Trump and Lula Discuss Trade, Sanctions, and Security in “Productive” Phone Call 
Honduras Election Turmoil Deepens as Nasralla Alleges Fraud in Tight Presidential Race 
Netanyahu Seeks Presidential Pardon Amid Ongoing Corruption Trial 
IMF Deputy Dan Katz Visits China as Key Economic Review Nears 
Hikvision Challenges FCC Rule Tightening Restrictions on Chinese Telecom Equipment 
Bristol Myers Faces $6.7 Billion Lawsuit After Judge Allows Key Shareholder Claims to Proceed 
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 
Pentagon Probe Finds Hegseth’s Use of Signal Risked Exposing Sensitive Yemen Strike Details 
Australia Progresses AUKUS Review as U.S. Affirms Strong Support 
Judge Dismisses Charges Against Comey and Letitia James After Ruling on Prosecutor’s Appointment 
Australia Moves Forward With Teen Social Media Ban as Platforms Begin Lockouts 
California Launches Portal for Reporting Alleged Misconduct by Federal Immigration Agents 
U.S. Expected to Expand Travel Ban to More Than 30 Countries 
Appeals Court Blocks Expansion of Fast-Track Deportations in the U.S. 
Taiwan Signals Openness to Renew Ties with Honduras as Election Unfolds 
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.
