In a surprising move, former President Donald Trump announced the termination of trade discussions with Canada on Friday, citing Canada’s implementation of a digital services tax on tech companies. Trump stated that the tax, which is retroactive to 2022 and due to be paid beginning June 30, was a direct attack on the United States. This announcement came shortly after a period of relative calm in trade announcements. In response, Canada retaliated by imposing quotas on some steel imports and a surcharge on imports exceeding those quotas.
Read More
The U.S. Senate voted against a war powers resolution that would have restricted President Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks on Iran, with the vote largely along party lines. The resolution, proposed by Senator Tim Kaine, aimed to prevent offensive measures while preserving the ability to defend U.S. forces, drawing support from most Democrats but facing opposition from Republicans, except for Senator Rand Paul. This measure faced criticism for potentially hindering the defense of Israel, despite amendments addressing this concern. The resolution’s failure highlighted divisions within the Democratic caucus, with some members supporting military action and others advocating for a stronger anti-war stance.
Read More
The Supreme Court has sided with Texas in the case of *Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton*, upholding a law requiring age verification for adult websites. The court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect the right of adults to access content deemed obscene for minors without first providing proof of age, opening the door for similar age-gating measures nationwide. This decision, reached with a 6-3 majority, effectively revisits a 2004 ruling and attributes the change to advances in technology. The ruling highlights the absence of a strict scrutiny standard for age verification, potentially affecting privacy.
Read More
Thank you for subscribing to the NP Posted newsletter. Your welcome email is currently en route and may appear in your junk folder if not found in your inbox. The next installment of NP Posted will be delivered to your email address soon. By subscribing, you have agreed to receive the newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Read More
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has paved the way for potential federal enforcement of an executive order restricting birthright citizenship. This ruling, though not addressing the order’s legality, limits federal courts’ power to issue nationwide injunctions, preventing policies from taking effect during litigation. In dissent, Justices Sotomayor and Jackson criticized the decision, accusing the court of undermining its role in checking government power and warning of broader threats to constitutional protections, including the potential for executive overreach and creation of a “zone of lawlessness.” The justices emphasized that the principle of birthright citizenship has stood unchallenged for over a century.
Read More
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. CASA, effectively dismantling nationwide injunctions, has unleashed legal chaos. This decision removes the ability of lower courts to issue broad injunctions, empowering Trump to potentially violate constitutional rights on a case-by-case basis, varying by state or even county. The ruling’s consequence could mean that citizenship status will depend on where a person is born, mirroring the pre-Civil War era, which is a step backward. By targeting nationwide injunctions in this context, the court paves the way for Trump to implement policies previously blocked, including those related to birthright citizenship, thus pulling the country back to a neo-Confederate legal landscape.
Read More
Opponents of President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship are pursuing new legal strategies to challenge it. The ACLU and immigration rights advocates have filed a class-action lawsuit arguing the order violates the Constitution, seeking an emergency restraining order. The suit, filed in New Hampshire, seeks to protect a class of babies and their parents, potentially filling gaps left by existing litigation. The legal move is an attempt to navigate a recent Supreme Court decision limiting sweeping injunctions, although justices have raised concerns about the use of nationwide class actions to challenge the order.
Read More
During an interview, Senator Tommy Tuberville expressed concern about the leadership in major American cities, deeming it “godawful.” He advocated for President Trump to defund these cities, particularly those with “sanctuary” policies, citing the federal debt. Tuberville characterized individuals in these urban areas as “rats” living off the government and called for their deportation. He also made controversial comments about urban dwellers potentially relocating to Alabama. Additionally, Tuberville expressed views on mass migration and radical Islamic terrorism, comparing certain American cities to European cities he believes are negatively impacted.
Read More
Immigrant rights advocates swiftly filed a nationwide class action lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. This action was taken in direct response to a Supreme Court decision limiting nationwide injunctions against the order. The lawsuit, filed by the ACLU and other groups, alleges the administration is violating the Constitution, congressional intent, and Supreme Court precedent, seeking protections for affected babies and their parents. Constitutional experts and Rep. Jamie Raskin criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling and predicted the action of public interest groups would be to file a nationwide class action suit. This legal strategy follows the Supreme Court leaving the door open to other avenues to challenge the administration.
Read More
During a radio interview, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand appeared to suggest Zohran Mamdani had condoned “global jihad” in response to a caller’s claims about the newly elected politician. While addressing the accusations, Gillibrand stated she was concerned by past public statements and positions, particularly references to global jihad, which was later clarified by the show’s host. Gillibrand’s office later clarified that she had “misspoke” while attempting to address the caller’s assertions. Mamdani’s campaign declined to comment on the matter.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker