China Urged to Prioritize Economy Over Territorial Ambitions, Says Taiwan’s President Lai 
U.S. Backs Bayer in Supreme Court Battle Over Roundup Cancer Lawsuits 
U.S. Justice Department Orders Intensified Probe Into Antifa and Domestic Extremist Groups 
Trump Administration Tightens H-1B Visa Vetting With New Focus on Free Speech and Censorship 
States Sue Trump Administration Over SNAP Restrictions for Legal Immigrants 
U.S. Repatriation Flight Carrying 266 Venezuelan Migrants Lands in Caracas 
Trump Administration Halts Immigration, Green Card, and Citizenship Processing for 19 Countries 
Hikvision Challenges FCC Rule Tightening Restrictions on Chinese Telecom Equipment 
UN Chief Says Gaza Operation “Fundamentally Wrong” as Concerns Over War Crimes Grow 
Bolsonaro Blames Medication Mix-Up for Ankle Monitor Tampering as Detention Continues 
Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Medicaid Funding Restrictions Targeting Planned Parenthood 
Australia and Japan Strengthen Defence Cooperation Amid Rising Regional Tensions 
Cuba Reaffirms Anti-Drug Cooperation as Tensions Rise in the Caribbean 
Bristol Myers Faces $6.7 Billion Lawsuit After Judge Allows Key Shareholder Claims to Proceed 
Appeals Court Blocks Expansion of Fast-Track Deportations in the U.S. 
Drones Spotted Near Zelenskiy’s Flight Path in Ireland Trigger Security Alert 
Judge Dismisses Charges Against Comey and Letitia James After Ruling on Prosecutor’s Appointment 
A federal court has blocked President Donald Trump’s proposed reciprocal trade tariffs, ruling he exceeded his authority by attempting to impose sweeping levies on U.S. trading partners. The U.S. Court of International Trade determined that only Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce, rejecting Trump's use of emergency powers to justify the tariffs.
The lawsuit, filed by the Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. importers, challenged Trump’s invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court concluded that IEEPA did not authorize the president to impose broad, indefinite tariffs on nearly all foreign goods, declaring such authority as “unbounded.”
In its decision, the court stated, “The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder.”
Trump had introduced the tariff proposal in early April, calling it “liberation day,” targeting nations with trade surpluses against the U.S. and countries allegedly acting as trade intermediaries for China. While most of the tariffs were delayed by 90 days, China faced steep duties—reportedly up to 245%—before a de-escalation agreement was reached in May.
This ruling marks a significant legal setback for Trump’s trade agenda, which focused on aggressive tariffs to counter perceived unfair trade practices. The Biden administration has yet to signal whether it will support or appeal the ruling.
The decision is seen as a win for small businesses reliant on global supply chains, and it reaffirms limits on presidential authority in matters of international trade. Legal experts say the outcome could shape future administrations’ use of emergency powers in economic policy.
