U.S. Supreme Court denies request to quickly hear Trump tariff challenge
The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Friday to speed up its consideration of whether to take up a challenge to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute.
The Supreme Court denied a request by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources, that filed the legal challenge against Trump's tariffs to expedite the review of the dispute by the nation's top judicial body.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency legal authority he had cited for them. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now.
Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending.
Story continues below advertisement
Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited for them, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
Slowing sales raise questions about B.C.'s electric vehicle mandate
The British Columbia government is facing renewed questions about whether its aggressive electric vehicle (EV) sales mandates can be achieved. Under current B.C. law, 26 per cent of new light-duty vehicles sold in B.C. must be zero-emission by 2026, a figure climbing to 90 per cent in 2030 and 100 per cent in 2035. B.C. has, to date, been a Canadian leader in EV adoption, with 24 per cent of new vehicle shoppers snapping one up in 2024. But that momentum has run into trouble. Both Ottawa and B.C. phased out their EV subsidies earlier this year, and the auto industry says sales dropped quickly afterward. 2:24 BIV: EV sales in Canada plummet over last year 'The first quarter, we were pushing 19 per cent in adoption rate. In April, it was down to 15 per cent … in May it's about flat with 15 per cent again, so the math is just not there to achieve the 26 per cent in 2026,' said Blair Qualey, president and CEO of the New Car Dealers' Association of B.C. Story continues below advertisement 'The 2030 number is virtually impossible.' Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Powering British Columbia's roads under a fully electric scenario is another concern. Barry Penner, chair of the Energy Futures Institute, said his group modelled the electricity needs B.C. would face if it did meet its 100 per cent adoption target by 2035. 'It would require, at full implementation, two more site C dams worth of electricity. And this year, we have been importing electricity,' Penner said. 'In the last couple of years, on average, we've imported 20 to 25 percent. Of our domestic electricity needs from outside the province.' Penner said consumer behaviour has also been shifting towards plug-in hybrids, which are cheaper, but have typically not qualified for government rebates. 3:48 B.C. electric vehicle rebate pause The Ministry of Energy and Climate Solutions did not respond to a request for comment by deadline. Story continues below advertisement However, Global News obtained a technical review of B.C.'s Zero-Emission Vehicles Act and Regulation, which appears to show the government is open to adjusting the program. The document shows the province is considering 'several changes' to the legislation 'to respond to current economic conditions, support affordability for consumers, and lessen pressures on automakers.' Those changes include revising the 2030 zero-emission sales targets, amending compliance ratios for battery electric and hydrogen-powered vehicles, changing the percentage of plug-in hybrids dealers can sell under the law, and changing range requirements to ensure more vehicles qualify for credits. The document further notes that challenges to EV adoption still include range anxiety and vehicle price. 'They're more expensive on average than a non-electric vehicle. Some studies suggest about $8,000 per vehicle,' Penner said. 'Internal government polling shows almost 60 per cent of British Columbians say that's the number one problem buying an electric cars is the cost and yet what have they done? They've removed the rebate.' B.C. has been working to upgrade infrastructure; BC Hydro has installed about 600 fast chargers around the province, with more to come. 'And while the province has paused EV subsidies for now, the policy document hints that it is looking at 'new initiative agreement pathways to support affordability for consumers.' Story continues below advertisement The province is also conducting a wider review of its entire CleanBC program. Qualey said new rebates would help the situation, but argued that even with them in place, the targets are too aggressive. 'Ideally, we would like a pause on all of it right now to continue the conversation so the manufacturers, who are the obligated parties in all of this, can sit with government … (and determine) what targets are achievable,' he said.
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
U.S. judge blocks National Science Foundation from slashing universities' federal funding
A federal judge on Friday prevented the National Science Foundation from sharply cutting research funding provided to universities in the latest legal setback to efforts by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration to slash government support of research at major academic institutions. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston invalidated a policy NSF adopted in May that limited the ability of universities to be reimbursed for administrative and facility costs that indirectly support grant-funded research, ruling that it was 'arbitrary and capricious.' Spokespeople for NSF and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling. NSF, a US$9 billion agency that funds scientific research, adopted the policy after having already canceled hundreds of grants out of step with the Republican president's priorities. His administration has also been freezing billions of dollars in government funding for numerous universities, including Harvard. NSF's policy, which was announced on May 2, set a cap on how much grant funding could go to cover indirect costs. NSF said funding for such costs could equal no more than 15% of the funding for direct research costs, regardless of what the costs actually were at universities. Historically, universities had negotiated with NSF and other agencies over the rate at which indirect costs could be reimbursed. The cap meant that for every $100 in funding going directly to a research grant award, universities would receive just $15 to cover overhead, such as the costs of maintaining lab space and paying for electricity and staff. The Trump administration said it sought through the policy to rein in spending on administrative overhead, which had grown to consume US$1.07 billion of NSF's annual US$4.22 billion grant-making budget for higher education institutions. That rate, though, is significantly lower than the indirect cost that many of the 69 research universities belonging to Association of American Universities had negotiated, which was often in the 50 per cent to 65 per cent range, the group's lawyers said. Talwani, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, said in her Friday decision that the administration's 15 per cent rate was unlawful. The association along with two other academic trade groups and 13 schools sued in May to block the policy, after earlier convincing judges in Boston to block similar funding cuts at the National Institutes of Health and U.S. Department of Energy. The association did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Friday decision. Among the schools that challenged NSF's funding cuts were the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University, Brown University, the University of California, Carnegie Mellon University, Cornell University, the University of Michigan and the University of Pennsylvania. They argued that NSF's action, if allowed to stand, 'will badly undermine scientific research at America's universities and erode our nation's enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation.' The U.S. Department of Defense has since also adopted a 15 per cent cap, which a judge on Tuesday temporarily blocked pending a hearing on July 2. He did so a day after a different judge in Boston ordered NIH to reinstate hundreds of grants for research on diversity-related topics nixed as part of the administration's purge of initiatives viewed as supporting 'diversity, equity and inclusion.'
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
How Trump has targeted Harvard's international students – and what the latest court ruling means
President Donald Trump and his administration have tried several tactics to block Harvard University's enrollment of international students, part of the White House's effort to secure policy changes at the private, Ivy League college. Targeting foreign students has become the administration's cornerstone effort to crack down on the nation's oldest and wealthiest college. The block on international enrollment, which accounts for a quarter of Harvard's students and much of its global allure, strikes at the core of Harvard's identity. Courts have stopped some of the government's actions, at least for now — but not all. In the latest court order, a federal judge on Friday put one of those efforts on hold until a lawsuit is resolved. But the fate of Harvard's international students — and its broader standoff with the Trump administration — remain in limbo. Here are all the ways the Trump administration has moved to block Harvard's foreign enrollment — and where each effort stands. Homeland Security tries to revoke Harvard's certification to host foreign students In May, the Trump administration tried to ban foreign students at Harvard, citing the Department of Homeland Security's authority to oversee which colleges are part of the Student Exchange and Visitor Program. The program allows colleges to issue documents that foreign students need to study in the United States. Harvard filed a lawsuit, arguing the administration violated the government's own regulations for withdrawing a school's certification. Within hours, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston put the administration's ban on hold temporarily — an order that had an expiration date. On Friday, she issued a preliminary injunction, blocking Homeland Security's move until the case is decided. That could take months or longer. The government can and does remove colleges from the Student Exchange and Visitor Program, making them ineligible to host foreign students on their campus. However, it's usually for administrative reasons outlined in law, such as failing to maintain accreditation, lacking proper facilities for classes, failing to employ qualified professional personnel — even failing to 'operate as a bona fide institution of learning.' Other colleges are removed when they close. Notably, Burroughs' order Friday said the federal government still has authority to review Harvard's ability to host international students through normal processes outlined in law. After Burroughs' emergency block in May, DHS issued a more typical 'Notice of Intent to Withdraw' Harvard's participation in the international student visa program. 'Today's order does not affect the DHS's ongoing administrative review,' Harvard said Friday in a message to its international students. 'Harvard is fully committed to compliance with the applicable F-1 (student visa) regulations and strongly opposes any effort to withdraw the University's certification.' Trump has sought to ban U.S. entry for incoming Harvard students Earlier this month, Trump himself moved to block entry to the United States for incoming Harvard students, issuing a proclamation that invoked a different legal authority. Harvard filed a court challenge attacking Trump's legal justification for the action — a federal law allowing him to block a 'class of aliens' deemed detrimental to the nation's interests. Targeting only those who are coming to the U.S. to study at Harvard doesn't qualify as a 'class of aliens,' Harvard said in its filing. Harvard's lawyers asked the court to block the action. Burroughs agreed to pause the entry ban temporarily, without giving an expiration date. She has not yet ruled on Harvard's request for another preliminary injunction, which would pause the ban until the court case is decided. 'We expect the judge to issue a more enduring decision in the coming days,' Harvard told international students Friday. At the center of Trump's pressure campaign against Harvard are his assertions that the school has tolerated anti-Jewish harassment, especially during pro-Palestinian protests. In seeking to keep Harvard students from coming to the U.S., he said Harvard is not a suitable destination. Harvard President Alan Garber has said the university has made changes to combat antisemitism and will not submit to the administration's demands for further changes. The administration has stepped up scrutiny of Harvard scholars' and students' visas In late May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed U.S. embassies and consulates to start reviewing social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work at or visit Harvard University for any signs of antisemitism. On Wednesday, the State Department said it was launching new vetting of social media accounts for foreigners applying for student visas, and not just those seeking to attend Harvard. Consular officers will be on the lookout for posts and messages that could be deemed hostile to the United States, its government, culture, institutions or founding principles, the department said, telling visa applicants to set their social media accounts to 'public.' In reopening the visa process, the State Department also told consulates to prioritize students hoping to enroll at colleges where foreigners make up less than 15% of the student body, a U.S. official familiar with the matter said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to detail information that has not been made public. Foreign students make up more than 15% of the total student body at almost 200 U.S. universities — including Harvard and the other Ivy League schools, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal education data from 2023. Most are private universities, including all eight Ivy League schools. Some Harvard students are also caught up in the government's recent ban against travel to the U.S. by citizens of 12 nations, mostly in Africa and the Middle East. The Trump administration last weekend called for 36 additional countries to commit to improving vetting of travelers or face a ban on their citizens visiting the United States. International students make up half the students at some Harvard programs Harvard sponsors more than 7,000 people on a combination of F-1 and J-1 visas, which are issued to students and to foreigners visiting the U.S. on exchange programs such as fellowships. Across all the schools that make up the university, about 26% of the student body is from outside the U.S. But some schools and programs, by nature of their subject matter, have significantly more international students. At the Harvard Kennedy School, which covers public policy and public administration, 49% of students are on F-1 visas. In the business school, one-third of students come from abroad. And within the law school, 94% of the students in the master's program in comparative law are international students. The administration has imposed a range of sanctions on Harvard since it rejected the government's demands for policy reforms related to campus protests, admissions, hiring and more. Conservatives say the demands are merited, decrying Harvard as a hotbed of liberalism and antisemitism. Harvard says the administration is illegally retaliating against the university. ____ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
