Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 138 Shares93 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump announces 50% steel tariffs and hails ‘blockbuster’ deal with Japan

    Donald Trump announced on Friday he was doubling foreign tariffs on steel imports to 50%, as the president celebrated a “blockbuster” agreement for Japan-based Nippon Steel to invest in US Steel during a rally in Pennsylvania.Surrounded by men in orange hardhats at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, Trump unveiled the new levies, declaring that the dramatic rate increase would “even further secure the steel industry in the United States”.“Nobody is going to get around that,” Trump said, of the tariff rate hike from what was 25%.In a social media post after the conclusion of his remarks, Trump announced that the 50% tariffs on steel would also apply to imported aluminum and would take effect on 4 June.“This will be yet another BIG jolt of great news for our wonderful steel and aluminum workers,” he declared in the post.It was not immediately clear how the announcement would affect the trade deal negotiated earlier this month that saw tariffs on UK steel and aluminum reduced to zero.Trump’s Friday tariffs announcement came a day after a federal appeals court temporarily allowed his tariffs to remain in effect staying a decision by a US trade court that blocked the president from imposing the duties.The trade court ruling, however, does not impede the president’s ability to unilaterally raise tariffs on steel imports, an authority granted under a national security provision called section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act.The precise relationship between Nippon Steel and US Steel raised questions on Friday, even for some of Trump’s allies. The president has thrown his full support behind the deal, months after insisting he was “totally against” a $14.9bn bid by Nippon Steel for its US rival.The United Steelworkers union had previously urged Trump to reject Nippon’s bid, dismissing the Japanese firm’s commitments to invest in the US as “flashy promises” and claiming it was “simply seeking to undercut our domestic industry from the inside”.Speaking to steelworkers, Trump insisted that US Steel would “stay an American company” after what he is now calling “a partnership” with Nippon.But US Steel’s website links to a standalone site with the combined branding of the two companies that features a statement describing the transaction as “US Steel’s agreement to be acquired by NSC”.On the website touting the deal, there were also multiple references to “Nippon Steel’s acquisition of US Steel” and the “potential sale of US Steel to Nippon Steel”.Even pro-Trump commentators on Fox expressed bafflement over the exact nature of the deal.“This is being described as ‘a partnership’, this deal between Nippon and US Steel – but then it’s described as an acquisition on the US Steel website,” Fox host Laura Ingraham pointed out on her Friday night show.She asked a guest from another pro-Trump outlet, Breitbart: “Who owns the majority stake in this company?”When the guest said he did not know, Ingraham suggested Trump might not be aware of the details. “I don’t know if he was fully informed about the terms of the deal. We just don’t know.”Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, had blocked Nippon’s acquisition, citing national security concerns, during his final weeks in office.During his remarks at the rally, Trump gloated that the Nippon investment would once again make the American steelmaker “synonymous with greatness”. He said protections were included to “ensure that all steel workers will keep their jobs and all facilities in the United States will remain open and thriving” and said Nippon had committed to maintaining all of US Steel’s currently operating blast furnaces for the next decade.The president also promised that every US steel worker would soon receive a $5,000 bonus – prompting the crowd to start a round of “U-S-A!” chants.Trump told the steelworkers in attendance that there was “a lot of money coming your way”.“We won’t be able to call this section a rust belt any more,” Trump said. “It’ll be a golden belt.”During the event, Trump invited local members of United Steelworkers on to the stage to promote the Nippon deal, which saw its leader break with the union to support it. Praising the president, Jason Zugai, vice-president of Irvin local 2227, said he believed the investments would be “life-changing”.But the powerful United Steelworkers union remained wary.“Our primary concern remains with the impact that this merger of US Steel into a foreign competitor will have on national security, our members and the communities where we live and work,” United Steelworkers president David McCall said in a statement.“Issuing press releases and making political speeches is easy. Binding commitments are hard.”Trump framed the administration’s drive to boost domestic steel production as “not just a matter of dignity or prosperity or pride” but as “above all, a matter of national security”.He blamed “decades of Washington betrayals and incompetence and stupidity and corruption” for hollowing out the once-dominant American steel industry, as the jobs “melted away, just like butter”.“We don’t want America’s future to be built with shoddy steel from Shanghai. We want it built with the strength and the pride of Pittsburgh,” he said.In his remarks at a US steel plant, Trump also repeated many of the false claims that have become a feature of his rallies including the lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He gloated over his 2024 victory and, gesturing toward his ear that was grazed by a would-be assassin’s bullet last year at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, said it was proof that a higher power was watching over him.He also called on congressional Republicans to align behind his “one big, beautiful bill,” urging attendees to lobby their representatives and senators to support the measure.Lois Beckett and Callum Jones contributed reporting More

  • 200 Shares104 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump news at a glance: Surprise doubling of steel tariffs risks global market turmoil – again

    Donald Trump said he was doubling tariffs on imported steel to 50% at a rally celebrating a “partnership” deal between US Steel and Japan-based Nippon Steel on Friday.Speaking in front of an audience of steelworkers, the US president said: “We are going to be imposing a 25% increase. We’re going to bring it from 25% to 50%, the tariffs on steel into the United States of America, which will even further secure the steel industry in the United States.”The surprise announcement, which contained no further detail, was cheered by the crowd at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania. Trump added: “Nobody is going to get around that.”He spoke after US markets closed for the weekend. But the increase, set to take effect next week, is likely to create fresh economic turmoil.Here are the key stories of the day:Trump announces 50% steel tariffsThe US president announced he was doubling foreign tariffs on steel imports to 50%, as he celebrated a “blockbuster” agreement for Japan-based Nippon Steel’s to invest in US Steel during a rally in Pennsylvania.Surrounded by men in orange hardhats, Donald Trump unveiled the tariff rate increase as he spoke at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, declaring that the dramatic hike would “even further secure” the US steel industry.It was not immediately clear how the announcement would affect the trade deal with the UK, negotiated earlier this month, that saw tariffs on steel and aluminium from the UK reduced to zero.Read the full storyTrump bids farewell to Musk – though not reallyThe president saw Elon Musk off from the White House on Friday, as the Tesla chief concluded his more than four months leading the so-called department of government efficiency’s disruptive foray into federal departments that achieved far fewer cost savings than expected.Standing alongside Trump in the Oval Office, Musk – who faced a 130-day limit in his tenure as a special government employee that had ended two days prior – vowed that his departure “is not the end” of Doge.Read the full storyMusk allegedly took lots of drugs while advising TrumpElon Musk engaged in extensive drug consumption while serving as one of Trump’s closest advisers, taking ketamine so frequently it caused bladder problems and travelling with a daily supply of about 20 pills, according to claims made to the New York Times.Read the full storyGolden Dome won’t be done by end of Trump’s termThe president’s so-called Golden Dome missile defence program – which will feature space-based weapons to intercept strikes against the US – is not expected to be ready before the end of his term, despite his prediction that it would be completed within the next three years.Read the full storyTrump fires National Portrait Gallery chiefDonald Trump says he is firing the first female director of the National Portrait Gallery, which contained a caption that referenced the attack on the US Capitol that his supporters carried out in early 2021.Read the full storyHarvard visitors to face social media screeningThe Trump administration has ordered US consulates worldwide to conduct mandatory social media screening of every visa applicant seeking to travel to Harvard University, with officials instructed to view private accounts as potential signs of “evasiveness”.Read the full storySupreme court allows White House to revoke migrants’ protected statusThe US supreme court on Friday announced it would allow the Trump administration to revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants living in the US, bolstering the Republican president’s drive to step up deportations.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

    The state department is seeking to create an “Office of Remigration” as
    part of a restructuring of the US diplomatic service to facilitate Trump’s rightwing anti-immigration policies.

    The FBI is investigating an apparent impersonator who pretended to be the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, in texts and calls to her contacts, including prominent Republicans.
    Catching up? Here’s what happened on 29 May 2025. More

  • 213 Shares54 Views

    in US Politics

    Drugs, marital advice and that black eye: key takeaways from Trump’s Oval Office send-off for Elon Musk

    Donald Trump hosted an Oval Office press conference with Elon Musk on Friday to mark the end of the tech billionaire’s tenure as a special government employee overseeing the so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge.Musk’s departure comes after weeks of increasing pressure over his time leading Doge, in which he slashed thousands of jobs, resources and public spending.Here are the key takeaways from the event:1. ‘Elon’s not really leaving,’ says TrumpMusk “is really not leaving” and many of his Doge team will stay on in the administration, Trump told reporters on what was meant to be Musk’s official last day as a “special government employee”.“Elon is really not leaving,” Trump said. “He’s going to be back and forth. I think I have a feeling it’s his baby, and I think he’s going to be doing a lot of things.”Musk later declared “this is not the end of Doge but really the beginning”, adding he will continue to visit the White House as a “friend and adviser” to the president.“I hope to continue to provide advice whenever the president would like,” Musk said. “I hope so,” Trump replied.2. Both sought to downplay rumours of a riftTrump praised Musk as “one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced” and paid glowing tribute to the tech billionaire’s “sweeping and consequential” efforts to slash the federal workforce and reduce the size of government.The lavish praise came just days after Musk publicly criticised Trump’s tax spending bill, saying he was “disappointed” with it and claiming it “undermines the work that the Doge team is doing”.Musk’s comments appeared to indicate that the honeymoon between the two men was over, but on Friday, there were no signs of friction between the pair.Trump presented Musk with a large golden key emblazoned with the White House insignia, which he said he only gave to “very special people” as a thank-you from the country.3. Musk sports a black eye – and blames his sonMusk attended the press conference wearing a black Doge cap, a black jacket and a black T-shirt with the words ‘The Dogefather’ – as well as a visibly bruised right eye.Asked about the bruise, Musk said his five-year-old son, X Æ A-12, had punched him in the face: “I was just horsing around with X and I said: ‘Go ahead, punch me in the face.’ And he did.”“I didn’t really feel much at the time,” he added. “But I guess it bruises up.”Musk quipped that he wasn’t “anywhere near France” at the time, a reference to a viral video appearing to show French president Emmanuel Macron’s wife, Brigitte, pushing Macron in the face.4. Trump offers marital advice to Macron Asked about the video of Macron and his wife and whether he had any “marital advice” for the couple, Trump replied: “Make sure the door remains closed.”“He’s fine. They’re fine,” Trump added. “They’re two really good people I know very well, and I don’t know what that was all about, but I know him very well, and they’re fine.”5. Musk dodges a question about alleged drug useMusk brushed off a New York Times report about his alleged drug use while serving as one of Trump’s closest advisers. “Let’s move on,” he said when asked about the article, before railing against the paper for their “lies about the Russiagate hoax”.According to the Times, Musk engaged in extensive drug consumption during his rise to political prominence, regularly consuming ketamine, ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms. His regular medication box contained pills bearing Adderall markings alongside other substances, the paper said.His use of ketamine was so frequent that he told people it caused bladder problems, the report says. Sources told the paper that he consumed the powerful anaesthetic sometimes daily rather than the “small amount” taken “about once every two weeks” he claimed in interviews. More

  • 163 Shares87 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump says he fired National Portrait Gallery chief in latest conflict with arts

    Donald Trump says he is firing the first female director of the National Portrait Gallery, which contained a caption that referenced the attack on the US Capitol that his supporters carried out in early 2021.The president announced the termination on Friday in a post on his social media platform that accused Sajet – born in Nigeria, raised in Australia and a citizen of the Netherlands – of being “a strong supporter” of diversity initiatives that his administration opposes as well as “highly partisan”. He cited no evidence for either claim.Legal experts, including Eric Columbus, a former litigator for the January 6 select committee, suggested Trump does not have the power to fire Sajet, since the gallery is part of the Smithsonian, which is not run by the executive branch.In its collection of portraits of American presidents, the gallery had this text about Trump: “Impeached twice, on charges of abuse of power and incitement of insurrection after supporters attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, he was acquitted by the Senate in both trials. After losing to Joe Biden in 2020, Trump mounted a historic comeback in the 2024 election. He is the only president aside from Grover Cleveland (1837-1908) to have won a nonconsecutive second term.”Sajet arrived in the US with her family in 1997, held positions at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, and the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and was appointed director of the National Portrait Gallery in 2013, according to a Guardian profile of her.The National Portrait Gallery is an art museum in Washington DC that opened in 1968 and is part of the Smithsonian Institution. It boasts the only complete collection of presidential portraits outside the White House.After beginning his second presidency in January, Trump issued an executive order directing the removal of “improper, divisive or anti-American ideology” from the institution’s storied museums.Sajet had said the gallery under her leadership tried “very hard to be even-handed when we talk about people and that’s the key”.“Everyone has an opinion about American presidents, good, bad and indifferent,” Sajet said. “We hear it all, but generally I think we’ve done pretty well.” More

  • 125 Shares65 Views

    in US Politics

    Oval and out: Musk and Trump’s farewell marred by disillusionment

    Another day, another made-for-great-television encounter between Donald Trump and the media in the Oval Office.The president, quite perversely, prides himself on the access he grants to a group of professionals he has routinely denounced as the “fake news” and “enemies of the people” – although any pain suffered from doing so has been eased by widening the net to include formerly fringe rightwing news organizations, who have responded in kind by lobbing friendly questions.But Friday’s was no ordinary presidential briefing.That was clear when Trump acknowledged – surely uniquely – that it wasn’t even primarily about him.“Today, it’s about a man named Elon,” he intoned, referring to Elon Musk, the tech billionaire who spent $275m of his own money to help Trump win November’s election and return to the White House.Yes, the Special One – as in “special government employee” – was leaving after 138 days at the heart of Trump’s administration. He had spearheaded the purportedly cost-slashing “department of government efficiency,” or Doge; boasted of feeding entire federal agencies “to the wood chipper” fought with cabinet secretaries; publicly paraded with a chainsaw; terrorised federal workers; and generally fomented mayhem within the governing bureaucracy.All in the name of rooting out “waste, fraud and abuse” – boldly forecasting in advance that he would be able to find $2tn worth of it. He had fallen well short of that target, and his popularity plummeted amid widespread resentment over his interference in the US government process. With that, the stock of his business empire, principally his electric vehicle firm, Tesla, had fallen too.So Musk – weeks ago seemingly ubiquitous and all-powerful – was not exactly going out on a high. The unaccustomed shadow of failure stalked him. Disillusionment did, too, as illustrated by his criticism of Trump’s Big Beautiful bill, which he warned would undermine Doge’s cost-cutting endeavours.Still, the president was generous. “He’s one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced,” he said, as Musk – wearing a black baseball cap – stood beside the resolute desk. “He stepped forward to put his very great talents into the service of our nation, and we appreciate it.”But apparently not everybody.For some people had been gossiping about Musk – and had snitched to the New York Times.Hopes that he would be afforded a graceful exit from the political arena were somewhat dashed when the Old Grey Lady of American journalism disclosed Friday that his illicit drug intake was much more widespread than previously known.The paper reported he used ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms, substances whose effects on political judgment have not been hitherto explored. He was also said to have imbibed so much ketamine – a drug prescribed for depression – that it affected his bladder.Predictably, the report was the first question raised by the media. And, clearly primed, Musk decided that the best form of defence was to take the piss, so to speak – out of the source.“The New York Times? Is that the same publication that got a Pulitzer prize for false reporting on the Russiagate?” he said, in a delivery that bore the hallmarks of being pre-rehearsed – and perhaps coached by Trump himself, as it reprised one of his favoured gripes against the “fake news”.“I think it is. That New York Times? Let’s move on.”And move on things did – before anyone realised that Musk had failed to address, or deny, any of the revelations in the Times’ report.Trump reclaimed his accustomed place centre-stage for a bit – riffing, in part, on Emmanuel Macron, the French president who had been in the news after his wife apparently shoved him as he was about to disembark from a plane on a visit to Vietnam.“Do you have world leader-to-world leader marital advice?” the thrice-married and twice-divorced US president was asked, cast in the unlikely role of marriage guidance counsellor.Trump replied, “Make sure the door remains closed,” before revealing, intriguingly, “No, I spoke to him and he’s fine. They’re two really good people I know very well. And I don’t know what that was all about.”Then somebody asked what had been, until then, an elephant in the room question: Elon appeared to have a black eye.“What happened to you?” asked a reporter. Given the popular anger against Musk’s imperious mien recently, there could have been any number of potential culprits: enemies in Maga-world, who have come to include Steve Bannon and Laura Loomer; a disaffected cabinet secretary taking exception to being insulted; perhaps even the disaffected mother of one of the billionaire’s numerous children as he has embarked on a one-man baby boom enterprise.But Musk gave the most prosaic of explanations. The bruise had happened in a bout of horseplay with his five-year-old son, X Æ A-12 – who has accompanied him on previous visits to the White House but was, perhaps fortunately, absent this time. “I was just messing around with X and I said, ‘Go ahead, punch me in the face,’ and he did. Turns out, even a five-year-old punching you in the face – actually, if you knew X.“I didn’t really feel much at the time and then, I guess, it really bruises up.”It seemed perfect as a metaphor for his reputation – and perhaps his psyche – as he prepared to leave Washington.Moments later – after Trump expounded on the alleged criminal havoc perpetrated by his favourite scapegoats, undocumented immigrants – Musk offered his take on the “fundamental moral flaw” of the left, a political grouping which once feted him but now holds him in contempt.“Empathy for the criminals, but not empathy for the victims,” said the man who previously told podcaster Joe Rogan that empathy was the “fundamental weakness of western civilization” and open to exploitation.As he spoke, it was hard to avoid the impression that among those he considered victims was himself. More

  • 138 Shares109 Views

    in US Politics

    Anthony Weiner says female politicians ‘judged much more harshly than men’

    Anthony Weiner says politicians such as him and Donald Trump can survive scandals while qualified candidates like Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton lose elections because “women get judged much more harshly than men do”.“I do believe that,” Weiner said Friday on ABC’s The View amid his run for a New York City council seat years after he crashed out of Congress in the wake of a sexting scandal that some argue aided Trump in clinching his first presidency in 2016.Much of Weiner’s appearance on the talkshow involved his addressing the various scandals that set the stage for one of the most spectacular falls from grace in US politics. As he has done before, Weiner asserted that he was in “recovery” after sexually messaging a teenaged girl led him to serve 18 months in prison.That came after a sexting scandal drove him out of the US House in 2011 after 13 years representing New Yorkers there. A 2013 run for New York mayor failed after he became ensnared in another scandal over sexual texts sent under the moniker Carlos Danger.Then, in 2016, as former secretary of state Clinton ran for the White House against Trump with the help of Weiner’s then wife, Human Abedin, federal authorities opened a criminal investigation into the ex-congressman’s exchange of lewd photos with a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. Investigators involved in that inquiry found emails on Weiner’s personal laptop that prompted them to re-examine a private email server used by Clinton.Agents did not find any incriminating evidence against Clinton. But many Democrats to this day believe the unflattering media coverage that surrounded the private email server investigation had a hand in Clinton’s decisive electoral college defeat to Trump despite his having lost the popular vote.Trump then lost the 2020 presidential race to Joe Biden before retaking the Oval Office in 2024 against vice-president Harris, overcoming – among other things – having been convicted of criminally falsifying business records in connection with payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels and having been held civilly liable for sexually abusing former Elle magazine columnist E Jean Carroll.All of which prompted The View co-host Joy Behar to tell Weiner it seemed that men like him were held to a different standard in politics than “qualified women”. Beside him and Trump, she also mentioned other figures who had faced notorious, sex-related scandals, including Clinton’s husband – Bill Clinton – as well as the ex-New York governors Eliot Spitzer and Andrew Cuomo.Weiner replied by arguing that he, Clinton, Spitzer and Cuomo all did “pay a price” to some extent. The ousted congressman said Clinton was impeached during his second term as US president while Spitzer and Cuomo both resigned New York’s governorship.“I mean, I hate to correct you,” Weiner said. “The question is … how do you judge their record in totality?”Nonetheless, Weiner added: “I do believe that women get judged much more harshly than men do. I do believe that.”The Democratic primary election for the New York City council seat that Weiner is eyeing is on 24 June. Cuomo is signed up to run in the Democratic primary election for mayor that same day. The general election for both races is set for 4 November. More

  • 163 Shares54 Views

    in US Politics

    Why Trump does not suffer Congress when it comes to his prized tariffs

    When it comes to cutting taxes or paying for mass deportations, Donald Trump is happy to work with Congress. But if the issue is his prized and disruptive tariff policy, the president has made clear that he has no time for their legislative wrangling.Trump underscored his sentiment towards Congress after a US trade court this week briefly put a stop to his controversial policy of placing levies on a wide range of countries, before a different court reversed that decision while legal proceedings continue.“The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around DC for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly. If allowed to stand, this would completely destroy Presidential Power – the Presidency would never be the same!” the president wrote on Truth Social.The statement served to put Congress in its place, even though its Republican leaders have shown Trump great deference since taking office. The Senate has approved just about every official he has nominated, no matter how controversial, while the House of Representatives last week overcame substantial differences among the GOP conference to pass the One Big Beautiful bill containing Trump’s tax and spending priorities.If there’s one place where there is daylight to be found between Trump and his Republican allies, it’s his tariff polices. Even avowed supporters of the president have raised their eyebrows at his on-again, off-again imposition of levies on the countries from which US consumers buy their goods and factories source their inputs, and Republican leaders have gone to great lengths to thwart their attempts to do something about them.Which might be why Trump struck out on his own, and hoped the courts would back him up. So far they have not. The US court of international trade, which ruled to block Trump’s tariffs on Wednesday, was very clear it believed his policies “exceed any authority granted to the president”.The matter may ultimately come down to the views of the supreme court, where Trump appointed half of the six-justice conservative supermajority during his first term. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor, said the case is likely to present a test of how the supreme court views the “major questions doctrine” (MQD), which argues clear congressional authority is needed for agencies to carry out any regulations of national importance, in light of Trump’s tariffs moves.The doctrine was used to defang regulators last year when the court overturned the Chevron decision, limiting regulators’ powers and arguing they had overstepped their authority.The supreme court may not be minded to accept the major questions doctrine when it comes to the commander in chief, wrote Goldsmith in his newsletter, Executive Function. “It is an open question whether the MQD applies to congressional authorizations to the president. Every Supreme Court decision involving the MQD has involved agency action, and lower courts are split on whether the MQD applies to presidential authorizations,” he said.For Congress’s beleaguered Democrats, this week’s court intervention, however fleeting, provided grist for the case they’ve been trying to make to voters ever since Trump took office, which is that he is trying to act like the sort of monarch America was founded on rejecting.“This is why the Framers gave Congress constitutional power over trade and tariffs,” said Suzan DelBene, a Washington state House Democrat who has proposed one of many bills to block Trump’s tariffs. “The court spoke decisively in defense of our democracy and against a president attempting to be king.” More

  • 163 Shares87 Views

    in US Politics

    Supreme court allows White House to revoke temporary protected status of many migrants

    The US supreme court on Friday announced it would allow the Trump administration to revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants living in the United States, bolstering the Republican president’s drive to step up deportations.The court put on hold Boston-based US district judge Indira Talwani’s order halting the administration’s move to end the immigration humanitarian “parole” protections granted to 532,000 people by Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, potentially exposing many of them to rapid removal from the country, while the detailed case plays out in lower courts.As with many of the court’s emergency orders – after rapid appeals brought the case to their bench – the decision issued on Friday was unsigned and gave no reasoning. However two of the court’s three liberal-leaning justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, publicly dissented.The court “botched” its assessment of whether the administration was entitled to freeze Talwani’s decision pending the litigation, Jackson wrote in an accompanying opinion.The outcome, Jackson wrote, “undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending”.Jackson also said that “it is apparent that the government seeks a stay to enable it to inflict maximum pre-decision damage.”She added that those living under parole protections in this case now face “two unbearable options”.One option is to “elect to leave the United States and thereby, confront ‘dangers in their native countries,’ experience destructive ‘family separation’ and possibly ‘forfeit any opportunity to obtain a remedy based on their … claims”, Jackson wrote.The other option is that they could remain in the US after parole termination and “risk imminent removal at the hands of government agents, along with its serious attendant consequences”.To Jackson, “either choice creates significant problems for respondents that far exceed any harm to the government … At a minimum, granting the stay would facilitate needless human suffering before the courts have reached a final judgement regarding the legal arguments at issue, while denying the government’s application would not have anything close to the kind of practical impact.”Immigration parole is a form of temporary permission under American law to be in the country for “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit”, allowing recipients to live and work in the US. Biden, a Democrat, used parole as part of his administration’s approach to handling migrants entering at the US-Mexico border.Such a status does not offer immigrants a long-term path towards citizenship but it can typically be renewed multiple times. A report from the American Immigration Council found that halting the program would, apart from the humanitarian effect, be a blow to the US economy, as households in the US where the breadwinners have temporary protected status (TPS) collectively earned more than $10bn in total income in 2021 while paying nearly $1.3bn in federal taxes.Trump called for ending humanitarian parole programs in an executive order signed on 20 January, his first day back in office. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) subsequently moved to terminate them in March, cutting short the two-year parole grants. The administration said revoking the parole status would make it easier to place migrants in a fast-track deportation process called “expedited removal”.The case is one of many that the Trump administration has brought in an emergency fashion to the nation’s highest judicial body seeking to undo decisions by judges impeding the president’s sweeping policies, including several targeting immigrants.The supreme court on 19 May also let Trump end TPS that had been granted under Biden to about 350,000 additional Venezuelans living in the United States, while that legal dispute plays out.Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent then, while House Democrats condemned the supreme court’s decision.In a bid to reduce unauthorized border crossings, Biden starting in 2022 offering limited extra pathways to come to the US legally, allowing Venezuelans who entered the US by air to request a two-year parole if they passed security checks and had a US financial sponsor. Biden expanded that eligibility process to Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans in 2023 as his administration grappled with high levels of illegal immigration from those countries.The plaintiffs in this case, a group of migrants granted parole and Americans who serve as their sponsors, sued administration officials claiming they violated federal law governing the actions of government agencies.Talwani in April found that the law governing such parole did not allow for the program’s blanket termination, instead requiring a case-by-case review. The Boston-based first US circuit court of appeals declined to put the judge’s decision on hold and the government appealed.The justice department told the supreme court that Talwani’s order had upended “critical immigration policies that are carefully calibrated to deter illegal entry”, effectively “undoing democratically approved policies that featured heavily in the November election” that returned Trump to the presidency.The plaintiffs told the supreme court they would face grave harm if their parole is cut short given that the administration has indefinitely suspended processing their pending applications for asylum and other immigration relief.They said they would be separated from their families and immediately subject to expedited deportation “to the same despotic and unstable countries from which they fled, where many will face serious risks of danger, persecution and even death”.Speaking at the White House on Friday afternoon, Donald Trump praised the decision, saying “a couple of hours ago we had a great decision from the supreme court that’s very important”.Reuters contributed reporting More