family are regular subjects of online and media gossip.
Despite broad public support for changing the succession rules, away from the pageantry, people are focused on other issues, such as rising inflation, royal historian Hideya Kawanishi told AFP.
“If people who are generally supportive (of women emperors) become a bit louder, then politicians can become more serious,” said Kawanishi, an associate professor at Nagoya University.
“But when ceremonies end, society, including the media, calms down and moves on.”
-
Tech1 week ago
SSA Whistleblower’s Resignation Email Mysteriously Disappeared From Inboxes
-
Entertainment1 week ago
Sabrina Carpenter gives insight into her new music and viral debate over album cover
-
Tech1 week ago
Watch Our Livestream Replay: Back to School in the Age of AI
-
Tech1 week ago
DJI’s Mic 3 Takes the Best Wireless Microphone and Makes It Better
-
Tech1 week ago
Gear News of the Week: Apple’s iPhone Event Gets a Date, and Plaud Upgrades Its AI Note-Taker
-
Tech1 week ago
We’ve Rounded Up the 41 Best Labor Day Deals on Gear We’ve Tested
-
Fashion1 week ago
US’ Guess Q2 profit hits $6.2 mn, but margins shrink on costs
-
Tech1 week ago
FEMA’s Chaotic Summer Has Gone From Bad to Worse