Americas

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      White House’s defense for not recalling deportations ‘one heck of a stretch’, says judge

      by

      The Trump administration claimed to a federal judge on Monday that it did not recall deportation flights of hundreds of suspected Venezuelan gang members over the weekend despite his specific instructions because that was not expressly included in the formal written order issued afterwards.The administration also said that even if James Boasberg, the chief US district judge in Washington, had included that instruction in his formal order, his authority to compel the planes to return disappeared the moment the planes entered international airspace.The extraordinary arguments suggested the White House took advantage of its own perceived uncertainty with a federal court order to do as it pleased, testing the limits of the judicial system to hold to account an administration set on circumventing adverse rulings.An incredulous Boasberg at one stage asked the administration: “Isn’t then the better course to return the planes to the United States and figure out what to do, than say: ‘We don’t care; we’ll do what we want’?”The showdown between the administration and the judge reached a crescendo over the weekend after the US president secretly invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport, without normal due process, Venezuelans over age 14 who the government says belong to the Tren de Aragua gang.The underlying basis for Trump to invoke the statute is unclear because it historically requires the president to identify a state adversary, and Boasberg on Saturday issued a temporary restraining order blocking deportations of five Venezuelans who had filed suit against the government.At an emergency hearing on Saturday evening, Boasberg extended his injunction to block the deportation of all Venezuelan migrants using Alien Enemies Act authority, and told the administration that any deportation flights already in the air needed to be recalled.By the time of the hearing, two flights had already taken off and a third flight left after Boasberg issued his ruling. All three flights landed in El Salvador, where the deportees were taken to a special maximum security prison, after Boasberg issued his written order.The Trump administration claimed at a hearing on Monday that it believed it had complied with the written order issued by Boasberg, which did not include his verbal instructions for any flights already departed to return to the US.“Oral statements are not injunctions and the written orders always supersede whatever may have been stated in the record,” Abhishek Kambli, the deputy assistant attorney general for the justice department’s civil division, argued for the administration.The judge appeared unimpressed by that contention. “You felt that you could disregard it because it wasn’t in the written order. That’s your first argument? The idea that because my written order was pithier so it could be disregarded, that’s one heck of a stretch,” Boasberg said.The administration also suggested that even if Boasberg had included the directive in his written order, by the time he had granted the temporary restraining order, the deportation flights were outside of the judge’s jurisdiction.The judge expressed similar skepticism at the second argument, noting that federal judges still have authority over US government officials who make the decisions about the planes, even if the planes themselves were outside of US airspace.“The problem is the equitable power of United States courts is not so limited,” Boasberg said. “It’s not a question that the plane was or was not in US airspace.” Boasberg added. “My equitable powers are pretty clear that they do not lapse at the airspace’s edge.”At times, the Trump administration appeared to touch on a separate but related position that the judge’s authority to block the deportations clashed with Trump’s authority to direct US military forces and foreign relations without review by the courts.Boasberg expressed doubt at the strength of that argument, as well as Kambli’s separate claim that he could not provide more details about when the deportation flights took off and how many flights left the US on Saturday, before and possibly after his order.Kambli said he was not authorized to provide those details on account of national security concerns, even in private, to the judge himself. Asked whether the information was classified, Kambli demurred. Boasberg ordered the government to provide him with more information by noon on Tuesday.The statements offered by the administration in federal district court in Washington offered a more legally refined version of public statements from White House officials about the possibility that they had defied a court order.White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt insisted on Monday that the administration acted within “the bounds of immigration law in this country” and said the Trump team did not believe a verbal order carried the same legal weight as a written order.But the White House’s “border czar” Tom Homan offered greater defiance at the court order and told Fox News in an interview that the court order came too late for Boasberg to have jurisdiction over the matter, saying: “I don’t care what the judges think.” More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      White House denies violating judge’s order with Venezuela deportations

      by

      The White House has denied allegations that it engaged in a “a blatant violation” of a judge’s order by deporting about 250 Venezuelan alleged gang members to El Salvador on Saturday, with the US border czar appearing to contradict the denial on Monday by declaring: “I don’t care what the judges think.”The US district judge James E Boasberg has scheduled a hearing for Monday afternoon to demand an explanation about why his Saturday order temporarily blocking the deportation flights had apparently been ignored.The Trump administration had ordered at least some of the deportations using the Alien Enemies Act, a law from 1798 that is meant to be used during wartime. The president quietly invoked the law on Friday and progressive groups almost immediately sued to stop it.On Saturday, during a court hearing over the case, Boasberg added a verbal order that any flights that had already departed with Venezuelan immigrants using the Alien Enemies Act turn around and return to the US.“This is something that you need to make sure is complied with immediately,” he told the justice department, according to the Washington Post.At that point (about 6.51pm ET, according to Axios), both flights were off the Yucatán peninsula, according to flight paths posted on X.Later on Saturday night, however, El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, confirmed that the planes had landed in his country and the alleged gang members were in custody, posting on social media, “Oopsie … too late” above a news article about the judge’s order to turn the planes around.White House officials insisted that the migrants were no longer in US territory when the judge issued his order, claiming that it therefore did not apply.The administration “did not ‘refuse to comply’ with a court order”, said the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, in a statement on Monday.She also argued, however, that the order itself did not need to be followed in the first place.“The order, which had no lawful basis, was issued after terrorist TdA aliens had already been removed from US territory,” Leavitt said. “The written order and the administration’s actions do not conflict.“As the supreme court has repeatedly made clear – federal courts generally have no jurisdiction over the president’s conduct of foreign affairs, his authorities under the Alien Enemies Act, and his core Article II powers to remove foreign alien terrorists from US soil and repel a declared invasion.“A single judge in a single city cannot direct the movements of an aircraft carrying foreign alien terrorists who were physically expelled from US soil.”Other Trump administration officials, who have not been named, echoed similar statements to Axios about the ruling coming too late, claiming that the administration did not defy the judge as the planes were “already outside of US airspace” and therefore arguing that the order was “not applicable”.In a court filing on Monday, lawyers for the administration said that the judge’s oral order was “not enforceable”.ABC News also reported that the administration cited “operational” and “national security” reasons that the planes needed to land, and that the two planes took off during the hearing on Saturday.When asked by a reporter on Sunday whether the administration violated the judge’s orders, Donald Trump said: “I don’t know, you have to speak to the lawyers about that.” He added: “I can tell you this, these were bad people.”Reuters reported that the Trump administration stated in a court filing on Sunday that “some” of the Venezuelans had already been removed from the US before the judge’s order, but did not provide any further details.The New York Times noted that the filing implied that the government had other legal grounds for the deportations of the Venezuelans, other than the use of the Alien Enemies Act that was blocked by the judge.The American Civil Liberties Union and Democracy Forward, which sued to stop the use of the act, added in a court filing on Monday that they believe that the government violated the court order , calling the administration’s actions a “blatant violation of the court’s order”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe rights groups asked the judge to compel the administration to clarify whether any flights departed after the judge’s orders, and to provide more information on the flight timings.On Monday morning, Boasberg scheduled a 4pm hearing for the Trump administration to explain if they defied his order.Later on Monday morning, Tom Homan, Trump’s “border czar”, told reporters: “By the time the order came, the plane was already over international waters, with a plane full of terrorists and significant public safety threats.”He added: “To turn the plane around over international waters” and “come back with terrorists back to the United States, that’s not what this president promised the American people”.He followed up the remarks in an appearance on Fox and Friends, where according to the Hill he said: “I don’t care what the judges think. I don’t care.”He repeated his claim that the flight was “already in international waters” but also questioned why the judge would want “terrorists returned to the United States”: “Look, President Trump, by proclamation, invoked the authorities of the Alien Enemies Act, which he has a right to do, and it’s a gamechanger.”The Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck criticised the administration’s argument that it was too late to act once the planes had left the US. He argued on social media that “a federal court’s jurisdiction does not stop at the water’s edge” but rather, “the question is whether the defendants are subject to the court order, not where the conduct being challenged takes place”.Vladeck also told the Associated Press that although the judge’s verbal directive to turn around the planes was not technically part of his final written order, nevertheless the Trump administration clearly violated the “spirit” of it.Peter Markowitz, a Cardozo Law School professor and immigration enforcement expert, told Reuters that he believed the Trump administration’s actions “most certainly violate” the court’s order.In a statement on Monday, the Democratic senators Alex Padilla, Cory Booker, Dick Durbin and Peter Welch condemned Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act.“Let’s be clear: we are not at war, and immigrants are not invading our country,” they said. “Furthermore, courts determine whether people have broken the law – not a president acting alone, and not immigration agents picking and choosing who gets imprisoned or deported.”The deportations may not be the only instance of the White House directly violating a court order, after the administration reportedly deported Dr Rasha Alawieh, a kidney transplant specialist and Brown University professor, despite a court order temporarily blocking her expulsion.Citing her attorney and court documents, the New York Times reported that the 34-year-old Lebanese citizen – who had a valid US visa – was detained on Thursday upon returning to the US after visiting family in Lebanon. A federal judge had reportedly ordered the government to provide the court with 48 hours’ notice before deporting Alawieh, but she was reportedly put on a flight to Paris anyway. A hearing in her case is set for Monday. More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US deports 250 alleged gang members to El Salvador despite court ruling to halt flights

      by

      The US deported more than 250 mainly Venezuelan alleged gang members to El Salvador despite a US judge’s ruling to halt the flights on Saturday after Donald Trump controversially invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law meant only to be used in wartime.El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, said 238 members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and 23 members of the Salvadoran gang MS-13 had arrived and were in custody as part of a deal under which the US will pay the Central American country to hold them in its 40,000-person capacity “terrorism confinement centre”.The confirmation came hours after a US federal judge expanded his ruling temporarily blocking the Trump administration from invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime authority that allows the president broad leeway on policy and executive action to speed up mass deportations.The US district judge James Boasberg had attempted to halt the deportations for all individuals deemed eligible for removal under Trump’s proclamation, which was issued on Friday. Boasberg also ordered deportation flights already in the air to return to the US.“Oopsie … Too late,” Bukele posted online, followed by a laughing emoji.Soon after Bukele’s statement, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, thanked El Salvador’s leader.“Thank you for your assistance and friendship, President Bukele,” he wrote on the social media site X, following up on an earlier post in which he said the US had sent “2 dangerous top MS-13 leaders plus 21 of its most wanted back to face justice in El Salvador”.Rubio added that “over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars”.On Friday, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act to order the deportations of suspected members of the Venezuelan gang he has accused of “unlawfully infiltrating” the US. The US formally designated Tren de Aragua a “foreign terrorist organization” last month.View image in fullscreenHe claimed the gang members were “conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions” against the US.The Alien Enemies Act has only ever been used three times before, most recently during the second world war, when it was used to incarcerate Germans and Italians as well as for the mass internment of Japanese-American civilians.It was originally passed by Congress in preparation for what the US believed would be an impending war with France. It was also used during the war of 1812 and during the first world war. The US attorney general, Pam Bondi, slammed Judge Boasberg’s stay on deportations. “This order disregards well-established authority regarding President Trump’s power, and it puts the public and law enforcement at risk,” Bondi said in a statement on Saturday night.But lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union contend that the Trump does not have the authority to use the law against a criminal gang, rather than a recognized state.On Sunday, the Republican senator Mike Rounds questioned whether the deportation flights had ignored Judge Boasberg’s order to turn around. “We’ll find out whether or not that actually occurred or not,” Rounds told CNN. “I don’t know about the timing on it. I do know that we will follow the law.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEl Salvador’s multimillion-dollar “terrorism confinement centre” – which is known by its Spanish acronym Cecot – is the centerpiece of Bukele’s highly controversial anti-gang crackdown which has seen tens of thousands of people jailed since it was launched in March 2022.The 40,000-capacity “mega-prison” was opened at the start of 2023 and has since become an essential destination for rightwing Latin American populists keen to burnish their crime-fighting credentials with voters. “This is the way. Tough on crime,” Argentina’s hardline security minister, Patricia Bullrich, enthused last year after posing outside Cecot’s packed cells.A succession of social media influencers and foreign journalists have also been invited to tour the prison to document its harsh conditions and help Bukele promote his clampdown, which has helped dramatically reduce El Salvador’s once sky-high murder rate.“The conditions in there are like something you’ve never seen … Depending on which side of the argument you fall on, it’s either the ultimate deterrent or it’s an abuse of human rights,” the Australian TV journalist Liam Bartlett reported after visiting El Salvador’s “hellhole” prison recently.“There’s no sheets [and] no mattresses. [Prisoners] sleep on cold steel frames and they eat the same meal every single day. Utensils are banned so they use their hands [to eat]. There’s just two open toilets in each of these massive cells and the lights stay on 24/7,” Bartlett added. “Imagine how long you would last in these conditions.”Human rights activists have decried how the mass imprisonments have taken place largely without legal process. More than 100 prisoners have died behind bars since Bukele’s clampdown began.Neither the US nor El Salvador offered any immediate evidence that the scores of Venezuelan prisoners sent to Cecot this weekend were in fact gang members or had been convicted of any offense. More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Maga since forever’: mercenary mogul Erik Prince pushes to privatize Trump deportation plans

      by

      Silicon Valley has played a sizable part in the early days of Donald Trump’s new administration, but another familiar face in the Maga-verse is beginning to emerge: businessman Erik Prince, often described by his critics as a living “Bond villain”.Prince is the most famous mercenary of the contemporary era and the founder of the now defunct private military company Blackwater. For a time, it was a prolific privateer in the “war on terror”, racking up millions in US government contracts by providing soldiers of fortune to the CIA, Pentagon and beyond.Now he is a central figure among a web of other contractors trying to sell Trump advisers on a $25bn deal to privatize the mass deportations of 12 million migrants.In an appearance on NewsNation, he immediately tried to temper that his plan had any traction.“No indications, so far,” said Prince about a federal contract materializing. “Eventually if they’re going to hit those kinds of numbers and scale, they’re going to need additional private sector.”But the news had people wondering, how is Prince going to factor into the second Trump presidency?Sean McFate, a professor at Georgetown University who has advised the Pentagon and the CIA, said: “Erik Prince has always been politically connected to Maga, the Maga movement, and that’s going back to 2015.”Prince, himself a special forces veteran and ex-Navy Seal, is a known business associate of Steve Bannon, the architect of Trump’s first electoral win. Prince even appeared with him last July at a press conference before Bannon surrendered to authorities and began a short prison sentence for defying a congressional subpoena.“He comes from a wealthy Republican family,” said McFate, who has authored books on the global mercenary industry and is familiar with Prince’s history. “His sister, Betsy DeVos, is the former education secretary, and he’s been a Maga, not just a Maga, he’s been a Steve Bannon, Maga Breitbart Republican, since forever.”Beginning during the two Bush administrations, Blackwater was a major recipient of Pentagon money flowing into wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But a massacre in Baghdad at the hands of some of his contractors led to prison sentences, congressional inquiries and blacklistings of the firm.Years later, Trump would come to the rescue: pardoning all of the Blackwater mercenaries involved in the massacre.Now, with the current administration, which is doling out free advertising to Elon Musk and other Maga loyalists, Prince has a new and familiar ally in Washington.“This is a big market time for him,” said McFate. “He’s very quiet when there’s a Democrat in the White House and gets very noisy when a Republican, especially Trump, is in the White House; I expect this to be one of many things he will try to pitch.”Do you have tips about private military contractors or the world of Erik Prince? Tip us securely here or text Ben Makuch at BenMakuch.90 on Signal.McFate said Prince is nothing if not an “opportunist” and an “egotist” with a penchant for getting into media cycles.“If Trump or somebody says ‘That’s an interesting idea,’ he will pump out a PowerPoint slideshow proposing an idea, whether or not he can do it,” he said. Prince also has the ear of Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, and was a character witness for her Senate confirmation.There’s no denying Prince is a relentless pitchman, offering world governments billion-dollar plans to privatize wars or other less expensive espionage activities. For example, he was recently named to the advisory board of the London-based private intelligence firm Vantage Intelligence, which advises “sovereign wealth funds” and other “high-net-worth individuals”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionPost-Blackwater and under new companies, he has proposed missions in Afghanistan, Ukraine, Congo, Libya and, purportedly, Venezuela – a country he often mentions as ripe for overthrow on his podcast, Off Leash.A senior commander in an alliance of former Venezuelan soldiers who defected from the Chavista regime told the Guardian his organization has been asking Prince for help against the country’s current president, Nicolás Maduro.“We have sent messages to Mr Erik Prince to try to see if we can meet,” said Javier Nieto Quintero, a Florida-based former captain in the Venezuelan military and leader of the Venezuelan dissident organization Carive. “If he wants, we can provide help, support in terms of information, intelligence, or any other area based on the freedom of our country.”Nieto Quintero, who said Prince has yet to respond, and Carive was used in a failed operation against Maduro in 2020 led by a former Green Beret. In what is notoriously known as the “Bay of Piglets”, six of Nieto Quintero’s men were killed and close to 100 captured, including two former US servicemen recruited for the job who were freed two years ago from a Caracas prison.Prince’s eye has undoubtedly been focused on Venezuela, a country with vast oil reserves that has long been in the crosshairs of Trump’s retinue. In recent months, Prince has supported a Venezuelan opposition movement called Ya Casi Venezuela, claiming to have raised more than $1m for it over the summer. The Maduro regime is now investigating Prince’s links to the campaign, which it paints as a sort of front for western governments fostering its downfall.Venezuela has reason to fear Prince and his connections to American spies: the CIA, with a rich history of covert actions in Latin America, was at least aware of a plot to overthrow Maduro’s predecessor Hugo Chávez in 2002.“We were in contact with Ya Casi Venezuela, but a meeting never took place,” said Nieto Quintero. “We have continued to grow and strengthen our ranks and our doctrine, our plans, our institutional, military, security and defense proposals.”Prince is officially active in the region. Last week, Ecuador announced it would be partnering with Prince in a “strategic alliance” to reinforce the country’s controversial “war on crime” with his expertise.Prince did not respond to a request for comment sent through his encrypted cellphone company, Unplugged. Ya Casi Venezuela did not answer numerous emails about its relationship with Prince. As of now, no business deal between the Trump administration and Prince has been signed or publicly disclosed.But across his career as both a shadowy contractor and a political figure, who just graced the stages of the latest Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) to applause and then spoke to Harvard Republicans, the public and private sides of Prince remain somewhat antithetical.“He likes to be in the news, which makes him a very bad mercenary,” said McFate. “Frankly, most mercenaries I talk to in Africa, the big ones, despise him.” More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump invokes 18th-century wartime act to deport five Venezuelans

      by

      Donald Trump has invoked the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport five Venezuelan nationals from the US.In a presidential proclamation issued on Saturday, the White House said: “Tren de Aragua (TdA) is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization with thousands of members, many of whom have unlawfully infiltrated the United States and are conducting irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States.”The invocation of the wartime act comes just hours after a federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s administration from using the 1798 Act to carry out its intended deportations of the Venezuelans.On Saturday, US district judge James Boasberg of the federal district court in Washington DC agreed to issue temporary restraining order that prevents the Venezuelans’ deportation for 14 days.“Given the exigent circumstances that it [the court] has been made aware of this morning, it has determined that an immediate Order is warranted to maintain the status quo until a hearing can be set,” Boasberg wrote in his order.Boasberg’s decision comes in response to a lawsuit filed the same day by the American Civil Liberties Union and Democracy Forward. The organizations charge that the Trump administration unlawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act.In the lawsuit, ACLU and Democracy Forward argue the act has been invoked only three times in the history of the US: the war of 1812, first world war and second world war.“It cannot be used here against nationals of a country – Venezuela – with whom the United States is not at war, which is not invading the United States and which has not launched a predatory incursion into the United States,” the lawsuit stated.“The government’s proclamation would allow agents to immediately put noncitizens on planes without any review of any aspect of the determination that they are alien enemies,” the lawsuit added.A remote hearing has been scheduled for today at 5pm before Boasberg. Both ACLU and Democracy Forward will ask that the temporary restraining order be broadened to everyone in danger of removal under the act, the civil liberties organizations said.The president had previously ordered his administration to designate Venezuela’s Tren De Aragua gang as a foreign terrorist organization.With Trump characterizing the gang as a foreign force that is invading the US, civil liberties organizations such as the ACLU fear that Trump may invoke the 1798 act “unlawfully during peacetime to accelerate mass deportations, sidestepping the limits of this wartime authority and the procedures and protections in immigration law.”The invocation is expected to face legal challenges almost immediately. The 227-year-old law is designed to primarily be used in wartime, and only Congress has the authority to declare a war. But the president does have the discretion to invoke the law to defend against a “threatened or ongoing invasion or predatory incursion”, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a non-partisan authority on law and policy.“This law shouldn’t be invoked because migration is not an invasion, and we’re not in a war time,” said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, the deputy director of federal advocacy for United We Dream, an immigrant rights organization. “It’s extremely horrifying that we, as immigrants, are being labeled as terrorists, as invaders.”Those subject to the Alien Enemies Act could be deported without a court hearing or asylum interview, and their cases would be governed by wartime authority rather than by immigration law.The Alien Enemies Act specifically allows the president to detain, relocate, or deport immigrants based on their country of ancestry – and crucially covers not only citizens of hostile nations but also “natives”, which could include people who may have renounced their foreign citizenship and sought legal residency in the US.The centuries-old law was also used to arrest more than 31,000 people – mostly people of Japanese, German and Italian ancestry – as “alien enemies” during the second world war, and played a role in the mass removal and incarceration of Japanese Americans during the war.Trump has been building his case for invoking the act for years by characterizing the influx of migrants at the southern border as an “invasion”. He also previewed his invocation in an executive order on his inauguration day, directing the secretaries of state to plan by preparing facilities “necessary to expedite the removal” of those subject to the act.“By invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, I will direct our government to use the full and immense power of federal and state law enforcement to eliminate the presence of all foreign gangs and criminal networks bringing devastating crime to US soil, including our cities and inner cities,” he said in his inaugural address.Though anti-immigrant politicians and groups have long advocated for the use of the act in response to unlawful border crossings, Macedo do Nascimento said a number of executive orders and congressional policies have already broadened the federal government’s authorities to detain and deport immigrants.“There are already laws that allow for mass detention. There are already laws, like the Laiken Riley Act, that would broaden the dragnet of people who can be detained,” Macedo do Nascimento said. “So the idea of him invoking the Alien Enemies Act feels kind of needless. To me, it is really about building the narrative to label immigrants as terrorists.” More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      EU retaliates against Trump tariffs with €26bn ‘countermeasures’

      by

      The EU has announced it will impose trade “countermeasures” on €26bn (£22bn) worth of US goods in retaliation after Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, escalating a global trade war.The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, called the 25% US levies on global imports of the metals “unjustified trade restrictions”, after they came into force at 4am GMT on Wednesday.“We deeply regret this measure,” von der Leyen said in a statement, as Brussels announced it would be “launching a series of countermeasures” on 1 April. “The European Union must act to protect consumers and business,” she added.The commission said it would be targeting industrial products in response, including steel and aluminium, as well as household tools, plastics and wooden goods.In addition, the EU measures will affect some US agricultural products, such as poultry, beef, some seafood, nuts, eggs, dairy, sugar and vegetables, provided they are approved by member states.The retaliatory measures will also entail Brussels reimposing the tariffs on US goods including bourbon whiskey, jeans and Harley-Davidson motorbikes that it introduced during the first Trump term.“We will always remain open to negotiation. We firmly believe that in a world fraught with geopolitical and economic uncertainties, it is not in our common interest to burden our economies with tariffs,” von der Leyen said.France’s European affairs minister, Benjamin Haddad, said on Wednesday that the EU could “go further” in its response to the US tariffs. The measures “are proportionate”, Haddad told TF1 television. “If it came to a situation where we had to go further, digital services or intellectual property could be included,” he said.Britain would not issue its own immediate measures in response to the US tariffs but was going to “reserve our right to retaliate”, a UK minister said.The exchequer secretary to the Treasury, James Murray, told Times Radio the levies were disappointing but “we want to take a pragmatic approach, and we’re already negotiating rapidly toward an economic agreement with the US, with the potential to eliminate additional tariffs”.Asked by Sky News whether Britain’s response to the levies could be called weak in comparison with Brussels, Murray said the UK was in a “very different position than the EU” and does not want to be “pushed off course” as it pursues a trade deal with Washington.“We think the right response is to continue pragmatically, cool-headedly, without a knee-jerk response, but toward our economic agreement that we’re negotiating with the US to secure, because that’s in the best interests of the UK,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHis comments came after the prime minister, Keir Starmer, said on Tuesday that Britain would not respond with its own counter-tariffs, after last-ditch efforts to persuade Trump to spare British industry from his global tariffs appeared to have failed.The UK steel industry warned that Trump’s tariffs “couldn’t come at a worse time”, and said the move would have “hugely damaging consequences for UK suppliers and their customers in the US”.Gareth Stace, the director general of the trade association UK Steel, called the Trump administration’s move “hugely disappointing”. He said: “President Trump must surely recognise that the UK is an ally, not a foe. Our steel sector is not a threat to the US but a partner to key customers, sharing the same values and objectives in addressing global overcapacity and tackling unfair trade.“These tariffs couldn’t come at a worse time for the UK steel industry, as we battle with high energy costs and subdued demand at home, against an oversupplied and increasingly protectionist global landscape.”The introduction of EU measures came after a day of drama on Tuesday, when Trump threatened to double tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium in response to Canadian threats to increase electricity prices for US customers.The US president backed off from those plans after the Ontario premier, Doug Ford, agreed to suspend his province’s decision to impose a 25% surcharge on electricity exports to the states of Minnesota, Michigan and New York. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump threatens to raise Canadian steel and aluminum tariffs to 50%

      by

      The looming trade war between the US and Canada escalated on Tuesday as Donald Trump threatened to double tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum after Canadian threats to increase electricity prices for US customers.On Tuesday morning Trump announced plans to double tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum from 25% to 50% and once again threatened to annex Canada as retaliation for the province of Ontario’s imposition of a 25% surcharge on electricity exports to several US states, in a dramatic escalation of the trade war between the two ostensibly allied countries.The news set off another stock market sell-off on Wall Street that was tempered when Ontario’s premier, Doug Ford, said he made a deal with the US commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, to suspend Canada’s 25% tariff on exports of electricity to Michigan, New York and Minnesota after Lutnick agreed to discuss renewing existing trade relations.Incorrectly calling Canada “one of the highest tariffing nations anywhere in the world”, Trump said he had instructed his secretary of commerce to increase levies on the metals due to start Wednesday morning. He also threatened more tariffs on 2 April on the car industry that would “essentially, permanently shut down the automobile manufacturing business in Canada”.Asking rhetorically why the US received electricity from another country, he accused Canada of using energy, “that so affects the life of innocent people, as a bargaining chip and threat” and said “they will pay a financial price for this so big that it will be read about in History Books for many years to come”.After the news that Ontario was suspending its electricity hikes, Trump said he would “probably” reconsider imposing the higher tariffs on Canada.Mark Carney, Canada’s incoming prime minister, called Trump’s latest move “an attack on Canadian workers, families and businesses” and promised to “keep our tariffs on until the Americans show us respect and make credible, reliable commitments to free and fair trade”.The Trump administration was also reportedly preparing on Tuesday to institute a new rule that would require some Canadians staying in the US for more than 30 days to register personal information and agree to fingerprinting, according to Bloomberg. Currently there is largely frictionless travel for citizens between the two countries.The fractious economic battle between the US and Canada has developed even graver undertones as Trump makes increasingly aggressive threats for the US to absorb its northern neighbour. Although at first claiming that he wanted Canada to crack down on fentanyl, Trump has now accused the US ally of underpaying for military protection and incorrectly described the trade imbalance with Canada as a $200bn subsidy from the US.Trump coupled his tariff declaration with openly aggressive language about making Canada “our cherished Fifty First State”, repeating a constant refrain over the last few months. He claimed American statehood for Canada would make “all tariffs, and everything else, totally disappear”, called the border “an artificial line of separation drawn many years ago” and suggested the Canadian national anthem, O Canada, would become a state anthem.The rhetoric has inspired a rare unity among Canadian politicians, with Carney campaigning for Liberal leader on standing up to Trump, and saying to a standing ovation in his acceptance speech on Sunday that “Canada never, ever will be part of America”.Trump’s moves are just the latest in the chaos around the president’s trade policy, amid tumbling stock markets and fears it could trigger a possible US recession.The White House’s strategy so far has been to play down the anxiety on Wall Street, even as stocks waver. After Trump refused to rule out the possibility of a recession in an interview with Fox News over the weekend, the Nasdaq had its worst day on Monday since September 2022, dropping 4%.Shares in US automakers also fell after the announcement, as traders bet that high metal tariffs would drive up costs for the American industrial sector, eating into their profits. Ford Motor dropped nearly 4%, while General Motors dipped by 1.3%. Shares in the carmaker Stellantis – which has several manufacturing facilities in Canada – fell by more than 5%.Price premiums for aluminum on US physical market soared to a record high above $990 a metric ton, Reuters reported.The Ontario premier Ford has said that Trump must take the blame if there is a recession in the US, telling MSNBC on Tuesday: “If we go into a recession, it will be called the Trump recession.”Ford has said in the past that he would be willing to cut off US energy supply from Canada completely in response to Trump’s tariffs.“We will be relentless,” Ford said, adding he would not “hesitate” to shut off electricity exports to the US if Trump continues the trade war.“That’s the last thing I want to do. I want to send more electricity down to the US, to our closest allies or our best neighbors in the world. I want to send more electricity.” But, he said, “Is it a tool in our toolkit? One hundred per cent, and as he continues to hurt Canadian families, Ontario families, I won’t hesitate to do that.”Ford also encouraged American CEOs, who have been largely silent on the trade war and threats to Canadian sovereignty, to speak up. On Tuesday Trump is set to meet with the Business Roundtable, an influential group of business leaders that includes the CEOs of Google, Amazon and JPMorgan.Ford said: “We need those CEOs to actually get a backbone and stand in front of him and tell him, ‘This is going to be a disaster. It’s mass chaos right now.’”The group said in a statement last week that while it supported trade policies that “open markets to US exports, revitalize the domestic manufacturing base and de-risk supply chains”, it called on the White House to “preserve the benefits” of the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which Trump himself signed in 2020 but has since apparently violated by suddenly imposing steep tariffs on both countries.Tariffs of 25% on steel and aluminum imports were already slated to apply to all countries globally on Wednesday, after Trump announced them last month.Both consumer and business confidence has dropped in the US since Trump entered office.A survey published on Monday in Chief Executive magazine found that CEOs’ rating of the current business climate fell 20% in January, from 6.3 out of 10 – with 1 being “poor” and 10 being “excellent” – to 5, the lowest since spring 2020.
      Meanwhile, consumer confidence measured by the Conference Board found that confidence dropped over 6% in February, its biggest month-to-month drop since August 2021.Trump had not yet spoken with Carney, said the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday, arguing that the tariffs on Canadian metals “was a retaliatory statement due to the escalation of rhetoric that we’ve seen out of Ontario, Canada”.“I think Canada is a neighbor. They are a partner. They have always been an ally,” she said, adding: “Perhaps they are becoming a competitor now.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Canada’s designated PM Mark Carney meets with Trudeau as Trump threat looms

      by

      Canada’s incoming prime minister, Mark Carney, has met with Justin Trudeau as the pair discuss a transfer of power after the former central banker’s landslide victory at the Liberal party’s leadership race.The meeting on Monday sets the stage for an imminent federal election and gives Canada a fresh leader to square off against the United States president, with the two countries locked in a bitter trade war provoked by Donald Trump.Briefly speaking to reporters, Carney said he was “honoured” to receive nearly 86% of the vote, one of the most decisive wins of a party leader in decades.But, the 59-year-old former banker said he had “a lot of wood to chop” as he prepares to assume the reins of a country tearing on the verge of economic calamity.Carney is widely expected to call an election within days, reflecting both the urgency of Canada’s trade war with the United States, and the awkward reality that as prime minister without a seat in parliament, he is unable to attend sessions of the House of Commons.First, however, Trudeau must visit the governor general – the largely ceremonial representative of King Charles – and officially tender his resignation. Carney will then swear oaths of office and allegiance and form a cabinet. This is expected to happen in the coming days.After his meeting with Trudeau, Carney said the transition “will be seamless and it will be quick.’Under Canadian law, an election period must be at least 37 days and no more than 51 days, with the vote falling on a Monday. Party insiders have indicated Canadians will probably vote on 28 April or 5 May.The former governor of the Bank of England and of Canada takes the job of prime minister as Ottawa finds itself at odds with its closest ally and largest trading partner. Last week Trump announced a 25% tax on all Canadian goods, with a carve-out for the automotive and energy sectors. The tariffs have the power to push Canada’s fragile economy into a recession.Carney spent much of his acceptance speech on Sunday evening foreshadowing the theme that will probably define his tenure as prime minister: conflict with the volatile and unpredictable president who has threatened repeatedly to annex Canada.“America is not Canada. And Canada never, ever, will be part of America in any way, shape or form,” Carney told supporters. “We didn’t ask for this fight. But Canadians are always ready when someone else drops the gloves,” Carney said. “So the Americans, they should make no mistake, in trade as in hockey, Canada will win.While the Liberals trail slightly in the polls, Carney’s ascension within the party, and Trudeau’s exit, has dramatically revived their chances of eking out a victory in the next election – a result that was widely seen as unthinkable just weeks ago.Carney, a political novice who has never held elected office, also criticised his main political rival: the Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre.“Donald Trump thinks he can weaken us with his plan to divide and conquer. Pierre Poilievre’s plan will leave us divided and ready to be conquered,” Carney said. “Because a person who worships at the altar of Donald Trump will kneel before him, not stand up to him.”Carney also suggested Poilievre’s partisan nature was a liability in the existential fight for Canada’s future. “His anger isn’t action. His division isn’t strength. Division won’t win a trade war,” he said.Earlier that evening, Poilievre accused Carney of being “sneaky” at a Sunday evening rally in London, Ontario.“And now our Liberal friends, after they’ve caused all this damage, are going to pull a sneaky trick. They’re going to try to get elected for a fourth term. A fourth term by replacing Justin Trudeau with his economic adviser, Mark Carney,” he said. “Carney’s advice drove up taxes, housing costs and food prices, while he personally profited from moving billions of dollars and thousands of jobs out of Canada to the United States.”Carney’s dominant win outshone most expectations and provides the leader with both a strong mandate and a unified party. He won in all 343 of the Liberal party districts. His closest rival, the former finance minister Chrystia Freeland finished a distant second with only 8% of the vote, and was unable to win the most votes in her own district. More