Pentagon and Anthropic Clash Over AI Safeguards in National Security Use 
Marco Rubio Steps Down as Acting U.S. Archivist Amid Federal Law Limits 
Trump Lifts 25% Tariff on Indian Goods in Strategic U.S.–India Trade and Energy Deal 
Trump Signs Executive Order Threatening 25% Tariffs on Countries Trading With Iran 
Trump Says “Very Good Talks” Underway on Russia-Ukraine War as Peace Efforts Continue 
New York Judge Orders Redrawing of GOP-Held Congressional District 
TrumpRx.gov Highlights GLP-1 Drug Discounts but Offers Limited Savings for Most Americans 
FDA Targets Hims & Hers Over $49 Weight-Loss Pill, Raising Legal and Safety Concerns 
U.S. Lawmakers to Review Unredacted Jeffrey Epstein DOJ Files Starting Monday 
U.S. Justice Department Removes DHS Lawyer After Blunt Remarks in Minnesota Immigration Court 
U.S. to Begin Paying UN Dues as Financial Crisis Spurs Push for Reforms 
RFK Jr. Overhauls Federal Autism Panel, Sparking Medical Community Backlash 
South Korea Assures U.S. on Trade Deal Commitments Amid Tariff Concerns 
Nvidia, ByteDance, and the U.S.-China AI Chip Standoff Over H200 Exports 
Trump Proposes Two-Year Shutdown of Kennedy Center Amid Ongoing Turmoil 
Iran–U.S. Nuclear Talks in Oman Face Major Hurdles Amid Rising Regional Tensions 
The U.S. Supreme Court continues to back President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement policies, recently allowing the administration to end temporary legal protections for over 800,000 migrants. In two recent rulings, the Court lifted injunctions blocking the termination of humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua—moves likely to lead to mass deportations.
Despite the broad support, the Court has emphasized constitutional due process. It ruled that migrants must receive adequate notice before removal, rejecting the administration’s attempt to deport Venezuelans under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act without proper legal recourse. Justices also criticized the practice of giving detainees only 24 hours’ notice before deportation, calling it unconstitutional.
Trump's hardline policies have drawn legal scrutiny since he resumed office in January, with the Court already intervening in seven immigration-related disputes. Legal experts argue that while the conservative majority often defers to executive power, it is unwilling to overlook blatant violations of legal rights. In April, the Court ordered the release of a wrongfully deported Salvadoran man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, though he remains in custody in El Salvador.
Controversy also surrounds Trump's order to deport migrants to third countries like war-torn South Sudan. A federal judge halted the practice for violating due process, prompting the administration to seek Supreme Court intervention.
While the justices have allowed many deportations to proceed, legal scholars warn that removing legal protections without judicial explanation may set dangerous precedents. The Court is expected to rule soon on Trump’s bid to restrict birthright citizenship—a move that challenges long-held constitutional interpretations. As legal challenges mount, the Court faces the difficult task of balancing executive authority with constitutional protections.
