Trump’s big plans on trade and more run up against laws of political gravity, separation of powers

Trump’s big plans on trade and more run up against laws of political gravity, separation of powers
The setbacks fit a broader pattern for a president who has advanced an extraordinarily expansive view of executive power. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 30 May 2025
Follow

Trump’s big plans on trade and more run up against laws of political gravity, separation of powers

Trump’s big plans on trade and more run up against laws of political gravity, separation of powers
  • he laws of political gravity, the separation of powers and geopolitical realities are proving to be tougher to conquer than Trump will publicly admit

WASHINGTON: Once again, President Donald Trump’s biggest policy plans were stopped in their tracks.
On Wednesday, an obscure but powerful court in New York rejected the legal foundation of Trump’s most sweeping tariffs, finding that Trump could not use a 1977 law to declare a national emergency on trade imbalances and fentanyl smuggling to justify a series of import taxes that have unsettled the world. Reordering the global economy by executive fiat was an unconstitutional end-run around Congress’ powers, the three-judge panel of Trump, Obama and Reagan appointees ruled in a scathing rebuke of Trump’s action.
The setbacks fit a broader pattern for a president who has advanced an extraordinarily expansive view of executive power. Federal courts have called out the lack of due process in some of Trump’s deportation efforts. His proposed income tax cuts, now working their way through Congress, are so costly that some of them can’t be made permanent, as Trump had wished. His efforts to humble Harvard University and cut the federal workforce have encountered legal obstacles. And he’s running up against reality as his pledges to quickly end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza have turned into slogs.
The laws of political gravity, the separation of powers and geopolitical realities are proving to be tougher to conquer than Trump will publicly admit. As various legal skirmishes play out, he may have to choose between bowing to the limits of his power or trying to ignore the judicial system.
“If the latter, we may have a constitutional crisis,” said University of Texas history professor H.W. Brands.
After a second federal court on Thursday found Trump’s tariffs to be improper, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the Trump administration expects to prevail in its judicial appeals but also indicated that officials are exploring other laws to implement tariffs. A federal appeals court said Thursday the government can continue to collect the tariffs under the emergency powers law for now as the Trump administration challenges the ruling, though the government could be obligated to refund the money if the ruling is upheld.
Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, said there are two baseball caps in the room behind the Oval Office that say “Trump Always Wins” and Trump has been “right” about everything.
“Trump does always win these negotiations because we’re right,” Hassett said on Fox Business Network’s “Mornings with Maria.” “These activist judges are trying to slow down something right in the middle of really important negotiations.”
Part of Trump’s challenge lies in the nature of the job, in which only the thorniest of problems cross his desk. But there’s also the fact that Trump’s keen instincts for what plays well on TV don’t necessarily help with the nitty-gritty of policy details.
By unilaterally ordering tariffs, deportations and other actions through the White House, Trump is bypassing both Congress and the broader public, which could have given more popular legitimacy to his policy choices, said Princeton University history professor Julian Zelizer.
“The president is trying to achieve his goals outside normal legal processes and without focusing on public buy-in,” Zelizer said. “The problem is that we do have a constitutional system and there are many things a president can’t do. The courts are simply saying no. The reality is that many of his boldest decisions stand on an incredibly fragile foundation.”
As Trump sees it, his tariffs would solve genuine problems. His “Liberation Day” taxes on imports would close persistent trade imbalances with other countries, with his 10 percent baseline tariff providing a stream of revenue to help offset the trillions of dollars in federal borrowing that would be created by his planned income tax cuts.
But when the financial markets panicked and the interest charged on US debt shot up, Trump backtracked and ratcheted down many of his tariffs to 10 percent while negotiations began to take place.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested this had been the plan all along to force new trade negotiations. But Trump shortly undercut him by saying on the White House South Lawn that he backed down because the financial markets were getting “yippy” — a reminder that Trump’s own improvizatory and disruptive style can upend any working policy process.
Trump still has tariffs in place on autos, steel and aluminum. Those are tied to the premise that imports would create national security risks based on previous investigations under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. He could use other laws to start new investigations or temporarily impose tariffs, but the White House is more focused at the moment on challenging the court rulings.
“What is unprecedented is Trump asserting authority under a 1977 statute that had never been used for tariffs, not just for targeted tariffs, but the largest tariffs since the 1930s,” said Peter Harrell, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who served in the Biden White House. “That’s what is unprecedented and unusual.”
Harrell said Trump could re-create many of his tariffs using other laws but “it would require more work and be a much more orderly process.”
Rice University history professor Douglas Brinkley said Trump’s sense of the presidency relies on a deep misreading of the office. He mistakenly assumes that the tariffs used in the 19th century to fund a much smaller federal government would now be able to pay for a much larger federal government. But he also assumes that power flows to and from him, rather than from institutions and the rule of law.
“He doesn’t seem to realize that anytime he doesn’t listen to the court orders that he’s making an anti-American statement,” Brinkley said. “It’s telling people that I’m bigger than the American Constitution, that judges are just errand boys for me.”
The Trump White House blamed its latest setback on the US Court of International Trade.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said in a Bloomberg News interview that the judicial branch was part of the problem, keeping Trump from delivering on his promises.
“We’ve got courts in this country who are basically engaged in attacks on the American people,” Navarro said. “The president ran on stopping the fentanyl poisoning, stopping international trade unfair practices from stealing our factories and jobs. And courts keep getting in the way of that.”


US federal judge blocks Trump effort to keep Harvard from hosting foreign students

US federal judge blocks Trump effort to keep Harvard from hosting foreign students
Updated 12 sec ago
Follow

US federal judge blocks Trump effort to keep Harvard from hosting foreign students

US federal judge blocks Trump effort to keep Harvard from hosting foreign students
  • Homeland Security earlier withdrew the school’s certification to host foreign students after Harvard resisted Trump's interference
  • Harvard hosts roughly 7,000 international students, about a quarter of its total enrollment

WASHINGTON: A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to keep Harvard University from hosting international students, delivering the Ivy League school another victory as it challenges multiple government sanctions amid a battle with the White House.
The order from US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston preserves Harvard’s ability to host foreign students while the case is decided, but it falls short of resolving all of Harvard’s legal hurdles to hosting international students. Notably, Burroughs said the federal government still has authority to review Harvard’s ability to host international students through normal processes outlined in law.
Harvard sued the Department of Homeland Security in May after the agency abruptly withdrew the school’s certification to host foreign students and issue paperwork for their visas, skirting most of its usual procedures. The action would have forced Harvard’s roughly 7,000 international students — about a quarter of its total enrollment — to transfer or risk being in the US illegally. New foreign students would have been barred from coming to Harvard.
The university said it was experiencing illegal retaliation for rejecting the White House’s demands to overhaul Harvard policies related to campus protests, admissions, hiring and more. Burroughs temporarily had halted the government’s action hours after Harvard sued.
Less than two weeks later, in early June, President Donald Trump tried a new strategy. He issued a proclamation to block foreign students from entering the US to attend Harvard, citing a different legal justification. Harvard challenged the move, saying the president was attempting an end-run around the temporary court order. Burroughs temporarily blocked Trump’s proclamation as well. That emergency block remains in effect, and Burroughs did not address the proclamation in her order Friday.
“We expect the judge to issue a more enduring decision in the coming days,” Harvard said Friday in an email to international students. “Our Schools will continue to make contingency plans toward ensuring that our international students and scholars can pursue their academic work to the fullest extent possible, should there be a change to student visa eligibility or their ability to enroll at Harvard.”
Students in limbo
The stops and starts of the legal battle have unsettled current students and left others around the world waiting to find out whether they will be able to attend America’s oldest and wealthiest university.
The Trump administration’s efforts to stop Harvard from enrolling international students have created an environment of “profound fear, concern, and confusion,” the university said in a court filing. Countless international students have asked about transferring from the university, Harvard immigration services director Maureen Martin said.
Still, admissions consultants and students have indicated most current and prospective Harvard scholars are holding out hope they’ll be able to attend the university.
For one prospective graduate student, an admission to Harvard’s Graduate School of Education had rescued her educational dreams. Huang, who asked to be identified only by her surname for fear of being targeted, had seen her original doctoral offer at Vanderbilt University rescinded after federal cuts to research and programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
Harvard stepped in a few weeks later with a scholarship she couldn’t refuse. She rushed to schedule her visa interview in Beijing. More than a month after the appointment, despite court orders against the Trump administration’s policies, she still hasn’t heard back.
“Your personal effort and capability means nothing in this era,” Huang said in a social media post. “Why does it have to be so hard to go to school?”
An ongoing battle
Trump has been warring with Harvard for months after the university rejected a series of government demands meant to address conservative complaints that the school has become too liberal and has tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Trump officials have cut more than $2.6 billion in research grants, ended federal contracts and threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status.
On Friday, the president said in a post on Truth Social that the administration has been working with Harvard to address “their largescale improprieties” and that a deal with Harvard could be announced within the next week. “They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right,” Trump’s post said.
Trump’s administration first targeted Harvard’s international students in April. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanded that Harvard turn over a trove of records related to any dangerous or illegal activity by foreign students. Harvard says it complied, but Noem said the response fell short and on May 22 revoked Harvard’s certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program.
The sanction immediately put Harvard at a disadvantage as it competed for the world’s top students, the school said in its lawsuit, and it harmed Harvard’s reputation as a global research hub. “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard,” the lawsuit said.
The action would have upended some graduate schools that recruit heavily from abroad. Some schools overseas quickly offered invitations to Harvard’s students, including two universities in Hong Kong.
Harvard President Alan Garber previously said the university has made changes to combat antisemitism. But Harvard, he said, will not stray from its “core, legally-protected principles,” even after receiving federal ultimatums.
 


Trump says his intel chief was ‘wrong’ to believe Iran was not building a nuclear weapon

Trump says his intel chief was ‘wrong’ to believe Iran was not building a nuclear weapon
Updated 20 min 45 sec ago
Follow

Trump says his intel chief was ‘wrong’ to believe Iran was not building a nuclear weapon

Trump says his intel chief was ‘wrong’ to believe Iran was not building a nuclear weapon
  • Also says Israeli strikes could be ‘very hard to stop’ now that they are “winning”
  • After Trump's remark, Tulsi Gabbard says her statement was taken out of context

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump said Friday that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was “wrong” when she previously said that the US believed Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon, and he suggested that it would be “very hard to stop” Israel’s strikes on Iran in order to negotiate a possible ceasefire.
Trump has recently taken a more aggressive public stance toward Tehran as he’s sought more time to weigh whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility. Buried under a mountain, the facility is believed to be out of the reach of all but America’s “bunker-buster” bombs.
After landing in New Jersey for an evening fundraiser for his super political action committee, Trump was asked about Gabbard’s comments to Congress in March that US spy agencies believed that Iran wasn’t working on nuclear warheads. The president responded, “Well then, my intelligence community is wrong. Who in the intelligence community said that?”
Informed that it had been Gabbard, Trump said, “She’s wrong.”
In a subsequent post on X, Gabbard said her testimony was taken out of context “as a way to manufacture division.”
“America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly,” she wrote. “President Trump has been clear that can’t happen, and I agree.”
Still, disavowing Gabbard’s previous assessment came a day after the White House said Trump would decide within two weeks whether the US military would get directly involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. It said seeking additional time was “based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.”
But on Friday, Trump himself seemed to cast doubts on the possibility of talks leading to a pause in fighting between Israel and Iran. He said that, while he might support a ceasefire, Israel’s strikes on Iran could be “very hard to stop.”
Asked about Iran suggesting that, if the US was serious about furthering negotiations, it could call on Israel to stop its strikes, Trump responded, “I think it’s very hard to make that request right now.”
“If somebody is winning, it’s a little bit harder to do than if somebody is losing,” Trump said. “But we’re ready, willing and able, and we’ve been speaking to Iran, and we’ll see what happens.”
The president later added, “It’s very hard to stop when you look at it.”
“Israel’s doing well in terms of war. And, I think, you would say that Iran is doing less well. It’s a little bit hard to get somebody to stop,” Trump said.
Trump campaigned on decrying “endless wars” and has vowed to be an international peacemaker. That’s led some, even among conservatives, to point to Trump’s past criticism of the US invasion of Iraq beginning in 2003 as being at odds with his more aggressive stance toward Iran now.
Trump suggested the two situations were very different, though.
“There were no weapons of mass destruction. I never thought there were. And that was somewhat pre-nuclear. You know, it was, it was a nuclear age, but nothing like it is today,” Trump said of his past criticism of the administration of President George W. Bush.
He added of Iran’s current nuclear program, “It looked like I’m right about the material that they’ve gathered already. It’s a tremendous amount of material.”
Trump also cast doubts on Iran’s developing nuclear capabilities for civilian pursuits, like power generation.
“You’re sitting on one of the largest oil piles anywhere in the world,” he said. “It’s a little bit hard to see why you’d need that.”


Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from immigration detention

Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from immigration detention
Updated 21 June 2025
Follow

Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from immigration detention

Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from immigration detention
  • Khalil, a Columbia University student, who became a leader of pro-Palestinian campus protests has been in custody since March facing deportation
  • District Judge Michael Farbiarz ordered Khalil’s release on bail allowing him to return to New York while his case proceeds

JENA, Louisiana: Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil was released Friday from federal immigration detention, freed after three months by a judge’s ruling after becoming a symbol of President Donald Trump ‘s clampdown on campus protests.
The former Columbia University graduate student left a federal facility in Louisiana on Friday. He is expected to head to New York to reunite with his US citizen wife and newborn son.
The Trump administration sought to deport him over his role in pro-Palestinian protests
“Justice prevailed, but it’s very long overdue,” he said outside the facility in a remote part of Louisiana. “This shouldn’t have taken three months.”
Khalil was released after US District Judge Michael Farbiarz said it would be “highly, highly unusual” for the government to continue detaining a legal US resident who was unlikely to flee and hadn’t been accused of any violence.
“Petitioner is not a flight risk and the evidence presented is that he is not a danger to the community,” he said. “Period, full stop.”
Later in the hourlong hearing, which took place by phone, the judge said the government had “clearly not met” the standards for detention.
The government filed notice Friday evening that it’s appealing Khalil’s release.
Khalil had to surrender his passport and can’t travel internationally, but he will get his green card back and be given official documents permitting limited travel within the country, including New York and Michigan to visit family, New Jersey and Louisiana for court appearances and Washington to lobby Congress.
Khalil was the first person arrested under President Donald Trump ‘s crackdown on students who joined campus protests against Israel’s devastating war in Gaza. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Khalil must be expelled from the country because his continued presence could harm American foreign policy.
Farbiarz had ruled earlier that the government couldn’t deport Khalil on those grounds, but gave it leeway to continue pursuing a potential deportation based on allegations that he lied on his green card application. Trump administration lawyers repeated that accusation at Friday’s court hearing. It’s an accusation Khalil disputes.
In issuing his ruling Friday, the judge agreed with Khalil’s lawyers that the protest leader was being prevented from exercising his free speech and due process rights despite no obvious reason for his continued detention. The judge noted that Khalil is now clearly a public figure.
Khalil’s lawyers had asked that he either be freed on bail or, at the very least, moved from Louisiana to New Jersey so he can be closer to his wife and newborn son, who are both US citizens.
Khalil’s wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, said she can finally “breathe a sigh of relief” after her husband’s three months in detention.
“We know this ruling does not begin to address the injustices the Trump administration has brought upon our family, and so many others,” she said in a statement provided by Khalil’s lawyers. “But today we are celebrating Mahmoud coming back to New York to be reunited with our little family.”
The judge’s decision comes after several other scholars targeted for their activism have been released from custody, including another former Palestinian student at Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi; a Tufts University student, Rumeysa Ozturk; and a Georgetown University scholar, Badar Khan Suri.
Khalil was detained on March 8 at his apartment building in Manhattan over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
The international affairs graduate student isn’t accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. He served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists and wasn’t among the demonstrators arrested, but his prominence in news coverage and willingness to speak publicly made him a target of critics.
The Trump administration has argued that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country as it considers their views antisemitic.

 


Violence against children hit ‘unprecedented levels in 2024’

Violence against children hit ‘unprecedented levels in 2024’
Updated 20 June 2025
Follow

Violence against children hit ‘unprecedented levels in 2024’

Violence against children hit ‘unprecedented levels in 2024’
  • The UN kept Israeli forces on its blacklist of countries that violate children’s rights for a second year, citing 7,188 verified grave violations by its military, including the killing of 1,259 Palestinian children and injury to 941 others in Gaza
  • UN chief cites warfare strategies that included deployment of destructive and explosive weapons

NEW YORK: Violence against children caught in multiple and escalating conflicts reached “unprecedented levels” last year, with the highest number of violations in Gaza and the West Bank, Congo, Somalia, Nigeria and Haiti, according to a UN report.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ annual report on Children in Armed Conflict detailed “a staggering 25 percent surge in grave violations” against children under the age of 18 from 2023, when the number of such violations rose by 21 percent.
In 2024, the UN chief said children “bore the brunt of relentless hostilities and indiscriminate attacks, and were affected by the disregard for ceasefires and peace agreements and by deepening humanitarian crises.”

FASTFACT

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he is ‘appalled by the intensity of grave violations against children in the occupied Palestinian territories and Israel,’ and ‘deeply alarmed’by the increase in violations, especially the high number of children killed by Israeli forces.

He cited warfare strategies that included attacks on children, the deployment of increasingly destructive and explosive weapons in populated areas, and “the systematic exploitation of children for combat.”
Guterres said the UN verified 41,370 grave violations against children — 36,221 committed in 2024 and 5,149 committed earlier but verified last year.
The violations include killing, maiming, recruiting and abducting children, sexual violence against them, attacking schools and hospitals, and denying youngsters access to humanitarian aid.
The UN kept Israeli forces on its blacklist of countries that violate children’s rights for a second year, citing 7,188 verified grave violations by its military, including the killing of 1,259 Palestinian children and injury to 941 others in Gaza.
The Gaza Health Ministry has reported much higher figures, but the UN has strict criteria and said its process of verification is ongoing.
Guterres said he is “appalled by the intensity of grave violations against children in the occupied Palestinian territories and Israel,” and “deeply alarmed” by the increase in violations, especially the high number of children killed by Israeli forces.
He reiterated his calls on Israel to abide by international law requiring special protections for children, protection for schools and hospitals, and compliance with the requirement that attacks distinguish between combatants and civilians and avoid excessive harm to civilians.
The UN also kept Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad on the blacklist.
Israel’s UN Mission did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In Congo, the UN reported 4,043 verified grave violations against 3,418 children last year.
In Somalia, it reported 2,568 violations against 1,992 children.
In Nigeria, 2,436 grave violations were reported against 1,037 children. And in Haiti, the UN reported 2,269 verified grave violations against 1,373 children.
In the ongoing war following Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the UN kept the Russian armed forces and affiliated armed groups on its blacklist for a third year. The secretary-general expressed deep concern at “the sharp increase in grave violations against children in Ukraine” — 1,914 against 673 children.
He expressed alarm at the violations by Russian forces and their affiliates, singling out their verified killing of 94 Ukrainian children, injury to 577 others, and 559 attacks on schools and 303 on hospitals.
In Haiti, the UN put a gang, the Viv Ansanm coalition, on the blacklist for the first time.
Gangs have grown in power since the assassination of President Jovenel Moise in July 2021.
They are estimated to control 85 percent of the capital and have moved into surrounding areas.
In May, the US designated the powerful coalition representing more than a dozen gangs, whose name means “Living Together,” as a foreign terrorist organization.
Secretary-General Guterres expressed deep “alarm” at the surge in violations, especially incidents of gang recruitment and use, sexual violence, abduction, and denial of humanitarian aid.
The report said sexual violence jumped by 35 percent in 2024, including a dramatic increase in the number of gang rapes, but stressed that the numbers are vastly underreported.
“Girls were abducted for the purpose of recruitment and use, and for sexual slavery,” the UN chief said. In Haiti, the UN reported sexual violence against 566 children, 523 of them girls, and attributed 411 to the Viv Ansanm gang.
In Congo, the UN reported 358 acts of sexual violence against girls — 311 by armed groups and 47 by Congo’s armed forces. And in Somalia, 267 children were victims of sexual violence, 120 of them carried out by Al-Shabab extremists.
According to the report, violations affected 22,495 children in 2024, with armed groups responsible for almost 50 percent and government forces the main perpetrator of the killing and maiming of children, school attacks, and denial of humanitarian access.

The report noted a sharp rise in the number of children subjected to multiple violations — from 2,684 in 2023 to 3,137 in 2024.
“The cries of 22,495 innocent children who should be learning to read or play ball — but instead have been forced to learn how to survive gunfire and bombings — should keep all of us awake at night,” said Virginia Gamba, the UN special representative for children and armed conflict.
“We are at the point of no return,” she said, calling on the international community to protect children and the parties in conflict “to immediately end the war on children.”

 


Italy grapples with mass exodus and foreign influx amid economic fears

Italy grapples with mass exodus and foreign influx amid economic fears
Updated 20 June 2025
Follow

Italy grapples with mass exodus and foreign influx amid economic fears

Italy grapples with mass exodus and foreign influx amid economic fears
  • Ukrainians made up the biggest national group among those who arrived in 2023-2024, Istat said, followed by Albanians, Bangladeshis, Moroccans, Romanians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Argentines, and Tunisians

ROME: The number of Italians leaving their country and foreigners moving in has soared to the highest in a decade, official data showed on Friday, fueling national concerns about brain drain, economic decline, and immigration.
Italy has a right-wing government elected in 2022 on a mandate to curb migrant arrivals, but also has a shrinking population and growing labor shortages, highlighting the need to attract foreign workers.
Meanwhile, the country’s stagnant economy and low wages — salaries are below 1990 levels in inflation-adjusted terms — have been blamed for pushing many Italians to seek better fortunes abroad.

FASTFACT

Ukrainians made up the biggest national group among those who arrived in 2023-2024, followed by Albanians, Bangladeshis, Moroccans, Romanians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Argentines, and Tunisians.

Last year, 382,071 foreigners moved to Italy, up from 378,372 in 2023 and the highest since 2014, the statistics agency Istat said.
In the same period, 155,732 Italians emigrated, up from 114,057 in 2023 and also the highest since 2014. The immigration figure beat the previous high for the last decade of 301,000 in 2017, and was well above that period’s low of 191,766 from 2020 — the height of the COVID pandemic.
The figure of almost 270,000 nationals emigrating in the two-year period from 2023 to 2024 was up around 40 percent compared to the previous two years.
The two-year immigration figure for that period, around 760,000, was up 31 percent from 2021-2022.
The figures are derived from town registry offices, so are unlikely to reflect undocumented migration.
Ukrainians made up the biggest national group among those who arrived in 2023-2024, Istat said, followed by Albanians, Bangladeshis, Moroccans, Romanians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Argentines, and Tunisians.
As for the high number of emigrants, “it is more than plausible” that a significant number were “former immigrants” who moved abroad after acquiring Italian citizenship, Istat said.
The agency also said Italy’s poorer south was continuing to depopulate, noting that almost 1 percent of residents in Calabria, the region with the lowest per capita income, moved to central or northern areas during 2023-2024.