Latest News

Tariffs ruling is major blow to Trump’s second-term agenda

Published

3 weeks ago

2026/02/20

Priyan

[pic BBC]

Donald Trump had been warning for months that a Supreme Court decision like this would be catastrophic.

If the court curtailed his ability to impose these tariffs, he had said, it would be an “economic and national security disaster”.

A six-justice majority of the Supreme Court, in ruling against the president on Friday, didn’t care much about his concerns.

Congress, not the president, has the power to impose tariffs, the justices ruled. And nothing in the law that the president based his tariffs on, the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, delegated such sweeping powers to Trump.

The court’s decision represents a rare check on this president’s broad use of executive authority.

A majority of the justices over the past year have shown a willingness to allow Trump to press ahead with his agenda, particularly on immigration and reshaping the federal government, even as legal challenges work their way through the court system.

This case, which was fast-tracked through the court system as an emergency, slams the door on one such expansive use of presidential authority.

With several other major cases involving controversial uses of executive power, such as efforts to end birthright citizenship and to dismiss a Federal Reserve governor based on alleged improprieties, this may not be Trump’s only setback in the coming months.

At the very least, this decision weakens Trump’s hand when trying to force other nations to make concessions to the US and tarnishes his veneer of invincibility.

Weakness begets weakness, and America’s trading partners may be emboldened to take a tougher line with the US now that the president’s tariff powers have been curtailed.

It also opens up the possibility that the Trump administration may have to give back much of the tariff revenue it collected over the past year.

While the justices left this thorny issue to be decided by a lower court, Brett Kavanaugh in his dissent warned that the process is likely to be a “mess”.

The Trump administration had plenty of time to prepare for Friday’s decision.

Supreme Court precedent, and the attitude of many of the justices when the case was argued in court last November, indicated that an adverse outcome for the president was quite possible.

Jamieson Greer, Trump’s top trade adviser, said last month that the White House has “a lot of different options” on how to proceed if the tariffs were struck down.

“The reality,” he said, “is the president is going to have tariffs as part of his trade policy going forward.”

The other options that could be at Trump’s disposal are more limited, however.

They require government agencies to produce detailed reports to justify imposing tariffs, and they have limits on their scope and duration.

Gone are the days when the president could threaten, or enact, triple-digit tariffs with the wave of a pen or the click of a Truth Social post.

Getty Images A large container ship with lots of cargo on board is in foreground with Miami skyline behind — *A Rotterdam container ship prepares to dock at Port Miami [BBC]*

New tariffs will require a longer lead-in time before they are imposed.

That could limit the kind of economic disruption that took place when the president announced his expansive “Liberation Day” tariffs last year, and would give other nations more time to prepare their responses.

If Trump wants to restore his free hand to impose new tariffs, he could always ask Congress for the kind of explicit authorisation that the Supreme Court has said is necessary. But with narrow Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and midterm elections looming, the success of such a move seems unlikely.

In fact, some of Trump’s conservative allies in Congress may be breathing somewhat easier with this decision.

The president’s tariffs – and the costs they have imposed on consumers – have been unpopular among many Americans. Republican candidates in battleground states and congressional districts would have been open to Democratic attacks for supporting Trump’s policies.

That area of vulnerability has been reduced for now.

Friday’s decision will set up an awkward moment on Tuesday, when Trump delivers his annual State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress. Traditionally, many of the Supreme Court justices sit in the front row of the chamber.

The president, after spending months issuing dire warnings against the court, could stand eye-to-eye with the justices who eroded one of the key pillars of Trump’s second-term agenda.

***[BBC]***

A graphic showing how the US Supreme Court voted on Trump’s tariffs. The top section lists John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson as finding the tariffs illegal. The lower section shows Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito as not voting to strike them down. Colour bars indicate whether each justice was nominated by a Republican or Democratic president - the three nominated by a Democratic president (Sotomayor, Kagan and Brown Jackson) found the tariffs illegal, while the Republicans were split down the middle. — *A Rotterdam container ship prepares to dock at Port Miami [BBC]*

New tariffs will require a longer lead-in time before they are imposed.

That could limit the kind of economic disruption that took place when the president announced his expansive “Liberation Day” tariffs last year, and would give other nations more time to prepare their responses.

If Trump wants to restore his free hand to impose new tariffs, he could always ask Congress for the kind of explicit authorisation that the Supreme Court has said is necessary. But with narrow Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and midterm elections looming, the success of such a move seems unlikely.

In fact, some of Trump’s conservative allies in Congress may be breathing somewhat easier with this decision.

The president’s tariffs – and the costs they have imposed on consumers – have been unpopular among many Americans. Republican candidates in battleground states and congressional districts would have been open to Democratic attacks for supporting Trump’s policies.

That area of vulnerability has been reduced for now.

Friday’s decision will set up an awkward moment on Tuesday, when Trump delivers his annual State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress. Traditionally, many of the Supreme Court justices sit in the front row of the chamber.

The president, after spending months issuing dire warnings against the court, could stand eye-to-eye with the justices who eroded one of the key pillars of Trump’s second-term agenda.

***[BBC]***

All News Advertisement

Latest News

Nepal election 2026: Counting continues with rapper Balendra Shah’s party close to super-majority

Published

2 hours ago

2026/03/10

Priyan

[pic BBC]

Counting is continuing in Nepal as the party of rapper and ex-Kathmandu mayor Balendra Shah is potentially just one seat away from winning a super-majority in parliament.

The Rastriya Swatantra Party‘s win would mark the first time in decades that a single party has won a majority in Nepal, which has a two-system format that makes it difficult for any one party to win outright

If the RSP secures a two-thirds majority, it would also be the first time in decades that a single party has achieved this

Latest News

Madagascar military leader dissolves government in surprise move

Published

3 hours ago

2026/03/10

Priyan

Col Michael Randrianirina seized power last October in the wake of youth-led protests [BBC]

Madagascar’s military ruler Col Michael Randrianirina has dissolved the government unexpectedly, dismissing the prime minister and the entire cabinet, according to a statement from his spokesperson.

“The government has ceased its functions” it said, adding that Randrianirina will appoint a new prime minister “in line with the provisions stipulated by the constitution”.

No reason was given for the move.

Randrianirina seized power last October from Andry Rajoelina, following weeks of youth-led protests on the Indian Ocean island. Rajoelina had been elected president for a third term in a disputed poll in 2023.

The demonstrations were over persistent power and water shortages, culminating in the army siding with the demonstrators.

Randrianirina has pledged to call new elections within two years.

Last December, the regional bloc, the Southern African Development Community (Sadc), directed Madagascar’s military authorities to submit a roadmap for restoring democracy including plans for fresh elections by the end of February.

But in a surprise on Monday, Randrianirina sacked his entire government and assigned permanent secretaries to run ministries’ day-to-day operations until a new cabinet is formed.

Randrianirina has not explained the motivation for the mass sackings, but leaders of the Gen Z movement, whose grassroots mobilisation helped bring the military leader to power, have called for more inclusiveness in the transition process and greater representation in decision-making structures.

Activist groups, calling themselves Gen Z and Gen Y movements, had recently issued a 72-hour ultimatum for Randrianirina’s resignation, citing frustration with his performance, local media reported.

Businessman Herintsalama Rajaonarivelo had been appointed prime minister in October in an effort to bridge the divide between military leadership and civilian government.

The the Gen Z movement leaders rejected his appointment at the time, saying it was made in a “non-transparent” manner and “without consultation”.

The group demanded to know how Rajaonarivelo was selected given what it said were his connection to the previous government.

They then said that the decision “runs contrary to the desired structural change” the movement was seeking.

Monday’s dissolution of the government could mark a significant shift in the country’s political landscape with the military leader seeking to establish a new administration.

[BBC]

Latest News

ICC Board meetings in Doha called off due to West Asia conflict

Published

4 hours ago

2026/03/10

Priyan

Some ICC meetings will take place virtually over the next few weeks [Cricinfo]

The ICC Board and committee meetings scheduled for later this month in Doha have been called off due to the ongoing military conflict in West Asia. ESPNcricinfo understands that specific meetings, particularly those pertaining to the finance committee will take place virtually over the next few weeks. The possibility of in-person meetings in April remains open but much will depend on whether airspace has sufficiently re-opened for the board and committee members to fly safely.

The meetings were originally scheduled for March 25 to 27 and were due to include ICC Board Directors, Chief Executives, Committee members and ICC senior leadership. Three of the key issues up for discussion were global broadcasting rights ,with the deal between the ICC and *JioStar set to end in 2027, initial discussions over the next FTP and Olympic qualification for LA 2028. The second of those have already begun informally with several members approaching others as they make plans for cricket’s next four-year calendar.

This was the first time the ICC was due to meet in Qatar, which reports a cricketing participation growth rate of 447%. With limited flights to and from the country, hosting the meetings was deemed impossible at this time.

The crisis in West Asia has had an impact on scheduling too. The white-ball series between Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, scheduled to be held in the UAE from March 13 to 25, is likely to be postponed indefinitely.

[Cricinfo]