Appeals Court Blocks Expansion of Fast-Track Deportations in the U.S. 
Singapore Court Allows $2.7 Billion 1MDB Lawsuit Against Standard Chartered to Proceed 
Oil Prices Hold Steady as Ukraine Tensions and Fed Cut Expectations Support Market 
Asian Markets Mixed as RBI Cuts Rates and BOJ Signals Possible Hike 
Dollar Weakens Ahead of Expected Federal Reserve Rate Cut 
Anthropic Reportedly Taps Wilson Sonsini as It Prepares for a Potential 2026 IPO 
Asian Markets Mixed as Fed Rate Cut Bets Grow and Japan’s Nikkei Leads Gains 
Airbus Faces Pressure After November Deliveries Dip Amid Industrial Setback 
Northwestern University to Restore Research Funding Under $75 Million Agreement with U.S. Government 
Netflix’s Bid for Warner Bros Discovery Aims to Cut Streaming Costs and Reshape the Industry 
OpenAI Moves to Acquire Neptune as It Expands AI Training Capabilities 
BOJ Faces Pressure for Clarity, but Neutral Rate Estimates Likely to Stay Vague 
Intel Rejects TSMC’s Allegations of Trade-Secret Leaks as Legal Battle Escalates 
Meta Accused of Halting Internal Research on Mental Health Risks of Facebook and Instagram 
Momenta Quietly Moves Toward Hong Kong IPO Amid Rising China-U.S. Tensions 
Asian Currencies Steady as Rupee Hits Record Low Amid Fed Rate Cut Bets 
U.S. Backs Bayer in Supreme Court Battle Over Roundup Cancer Lawsuits 
The Texas Supreme Court on a 9-0 vote gave conservative activists another shot at suing the city of San Antonio for preventing Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in an airport due to its support of anti-LGBTQ causes.
The ruling overturned a lower court's dismissal of the complaint, allowing campaigners to cite enough facts to indicate the city was breaking a Texas legislation known as the "Save Chick-fil-A law," which prohibits governments from taking "adverse" actions against businesses because of their religious views.
After San Antonio's city council voted to exclude Chick-fil-A from an airport concession contract, Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the bill into law in 2019.
Soon after the law was approved, five conservative activists sued San Antonio, arguing that the city was breaking it because the city council's vote was based on Chick-fil-financial A's backing of Christian organizations opposed to same-sex marriage.
The plaintiffs' lawsuit, according to Justice Rebeca Aizpuru Huddle, failed to demonstrate a present breach, instead of focusing on the March 2019 vote, which predates the statute.
She stated that the vote alone does not imply that there is a "credible threat" of unfavorable action against Chick-fil-A today, allowing the city's government immunity to be waived under the legislation.
Huddle, on the other hand, believes the activists should be allowed to modify their case to include current infractions.
In a concurring judgment, Justice Jimmy Blacklock, joined by Justice John Devine, agreed that the issue should be reopened, but disputed that the 2019 vote was insufficient to demonstrate a current breach because it established "a forward-looking policy."
The court relegated the decision to the trial court.
