Connect with us

Politics

Trump to ask Supreme Court to save tariffs but faces tough legal questions

Published

on

Trump to ask Supreme Court to save tariffs but faces tough legal questions


US President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media, on the day of a closed House Republican Conference meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, US, May 20, 2025. — Reuters
US President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media, on the day of a closed House Republican Conference meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, US, May 20, 2025. — Reuters 

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump is set to imminently ask the conservative-majority Supreme Court to validate his broad emergency tariffs after two setbacks at lower courts, but will face tough legal questions as his administration presses ahead with backup plans.

Legal and trade experts said that the Supreme Court’s 6-3 majority of Republican-appointed justices may slightly improve Trump’s odds of keeping in place his “reciprocal” and fentanyl-related tariffs after a federal appeals court ruled 7-4 last week that they are illegal.

Trump said on Tuesday that his administration would seek as early as Wednesday an expedited ruling by the Supreme Court “because we need an early decision.” He warned of “devastation” if the duties he imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are struck down.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed on Friday with a lower court in finding that IEEPA does not grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs and the 1977 statute does not mention the term among regulatory powers it allows in a national emergency.

The ruling marked a rare setback for Trump, who has sought to re-order the global economy in the US’s favor with tariffs by declaring a national emergency over decades of trade deficits.

Top administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, say they expect the Supreme Court to uphold the use of IEEPA to justify tariffs, but will turn to other legal means if needed. The tariffs will remain in place at least through October 14 to allow time for the government to file the Supreme Court appeal.

Major questions doctrines

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.

How far that unwritten regulatory authority goes is the biggest challenge for Trump’s appeal, and two losses have led some legal scholars to predict that the Court of International Trade’s original ruling against the tariffs will ultimately be upheld.

“I have a really hard time believing that the Supreme Court is going to read IEEPA in such a broad way that the President can write and rewrite the tariff code in any way he wishes, on any particular day for any particular reason,” said John Veroneau, a former Republican-appointed deputy US Trade Representative and partner at Covington and Burling.

Veroneau said that the case will test the Supreme Court’s “major questions doctrine”, which holds that if Congress wants to give an executive agency the power to make decisions of “vast economic and political significance,” it must do so explicitly.

The doctrine was used against former President Joe Biden in 2023 when the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that he overstepped his authority by moving to cancel up to $400 billion in student loans — an order that the court said had a “staggering” scope of impact.

A key question is whether the court will apply the same standard to Trump’s tariffs. Comparing these to the impact of the student loan cancellations, the appeals court said in its decision that “the overall economic impact of the tariffs imposed under the government’s reading of IEEPA is even larger still.”

Split decision

Balancing this will be the Supreme Court’s traditional deference to the president on matters of foreign affairs and national emergencies, an issue where the 6-3 conservative majority may come into play. Six of the seven appeals court judges voting against the IEEPA tariffs were appointed by Democratic presidents, but there were crossover votes among both parties’ appointees.

“Given the Federal Circuit’s majority opinion and the dissent were quite robust, the Supreme Court will likely address the meat of whether IEEPA allows the administration to impose tariffs,” said Ryan Majerus, a former senior Commerce Department official and a partner with King and Spalding.

“That decision, either way, will have significant implications for where the administration’s trade policy goes next,” Majerus said.

The Trump administration has already been expanding tariff investigations under other legal authorities, including the national security-focused Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 under which a probe into furniture imports has been launched.

Bessent told Reuters that another option could be a provision of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that are found to discriminate against US commerce. The statute, Section 338, has been largely dormant for decades but would allow for quick imposition of tariffs.

If the IEEPA tariffs ultimately are struck down, trade lawyers said that a major headache for the Trump administration will be refunds of paid duties. Majerus said importers can lodge protests at the Customs and Border Protection agency to obtain refunds, but these efforts may end up in litigation.

CBP reported that as of August 25, collections of Trump’s tariffs imposed under IEEPA totaled $65.8 billion.

A source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking said that lawyers sifted through the ruling over the Labor Day holiday weekend to gauge possible outcomes and expected a quick appeal to the Supreme Court, with a final decision likely in early 2026.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Politics

Why have 1,000 ships at times lost their GPS in the Mideast?

Published

on

Why have 1,000 ships at times lost their GPS in the Mideast?


Bathers ride jet skis past anchored commercial vessels off the coast of Dubai, United Arab Emirates, March 2, 2026. — AFP
Bathers ride jet skis past anchored commercial vessels off the coast of Dubai, United Arab Emirates, March 2, 2026. — AFP

The global positioning system (GPS) capabilities of cargo ships, oil tankers and other vessels stuck in the Middle East because of the widening war are likely worse than those in your cell phone.

Experts say this deficiency explains why since the start of US-Israeli strikes, the jamming of satellite navigation signals has left about 1,000 ships in the Gulf and the Gulf of Oman unable to determine their location, either momentarily or continuously.

Dimitris Ampatzidis, a senior risk and compliance analyst for the energy market intelligence firm Kpler, told AFP the number represents about half of the vessels in the area.

The vast majority of those ships are located off the United Arab Emirates and Oman.

A satellite navigation system is made up of a constellation of satellites that send signals with the time to Earth, allowing the receiver to determine its precise location.

Modern smartphones receive signals from four groups of satellites: the American, European (Galileo), Russian (GLONASS) and Chinese (BeiDou) Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS).

Most cell phones now use two GPS frequency bands — one that is older and fainter, and a second that is newer and stronger.

But “many ships only listen to the original civilian GPS signal, which is called the L1 C/A signal. It’s the one that’s been around since the early 1990s for civilian use,” Todd Humphreys, an engineering professor at the University of Texas at Austin, told AFP.

Most ships are thus unable to rely on the BeiDou or Galileo systems in the event that a GPS is jammed.

The situation is even worse for airplanes, due to aviation regulations.

“You will not find any aircraft flying in the world today whose built-in GPS receiver is capable of tracking and interpreting signals other than the GPS L1 C/A. So it´s out of date by 15 years,” Humphreys said.

Spoofing

Jamming a GPS signal is “not that complicated,” said Katherine Dunn, the author of an upcoming book of the history of GPS, “Little Blue Dot.”

All one needs is “another radio transmitter that can broadcast on the same frequency, but louder,” she said, which creates “a wall of mush.”

Spoofing is more sophisticated — and more dangerous, affecting a ship’s Automatic Identification System, or AIS.

Every vessel transmits a message per second over a universal radio frequency that announces its identity, destination and position.

Spoofing manipulates that system, causing the affected ship to send a fake, or even nonsensical, location — meaning that ships could appear to be on land in Iran or the Emirates.

Clocks

Today, GPS signals are not just used to determine location; they also power onboard clocks, radar systems and speed logs, Dunn said.

So even if the ships off the Emirates or Kuwait were protected from drone fire and escorted through the Strait of Hormuz, navigating without a GPS would be perilous.

“Given the size of the ships, electronic assistance has become necessary to steer them,” said one merchant marine captain who has sailed on cargo ships around the world.

Crews must “resort to using 20th-century instruments — radar or visible landmarks,” he told AFP on condition of anonymity.

Defensive jamming

Signal jamming is undoubtedly being used both offensively and defensively. Gulf states are directing their systems towards their own shores to ward off Iran’s satellite-guided Shahed drones — at the cost, deemed acceptable, of disrupting their own lives.

Israel did the same thing in 2024, as did Iran after its 12 days of conflict with Israel last year.

“Even if their own air traffic or maritime traffic or their delivery drivers or their dating apps are affected by GPS jamming and spoofing, they’ll do it, just like Israel did. Israel did it for a year in 2024,” Humphreys said.

For air and sea navigation, start-ups are developing alternative technologies using Earth’s magnetic field or inertial navigation.

But for ships today, navigating without a GPS is still far in the future.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Saudi Arabia has told Iran not to attack it, warns of possible retaliation, say sources

Published

on

Saudi Arabia has told Iran not to attack it, warns of possible retaliation, say sources


Smoke rises above the city, amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, March 5, 2026. — Reuters
Smoke rises above the city, amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, March 5, 2026. — Reuters
  • Iran was warned of possible retaliation, sources say.
  • Saudi foreign minister spoke to Iranian counterpart.
  • Iran’s president apologises to Gulf states for ‘actions’.

Saudi Arabia has told Tehran that while it favours a diplomatic settlement to Iran’s conflict with the United States, continued attacks on the kingdom and its energy sector could push Riyadh to respond in kind, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The message was conveyed before a speech on Saturday in which Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian apologised to neighbouring Gulf states for Tehran’s actions — an apparent attempt to defuse regional anger over Iranian strikes that hit civilian targets.

Two days earlier, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan spoke to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and set out Riyadh’s position with clarity, the sources said.

Saudi Arabia is open to any form of mediation aimed at de‑escalation and a negotiated settlement, the sources quoted the minister as saying, underlining that neither Riyadh nor other Gulf states had let the US use their airspace or territory to launch airstrikes on Iran.

But Prince Faisal was also quoted by the sources as saying that if Iranian attacks persisted against Saudi territory or energy infrastructure, Saudi Arabia would be forced to permit US forces to use their bases there for military operations. Riyadh would retaliate if attacks on the kingdom’s critical energy facilities continued, he said.

The sources said the kingdom had remained in regular contact with Tehran through its ambassador since the US and Israeli military campaign against Iran began on February 28, following the collapse of talks on Iran’s nuclear programme.

The Saudi and Iranian foreign ministries did not respond to requests for comment.

Drone, missile attacks on Gulf States

The United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia have all come under heavy drone and missile fire from Iran over the past week.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed on the first day of the war. Tehran responded by hitting Israel and ‌Gulf Arab states hosting US military installations, and Israel has attacked Lebanon’s Iran-backed Hezbollah armed group.

Araqchi said in an interview on Saturday that he remained in constant contact with his Saudi counterpart and other Saudi officials, adding that Riyadh had assured Tehran it was fully committed to not allowing its territory, waters or airspace to be used for attacks against Iran.

Pezeshkian said Iran’s temporary leadership council had approved suspending attacks on nearby countries – unless an attack on Iran came from those nations.

“I personally apologise to neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” he said.

To what extent Pezeshkian’s remarks signal a change is unclear. There were further reports of strikes directed at Gulf states on Saturday.

Also, in a sign of possible divisions within Iran’s leadership, Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters – the unified combatant command of the Iranian armed forces – said in a statement afterwards that US and Israeli bases and interests across the region would remain targets.

The command said Iran’s armed forces respected the sovereignty and interests of neighbouring states and had not taken action against them so far. But it said US and Israeli military bases and assets on land, at sea and in the air across the region would be treated as primary targets and face “powerful and heavy” strikes by Iran’s forces.

US President Donald Trump said in a social media post that Iran had “apologised and surrendered to its Middle East neighbours, and promised that it will not shoot at them anymore. This promise was only made because of the relentless US and Israeli attack.”

Two Iranian sources confirmed that a call had taken place in which Riyadh warned Tehran to halt attacks on Saudi Arabia and neighbouring Gulf states. Iran, they said, reiterated its position that the strikes were not aimed at Gulf countries themselves but at US interests and military bases hosted on their territory.

One Iranian source said that Tehran had, in response, demanded that US bases in the region be closed and that some Gulf states stop sharing intelligence with Washington that Iran believes is being used to carry out attacks against it.

Another Iranian source said some military commanders were pressing to continue the strikes, accusing the US of using bases in Gulf states and these countries’ airspace to conduct operations against Iran.

Iran had in recent years mended fences with its Gulf neighbours, including former regional arch-rival Saudi Arabia. The diplomatic campaign imploded in the blitz of drones and missiles launched by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in the past week.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran Assures Neighbours of Non-Aggression Amid Regional Tensions

Published

on

Iran Assures Neighbours of Non-Aggression Amid Regional Tensions



Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has issued a significant statement aimed at easing regional tensions, assuring that Iran will not launch missile strikes or take aggressive action against neighbouring countries.

The president said the decision was taken with the approval of the Interim Leadership Council, stressing that Iran’s policy of non-aggression will remain in place as long as no attacks are carried out on Iranian territory.

Commitment to Peace

In a message shared on social media, Pezeshkian said Iran harbours no hostility toward regional countries and expressed regret over the recent tensions affecting neighbouring states.

“We harbor no hostility toward regional countries and apologize for the recent situation with our neighbors,” the president said.

Sovereignty Will Be Protected

While calling for peace, Pezeshkian also emphasized that Iran’s sovereignty and national security would not be compromised.

He added that diplomatic efforts and mediation aimed at ending the ongoing conflict should be led by the countries that initiated the confrontation.

Regional De-escalation Efforts

The statement comes amid rising tensions in the Middle East following military exchanges involving Iran, Israel, and the United States, prompting calls from several countries for de-escalation and dialogue to restore regional stability.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending