US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      People in the US: tell us how you think Trump’s first 100 days have gone so far

      by

      On the eve of his inauguration in January, Donald Trump vowed to deliver the “most extraordinary first 100 days of any presidency in American history”.Since taking office, the president has issued a flurry of executive orders that amount to a shock-and-awe campaign, and made a series of policy moves to dramatically reshape the United States.They range from imposing sweeping tariffs; establishing the “department of government efficiency”; gutting programs including USAID; declaring a national emergency on the southern border; attempting to put an end to birthright citizenship; attempting to deport US students for engaging in protest; and ending diversity programs in the federal government, to name a few.As the 100-day mark approaches, we want to hear from people across the political spectrum in the US on the second Trump administration. Tell us, in 100 words or less, what you think of the beginning of Trump’s second term and how you think he has or has not succeeded on his promise of an “extraordinary first 100 days”.We will curate 100 responses from people across the country. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump DoJ unable to tell court where man wrongly deported to El Salvador is

      by

      Lawyers for the Trump administration were unable on Friday to tell a federal court exactly where the Maryland resident who was wrongly deported to El Salvador last month is or how he is, as the judge admonished the government at a heated hearing.The US district judge Paula Xinis said it was “extremely troubling” that the Trump administration failed to comply with a court order to provide details on the whereabouts and status of the Salvadorian citizen Kilmar Abrego García and she wanted daily updates on what the government is doing to bring him home.“Where is he and under whose authority?” Xinis asked in a Maryland courtroom.“I’m not asking for state secrets,” she said. “All I know is that he’s not here. The government was prohibited from sending him to El Salvador, and now I’m asking a very simple question: where is he?”The government side responded that it had no evidence that he is not still in El Salvador. “That is extremely troubling,” Xinis said.As Newsweek reported, Xinis added: “We’re not going to slow-walk this … We’re not relitigating what the supreme court has already put to bed.”The US supreme court on Thursday upheld the judge’s order to facilitate Abrego García’s return to the US, after a lawsuit filed by the man and his family challenging the legality of his summary deportation on 15 March.Abrego García has had a US work permit since 2019 but was stopped and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) officers on 12 March and questioned about alleged gang affiliation. He was deported on one of three high-profile deportation flights to El Salvador made up chiefly of Venezuelans whom the government accuses of being gang members and assumed special powers to expel without a hearing.Xinis on Friday repeatedly pressed a government attorney for answers but the administration defied her order for details on how or when it would retrieve Abrego García and claimed she had not given them enough time to prepare.“I’m not sure what to take from the fact that the supreme court has spoken quite clearly and yet I can’t get an answer today about what you’ve done, if anything, in the past,” Xinis said.Drew Ensign, an attorney with the Department of Justice, repeated what the administration had said in court filings, that it would provide the requested information by the end of Tuesday, once it evaluated the supreme court ruling.“Have they done anything?” Xinis asked. Ensign said he did not have personal knowledge of what had been done, to which the judge responded: “So that means they’ve done nothing.”The administration said in a court filing earlier on Friday that it was “unreasonable and impracticable” to say what its next steps are before they are properly agreed upon and vetted.“Foreign affairs cannot operate on judicial timelines, in part because it involves sensitive country-specific considerations wholly inappropriate for judicial review,” the filing said.Abrego García’s lawyers said in a Friday court filing: “The government continues to delay, obfuscate, and flout court orders, while a man’s life and safety is at risk.”The case highlights the administration’s tensions with federal courts. Several have blocked Trump policies, and judges have expressed frustration with administration efforts – or lack of them – to comply with court orders.Abrego García’s wife, US citizen Jennifer Vásquez Sura, has not been able to speak to him since he was flown to his native El Salvador last month and imprisoned. She has been rallying outside court and has urged their supporters to keep fighting for him “and all the Kilmars out there whose stories are still waiting to be heard”.The family sued to challenge the legality of his deportation and on 4 April Xinis ordered the administration to “facilitate and effectuate” his return. The administration challenged that order at the supreme court, which upheld Xinis’s order but said the term “effectuate” was unclear and might exceed the court’s authority.The justice department in a supreme court filing on 7 April stated that while Abrego García was deported to El Salvador through “administrative error”, his actual removal from the United States “was not error”. The error, department lawyers wrote, was in removing him specifically to El Salvador despite the deportation protection order.Asked at the White House media briefing on Friday if Donald Trump wants the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, to bring Abrego García with him when he visits the US on Monday, the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the supreme court’s ruling “made it very clear that it’s the administration’s responsibility to ‘facilitate’ the return, not to ‘effectuate’ the return”.Similarly, the administration’s court filing said: “The court has not yet clarified what it means to ‘facilitate’ or ‘effectuate’ the return as it relates to this case, as [the] plaintiff is in the custody of a foreign sovereign. Defendants request – and require – the opportunity to brief that issue prior to being subject to any compliance deadlines.”Maya Yang, Reuters and the Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Ice can conduct enforcement actions in places of worship, US judge says

      by

      A federal judge on Friday sided with the Trump administration in allowing immigration agents to conduct enforcement operations at houses of worship despite a lawsuit filed by religious groups over the new policy.Dabney Friedrich, a US district judge in Washington, refused to grant a preliminary injunction to the plaintiffs, more than two dozen Christian and Jewish groups representing millions of Americans.She found that only a handful of immigration enforcement actions had been conducted in or around churches or other houses of worship and that the evidence did not show “that places of worship are being singled out as special targets”.The groups argued the policy violated the right to practice their religion. Since Donald Trump retook the presidency in January, attendance has declined significantly, with some areas showing double-digit percentage drops, they said.The judge, though, found that the groups had not shown their drops were definitively linked to the church policy specifically, as opposed to broader increased actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) or other agencies.“That evidence suggests that congregants are staying home to avoid encountering ICE in their own neighborhoods, not because churches or synagogues are locations of elevated risk,” wrote Friedrich, who was appointed by the Republican president during his first term.That means that simply reversing the policy on houses of worship would not necessarily mean immigrants would return to church, she found.On 20 January, his first day back in office, Trump’s administration rescinded a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy limiting where migrant arrests could happen. Its new policy said field agents using “common sense” and “discretion” could conduct immigration enforcement operations at houses of worship without a supervisor’s approval.Plaintiffs’ attorneys claimed the new DHS directive departs from the government’s 30-year-old policy against staging immigration enforcement operations in “protected areas” or “sensitive locations”.The ruling comes as Trump’s immigration crackdown hits courtrooms around the country. On Thursday alone, another judge cleared the way for the administration to require people in the country illegally to register with the government even as the US supreme court ordered the administration to work to bring back a man mistakenly deported to prison in El Salvador.There have been at least two other lawsuits over that sensitive locations policy. One Maryland-based judge agreed to block immigration enforcement operations for some religious faiths, including Quakers.A judge in Colorado, though, sided with the administration in another lawsuit over the reversal of the part of the policy that had limited immigration arrests at schools. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Immigration agents turned away after trying to enter LA elementary schools

      by

      Immigration officials attempted to enter two Los Angeles elementary schools this week, but were turned away by school administrators. The incident appears to be the Trump administration’s first attempt to enter the city’s public schools since amending regulations to allow immigration agents to enter “sensitive areas” such as schools.At a Thursday press conference, the Los Angeles unified school district superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, confirmed that agents from the Department of Homeland Security were seeking five students in first through sixth grades.Officials attempted to enter two south Los Angeles schools, Lillian Street elementary and Russell elementary, but were turned away after the schools’ principals asked to see their identification. Los Angeles Unified is a sanctuary district and does not cooperate with federal immigration agencies.The news comes as the Trump administration has escalated its attacks against international students and ramped up efforts to deport undocumented and documented immigrants alike. In January, homeland security rescinded Biden administration guidelines preventing its agents from entering “sensitive areas” including schools and churches.“Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” former acting homeland security secretary Benjamine Huffman said in a statement announcing the new policy. “The Trump administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”In response, LA Unified began distributing “Know Your Rights” cards to students and the school police department issued a statement saying it would not “assist or engage in immigration compliance checks, immigration enforcement activity, or ICE-related task force operations”.“I’m still mystified as to how a first-, second-, third-, fourth- or sixth-grader would pose any type of risk to the national security of our nation,” Carvalho said. “Schools are places for learning. Schools are places for understanding. Schools are places for instruction. Schools are not places of fear.”The superintendent told reporters that the immigration agents who arrived at the Los Angeles elementary schools said they wanted to see the “students to determine their well-being” as unaccompanied minors, and that they had received authorization to speak with students from their caretakers. He added that the district later spoke with the students’ caretakers and learned that was untrue.“DHS is leading efforts to conduct welfare checks on these children to ensure that they are safe and not being exploited, abused, and sex trafficked,” the homeland security department said in a statement to Fox 11 Los Angeles.“Unlike the previous administration, President Trump and Secretary Noem take the responsibility to protect children seriously and will continue to work with federal law enforcement to reunite children with their families. In less than 70 days, Secretary Noem and Secretary Kennedy have already reunited nearly 5,000 unaccompanied children with a relative or safe guardian.”Carvalho contested that, and said as an educator who entered the United States without authorization at the age of 17 himself, he felt “beyond my professional responsibility, a moral responsibility to protect these students”.The incident has drawn attention from congressional lawmakers, including Pasadena Democrat Judy Chu.“I’m absolutely incensed that DHS agents would try to enter elementary schools this week, and I’m so grateful to the brave LAUSD administrators who denied them entry. These are children who should be learning to read and write, not cowering in fear of being ripped away from their homes,” she said.“I’m concerned parents may keep their children home rather than risk sending them to school. As Angelenos, we must lock arms together in moments like these to protect kids from deportation squads and protect schools from Trump’s campaign of terror.” More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      US House panel drops inquiry into Northwestern’s law school clinics

      by

      The US House education and workforce committee withdrew an investigation into Northwestern University’s law school clinics after professors there sued and alleged that the inquiry violated their constitutional free speech rights.The professors secured what amounted to a legal victory for them on Thursday, when the House committee withdrew its investigative requests with respect to the university and its law school’s Bluhm Legal Clinic program on Thursday.Citing reports of antisemitism on campus, House committee members had sought budget and personnel records over claims that the university was using “taxpayer-supported institutional resources for troubling purposes”.The mention of reported antisemitism on campus was contained in a 27 March letter that the committee sent to justify the investigation and was addressed to Northwestern University’s chairperson, Peter Barris, as well as its president, Michael Schill.“The Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic at Northwestern’s Pritzker School of Law (Northwestern Law) is providing free legal representation in a civil suit to the organizers of an anti-Israel blockade of highway traffic to Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport,” the House committee’s letter said. “This blockade resulted in the arrest of 40 participants. The fact that Northwestern, a university supported by billions in federal funds, would dedicate its resources to support this illegal, antisemitic conduct raises serious questions.”The letter also alluded to “broader concerns about the institutionalization of leftwing political activism at Northwestern Law”, adding that the school’s Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic, led by the law professor Sheila Bedi, was using “Northwestern’s name and resources to engage in progressive-left political advocacy”.According to the letter, the House committee demanded that the university provide all written policies, procedures and guidance related to the function of the law school’s legal clinics, a detailed budget for the Bluhm Legal Clinic, and a list of its sources of funding. The committee also demanded the university turn over a list of all the Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic’s payments to people or groups not employed by Northwestern and any of its clinics and centers since 2020.In addition, the committee asked to review all hiring materials and performance reviews for Bedi.In response, Bedi and a fellow law professor, Lynn Cohn, sued the committee, asserting that its investigation violated their and their clients’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process, among others.The committee subsequently withdrew its request – a move that a Thursday press release from the Center for Constitutional Rights described as a “victory for academic freedom, the rule of law, and bedrock constitutional principles”.In a statement accompanying the press release, Bedi said: “I filed this suit to defend my clients’ rights to representation, my students’ rights to learn, and my right to teach. But today’s decision won’t stop the federal government’s attacks on universities and the legal profession.“Educators and institutions must stand united to protect our students, our communities, and each other … We teach, we advocate, and we stand with communities demanding justice. That’s why Congress is targeting us.”Echoing similar sentiments, Cohn said: “Uniting to support the fundamental rights of all people can still be done even in these turbulent times. We hope others will join this effort – this legal challenge is far from over. Clinical legal educators won’t back down. We will keep doing what we do best: centering students, defending our clients, and standing firm in defense of justice and the rule of law.”Donald Trump’s administration on Tuesday froze $790m for Northwestern University as part of the president’s increasing crackdowns on students and faculty members across US colleges who have expressed their opposition toward Israel’s deadly war on Gaza.In response to the federal crackdowns, more than 1,000 faculty members, alumni, students and attorneys have signed letters expressing their support for Northwestern University.One letter signed by hundreds of alumni in part said they were troubled “that the federal government would target legal scholars who have dedicated their careers to upholding constitutional liberties”, WWTW reports. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump insists tariff war is ‘doing really well’ as recession fears mount

      by

      Donald Trump insisted his trade war with much of the world was “doing really well” despite mounting fears of recession and as Beijing hit back and again hiked tariffs on US exports to China.As the US president said his aggressive tariffs strategy was “moving along quickly”, a closely watched economic survey revealed that US consumer expectations for price growth had soared to a four-decade high.The White House maintains that the US economy is on the verge of a “golden age”, however, and that dozens of countries – now facing a US tariff of 10% after Trump shelved plans to impose higher rates until July – are scrambling to make deals.“The phones have been ringing off the hook to make deals,” the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters on Friday.Beijing raised Chinese tariffs on US products to 125% on Friday – the latest salvo of its escalating trade dispute with Washington – and accused Trump of “unilateral bullying and coercion”.“Even if the US continues to impose even higher tariffs, it would no longer have any economic significance, and would go down as a joke in the history of world economics,” the Chinese finance ministry said.Few investors were laughing. US government bonds – typically seen as one of the world’s safest financial assets – continued to be sold off, and were on course for their biggest weekly loss since 2019. The dollar also fell against a basket of currencies, and was down against the euro and the pound.Leading stock indices paused for breath on Friday after days of torrid trading. The FTSE 100 rose 0.6% in London. The S&P 500 increased 1.8% and the Dow Jones industrial average gained 1.6% in New York.The S&P 500 finished an extraordinarily volatile week for markets up 5.7%, its biggest weekly gain since November 2023.“We are doing really well on our TARIFF POLICY,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “Very exciting for America, and the World!!! It is moving along quickly. DJT”Some of Wall Street’s most influential figures were unconvinced. “I think we’re very close, if not in, a recession now,” Larry Fink, CEO of the investment giant BlackRock, told CNBC. Far from providing certainty, the 90-day pause on higher US tariffs on much of the world “means longer, more elevated uncertainty”, he added.Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, the US’s largest bank, said the world’s largest economy was facing “considerable turbulence” as a key measure of consumer confidence tumbled to its lowest level since the Covid-19 pandemic – and the second-lowest level on record.US consumer sentiment has dropped 11% to 50.8 this month, ahead the pause announced by Trump earlier this week, according to a regularly survey compiled by the University of Michigan.Expectations for inflation meanwhile surged, with respondents indicating they are bracing for prices to rise by 6.7% over the coming year – the survey’s highest year-ahead inflation expectation reading since 1981.“There is great optimism in this economy,” Leavitt claimed at the White House briefing when asked about the survey. “Trust in President Trump. He knows what he’s doing. This is a proven economic formula.”Trump won back the White House last November by pledging to rapidly bring down prices – something he has claimed, in recent weeks, is already happening. US inflation climbed at an annual rate of 2.4% last month, according to official data.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Consumers have spiralled from anxious to petrified,” observed Samuel Tombs, chief US economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. He added, however, that a bipartisan divide – with Democrats growing more pessimistic, while Republicans become more upbeat – suggests that people are allowing their political views to cloud their economic confidence.The US’s top markets watchdog is facing demands from senior Democrats to launch an investigation into alleged insider trading and market manipulation after Trump declared on social media that it was “A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!” hours before announcing Wednesday’s climbdown on tariffs.Days of erratic policymaking constructed a rollercoaster week for markets, with the S&P 500 dropping 12% in just four sessions, before surging back almost 10% in a single day after the administration pulled back from imposing higher tariffs on most countries, except China, which is facing a 145% tariff on exports to the US.In a letter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Senate Democrats including Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer wrote: “It is unconscionable that as American families are concerned about their financial security during this economic crisis entirely manufactured by the President, insiders may have actively profited from the market volatility and potentially perpetrated financial fraud on the American public.”Tesla meanwhile stopped taking orders in China for two models it previously imported from the US, as companies scramble to adapt to prohibitive tariffs imposed in Trump’s trade war.The manufacturer, run by Trump’s close ally Elon Musk, removed “order now” buttons on its Chinese website for its Model S saloon and Model X sports utility vehicle.Tesla did not give any indication of why it had made the changes but it came after the rapid escalation of the trade war between the US and China.The border taxes make the goods trade between the two countries prohibitively expensive and mean cars imported from the US are now much less attractive in China than those produced locally.In the UK, economists warned that stronger than expected growth of 0.5% in February is likely to prove short lived as the impact of Trump’s trade war is felt throughout the global economy. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can be deported for his views

      by

      Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate and Palestinian organizer, is eligible to be deported from the United States, an immigration judge ruled on Friday during a contentious hearing at a remote court in central Louisiana.The decision sides with the Trump administration’s claim that a short memo written by the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, which stated Khalil’s “current or expected beliefs, statements or associations” were counter to foreign policy interests, is sufficient evidence to remove a lawful permanent resident from the United States. The undated memo, the main piece of evidence submitted by the government, contained no allegations of criminal conduct.During a tense hearing on Friday afternoon, Khalil’s attorneys made an array of unsuccessful arguments attempting to both delay a ruling on his eligibility for removal and to terminate proceedings entirely. They argued the broad allegations contained in Rubio’s memo gave them a right to directly cross-examine him.Khalil held prayer beads as three attorneys for the Department of Homeland Security presented arguments for his removal.Judge Jamee Comans ruled that Rubio’s determination was “presumptive and sufficient evidence” and that she had no power to rule on concerns over free speech.“There is no indication that Congress contemplated an immigration judge or even the attorney general overruling the secretary of state on matters of foreign policy,” Comans said.A supporter was in tears sat on the crowded public benches as the ruling was delivered.Following the ruling, Khalil, who had remained silent throughout proceedings, requested permission to speak before the court.Addressing the judge directly, he said: “I would like to quote what you said last time, that ‘there’s nothing that’s more important to this court than due process rights and fundamental fairness.’”He continued: “Clearly what we witnessed today, neither of these principles were present today or in this whole process.“This is exactly why the Trump administration has sent me to this court, 1,000 miles away from my family. I just hope that the urgency that you deemed fit for me is afforded to the hundreds of others who have been here without hearing for months.”Khalil, 30, helped lead pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia last year. He was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) officers in New York on 8 March and transferred to a detention facility in Jena, Louisiana, where he has been detained for over a month. His case was the first in a string of Ice arrests instigated by the Trump administration targeting pro-Palestinian students and scholars present in the US on visas or green cards.The ruling means that Khalil’s removal proceedings will continue to move forward in Jena, while a separate case being heard in federal court in New Jersey examines the legality of his detention and questions surrounding the constitutionality of the government’s claims it can deport people for first amendment-protected speech if they are deemed adverse to US foreign policy.Khalil’s legal team is asking the New Jersey judge to release him on bail so that he can reunite with his wife, who is due to give birth to their first child this month.His lawyers slammed the decision, which they said appeared to be prewritten. “Today, we saw our worst fears play out: Mahmoud was subject to a charade of due process, a flagrant violation of his right to a fair hearing, and a weaponization of immigration law to suppress dissent. This is not over, and our fight continues,” said Marc van der Hout, Khalil’s immigration lawyer.“If Mahmoud can be targeted in this way, simply for speaking out for Palestinians and exercising his constitutionally protected right to free speech, this can happen to anyone over any issue the Trump administration dislikes. We will continue working tirelessly until Mahmoud is free and rightfully returned home to his family and community.”During a short prayer vigil held outside the detention centre on Friday afternoon, a group of interfaith clergy read messages of support. A short statement from Khalil’s wife, Noor Abdalla, who is due to give birth this month, was also delivered in front of reporters.“Today’s decision feels like a devastating blow to our family. No person should be deemed ‘removable’ from their home for speaking out against the killing of Palestinian families, doctors, and journalists,” the statement read.It continued: “In less than a month, Mahmoud and I will welcome our first child. Until we are reunited, I will not stop advocating for my husband’s safe return home.”The New Jersey judge has ordered the government not to remove Khalil as his case plays out in federal court. A hearing in that case is set for later on Friday. More

    • 238 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Musk thinks Trump’s pal Navarro is a ‘moron’. Who are we supposed to root for here? | Dave Schilling

      by

      I would like to dispel some rumors right up front. One, I did not receive a PhD in business from Harvard Business School. Hopefully this doesn’t make you think less of me, but I felt it necessary to be honest. Second, I did not even attend Harvard. I thought about it once; hopefully, thinking about something isn’t illegal yet.My point is that I am no elitist snob begging for your subservience. I’m a simple man, just trying to salvage the last of my meager wealth during the great trade war of 2025. I know absolutely nothing about global economic policy. As such, I must be worth listening to.I say all of this because Elon Musk, the owner of various companies such as Tesla, SpaceX, Weyland-Yutani, OCP, the Tyrell Corporation, etc, has made it abundantly clear that he can’t stand Peter Navarro.Peter Navarro, with his fancy degree from Harvard, is too much of an intellectual for the current zeitgeist that favors a complete lack of knowledge for just about anyone in a position of authority. The secretary of education never taught a single school class, but she has (poorly) received a Stone Cold Stunner. The secretary of health and human services has a problem with pasteurized milk. The secretary of transportation was on Road Rules, so at least he has a basic understanding of motorway etiquette. But for the most part, if you have only a layman’s understanding of your role, you are unequivocally qualified to lead.I am ill-suited to any cabinet position, unless there’s a secretary of cocktails, in which case, I make a mean dry gin martini with a twist of lemon. So I am paradoxically the perfect person to run our economic policy, based on the rhetoric of Elon Musk, who deemed Peter Navarro to be a “moron” because of his advanced degree, and his support for Donald Trump’s ruinous tariffs against global trade. Navarro stated that Musk’s Tesla plants are a prime example of the world’s trade imbalance. “In many cases, if you go to [Musk’s] Texas plant, a good part of the engines that he gets, which in the EV case are the batteries, come from Japan and come from China. The electronics come from Taiwan,” Navarro alleged.This statement set Musk off, causing him to turn on Navarro – whom he considers “dumber than a sack of bricks” – and by proxy, Trump’s stated aims of bringing manufacturing back to the US through onerous taxation. Musk said on X: “By any definition whatsoever, Tesla is the most vertically integrated auto manufacturer in America with the highest percentage of US content. Navarro should ask the fake expert he invented, Ron Vara.” The “Ron Vara” comment is in reference to the allegedly made-up expert that Navarro cited in his 2011 book Death by China, which warns the reader of nefarious Chinese economic policy. When called out about his charming little fib, Navarro said that the use of a fictional figure that is clearly an anagram of his own last name was a fun “inside joke” between him and … I suppose the basic tenets of ethics.This is, by any cogent estimation, a battle of the titans: Navarro, the Ivy League-educated garbage man for the current American president, and Musk, who managed to wield his immense wealth to convince said president that having a functioning government was beta-ass behavior, bruh. Is there a winner here? Probably not. We all lose when no one seems to care about anything but their own interests. Navarro is terrified to upset his boss. Musk clearly doesn’t want to endanger his own profits by allowing tariffs to squelch the free exchange of goods between nations that like electric cars. The rest of us, the chaff caught between these two gibbering hobbits, can fend for ourselves until they figure it out.This fight is expensive for us. The stock market, which is too esoteric and costly for most average people to participate in directly, shed trillions of dollars thanks to fears of Trump’s tariffs. That value bounced back after the president backed off his threats for a period of 90 days, but the psychological effect of that brinkmanship will be hard to shake. Those fluctuations are video game-like blips for the mega-rich, but they can cause real harm to the retirement funds of the average citizen. A tariff on pharmaceuticals could inhibit people from accessing life-saving medication. To people like Navarro and Musk, these are theoretical concerns, so far removed from their everyday lives that they might as well be the problems of the Klingon empire on Star Trek. Why should they care, when their own petty squabbles are so near and dear to them?But this is the grand thesis of Trump’s America. Personal grievance and retribution are paramount. Proving you are superior to your enemy means more than the fate of a stranger, or a neighbor. Why do we get out of bed every morning if not to smite our opponent on the virtual battlefield of social media? It means more to be right than to do right.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn some twisted way, Musk is correct. We do need some manner of global trade to survive, because the global economy is so bloody complicated and ridiculous that we have to keep some semblance of the status quo for now. That his calculus is related to his own personal wealth is an unfortunate aspect of this position. Navarro, on the other hand, understands Musk shouldn’t be involved in the economic policy of the entire planet. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, referred to this spat as a benign “boys will be boys” dust-up, but I think it’s more than that. This is Godzilla v Kong, if Godzilla was a sycophantic bureaucrat and Kong appeared to have very expensive hair transplants.In the aforementioned film, Godzilla and Kong beat the shit out of each other and destroyed an entire city in the process. This real-life fight could actually be more devastating if we do nothing about it.

      Dave Schilling is a Los Angeles-based writer and humorist More