World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares67 Views

      in US Politics

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

      by

      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

    • 150 Shares71 Views

      in US Politics

      Google and Home Depot drop Pride Toronto sponsorship amid Trump’s DEI war

      by

      In another blow to one of the largest celebrations of LGTBQ+ people in North America, Pride Toronto has unexpectedly lost two more major corporate sponsors, just weeks before the festival in a setback the festival’s organizer says is direct result of Donald Trump’s campaign to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the US.Google and Home Depot both announced their plans to abandon the festival in the form of one-line emails, said Kojo Modeste, the executive director of the Canadian event.Organizers have warned that the loss of sponsors will pose operational challenges for Pride Toronto that attracts 3 million attendees annually. Other organisations, including local trade unions, have stepped in to help make up the shortfall, but Modeste told the Guardian he was deeply worried about the celebration’s future.“Am I going to have to drastically cut what the festival looks like for 2026? This is not the place that I want to be in,” he said.Home Depot told the Guardian it continually reviews its non-profit giving and decided not to contribute this year. Google told the newspaper it would be supporting “Toronto Googlers” marching in the parade and “community moments” from Pride.The sudden exit of Google and Home Depot follows the departure in February of three other prominent sponsors. At the time, Modeste did not name them, but on Friday he revealed that they were Nissan, Adidas and Clorox.Nissan Canada said it was unable to sponsor Pride in Toronto due to a “local decision” that it says was based on a reevaluation of marketing and media activities. Adidas and Clorox have been approached for comment.“These are American companies and they are showing their true colours,” said Modeste. “We thought they were with the community, but clearly, they’re not.”Corporate sponsorship not only goes towards paying staff, but hundreds of local artists and to keep Pride as a free event.Modeste said he grew up in a period before widespread Pride celebrations – and did not want that to be the experience of current younger generations. “I don’t want to be the one to have to make that decision, to take Pride away from the community,” he said.The White House’s condemnation of diversity and inclusion efforts has resulted in corporations shirking away from festivals that they once loudly supported, said Sui Sui, a professor at Toronto Metropolitan University whose research focuses on DEI initiatives.Sui said that the move also signals that commitments large sponsors made in the past were tenuous and motivated not because of genuine support, but because of the perceived profitability of aligning with such causes.The months-long purge of US federal government workers by the Trump administration has resulted in the firings of tens of thousands of people, including those who worked in forwarding diversity and equity initiatives.Sui said that the chill around sponsors for pride events has also affected New York City and Philadelphia. Mastercard, Nissan, Pepsi, Garnier and more major backers have abandoned the New York celebration, while Target and Philadelphia Union exited Philly Pride 365.“Canada is following suit,” she said.For the future, Pride Toronto and other pride events may need to rely more significantly on grassroots efforts to keep events going, she said.“It’s for them to see who truly believes the importance of Pride.” More

    • 213 Shares75 Views

      in US Politics

      Is every memecoin just a scam? Experts on whether Andrew Tate and Trump are fleecing their followers

      by

      In November last year, I was turned into a memecoin. Several, in fact.Someone alerted me that a memecoin called Dork Nerd Geek ($DNG) had been minted with a picture of my face, and it already had a market cap (the total value of all coins in circulation) of $29,000. Twenty minutes later it was $100,000. An hour later it was $800,000.I had no idea what was going on, but I did know that “Dork Nerd Geek” was the nickname Andrew Tate gave me because I’ve spent much of my journalistic career investigating allegations of human trafficking made against him.I noticed he was currently livestreaming to his followers. I opened up his live stream and, for the first time, bore witness to the insane volatility of the memecoin market.In the space of 10 minutes, dozens of new me-related memecoins were being minted, including “Disgraced News Gatherer”, “Matt Shea is a faggot,” and “Take My Wife Tate (CUCK),” the latter of which included a picture of my fiancee taken from Instagram. Tate was pumping some of these memecoins in value merely by talking about them, with market fluctuations happening in real time on the order of millions, based on his every word.Two seconds after he said the words “Fuck Matt Shea,” a coin called “FUCK MATT SHAE [sic]” soared in value. Twenty minutes later, he uttered the words “Fuck Matt Shea … ” again and it went even higher, only to drop back down to nothing when he finished his sentence with “… is not a generational asset”. He then said he would pump the coin after taking a piss. He walked offscreen to urinate. It rocketed.View image in fullscreenSoon, there were hundreds more Matt Shea memecoins with similar names, as his followers tried to trick people into thinking that their Matt Shea memecoin was the one Tate was pumping. His words became memecoins, those memecoins shot up in value, and then the value disappeared instantaneously.All in all, about $2m was spent by people on memecoins making fun of me in the span of a few hours, and hundreds of millions more on other coins he mentioned during the stream.By the end of his live stream, the value of all the coins he pumped was back to near zero. All the fans who had invested at his behest collectively would have lost hundreds of millions of dollars.His followers may have felt they were in on the joke, but in the end they mostly lost their money. Only a tiny number of wallets actually profited from the coin including one crypto that made a profit of $240,000.A number of online crypto investigators including Coffeezilla, bored2boar, StarPlatinum and others have found that Tate has manipulated memecoin markets using “pump and dump”-like schemes, leading to large profits for those within his inner circle. We put the allegations in these investigations to Tate’s team, who said they had no comment.What happened on Tate’s stream that day felt bizarre but I didn’t completely understand what I was witnessing. I thought I basically understood bitcoin, but how do memecoins differ, and why do they continue to be popular when so many people have lost money on them?Is every memecoin a scam?According to David Gerard, author of Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain: “Basically, literally, yes.”“All of this is like a big game of pretend with made-up financial instruments,” he said. “It’s printing your own made-up money. You print your own Monopoly money and then people buy it from you for real money.”The best thing you could possibly say about memecoins is that they initially felt like a funny, countercultural way to participate in internet culture. They satirised a financial system that increasingly looked like a silly game to those on the outside. They encapsulated a humorous generational nihilism.According to Sander Lutz, the nation’s first crypto-focused White House correspondent: “You could consider a memecoin to be a stock in a cultural phenomenon – like Dogecoin and the Doge meme.”“Another way of defining a memecoin,” Lutz said, “is a cryptocurrency token that has an acknowledged inherent lack of value. The crypto world, outside of memecoins, is full of so many people who are trying to pitch you on tokens that are ‘actually really profound’ or ‘represent a stake’ in some kind of ‘useful network’, but are equally worthless. What makes memecoins different is that there’s none of that noise.”In other words, all crypto is bullshit, but memecoins are consciously bullshit.In their essence, memecoins distill the attention economy into a tradable asset, monetising the ebb and flow of viral internet hype. This has created a system in which the biggest attention-seekers on the planet – Logan Paul, Andrew Tate, Elon Musk, Donald Trump – can bleed their followers for profit. The more controversial they are, the more viral they are; and the more viral they are, the more their memecoins increase in value. Last year, some developers performed attention-seeking stunts on livestreams to pump their tokens, leading to animal abuse and a faked suicide.Chase Herro, the co-founder of Trump’s main crypto venture, World Liberty Financial, said about crypto: “You can literally sell shit in a can, wrapped in piss, covered in human skin, for a billion dollars if the story’s right, because people will buy it.”Most memecoins end up making money for the person who makes them as a “rug pull” or a “pump and dump”. The term “rug pull” was actually invented by the crypto community, and it works like this:First, you mint a memecoin, and make sure that you and your mates own most of the liquidity pool (the total number of coins in circulation). The size of the liquidity pool – the amount of that memecoin that “exists” – is, like everything else in memecoins, a totally made-up number.Second, you generate hype around the coin by convincing people it will “moon” (shoot up in value). This usually involves getting a celebrity, influencer or the president of the US, to promote it. People then buy the coin, thinking it will be a good investment. Law of demand means that as people buy it, the “value” of the coin goes up, and since you and your mates own the lion’s share, you get richer.Then, at a time known only to you, the creator of the coin, and other insiders, you “pull the rug”, selling off all your stock at the newly high price. You make money, and the value of the coins bought by the masses you manipulated shoots back down to zero. It’s basically a way to just trick people into giving you money, dressed up as an “investment”.A “pump and dump” is pretty much the same thing, but with the slight caveat that you’re doing it with a coin that already exists, rather than creating your own. You buy a cheap coin, “pump” its value by hyping it so others invest, then “dump” all your stock, selling it off at a huge profit and causing everyone else to lose their money.“It’s provably negative sum,” Gerard told me. “The only way you get money is by other people losing money.”The only people really getting rich off memecoins are influencers and their crypto enablers (people like Herro, or Hayden Davis, the guy who helped launch Argentinian president Javier Milei’s memecoin and was involved in Melania Trump’s memecoin).View image in fullscreenDespite this, the idea that trading memecoins is a good way to get rich persists on the internet. Is it theoretically possible for someone like you or me to invest at just the right time and get rich off a coin?Just as with traditional gambling, there are a tiny number of success stories, such as people like the “Moo Deng whale”, who turned $800 of Moo Deng coin (a memecoin referencing the viral pygmy hippo of the same name), into $10m.But only 0.4% of Pump.fun (the main memecoin trading platform) traders have made more than $10,000. About 0.002% have made more than $1m.Lutz told me: “There are a select number of people who’ve made quite a lot of money on these tokens, but they tend to be the same people. They tend to be people who are very well-connected, who are in specific group chats, and who have a lot of existing capital.”“You’ll always have more people losing than amounts of winners,” according to Gerard. “And the winners never shut up, so you think it’s a winning environment.”One of the main reasons people keep falling for these coins is that they think they’ve figured out the scam and invested early, before the rug pull or the dump. But this is never really the case.According to Gerard: “Crypto has been an ever-escalating series of get-rich-quick schemes, where a whole bunch of people think that they’re smarter operators than the previous operator, and generally they’re not.”Memecoin traders will often be invited to Discord and Telegram chats that are sold as “insider channels” where, according to Gerard, “they think they’ll hear about these scams before the rug is pulled – but actually they’re the suckers. Crypto is full of people who think they’re the scammer, not the sucker.”Young gullible menDespite all this, many people – especially young men – continue to invest in memecoins.Forty-two percent of men and 17% of women aged 18 to 29 have invested in, traded or used crypto, according to a 2024 Pew Research Center study, compared to only 11% of men and 5% of women over 50.“It’s no accident that memecoins are such a phenomenon among young people who have grown immensely frustrated with a financial system that, I think it’s fair to say, has failed them,” Lutz explained, “and where supposedly sure investments aren’t likely to give them returns that would give them the quality of life their parents had. Memecoins are nakedly meaningless, but there are many financial products, both in crypto and in the world of traditional finance, that may profess to have meaning, but at their core may be nearly as meaningless to young people.”This, too, is why memecoins have become popular with far-right, manosphere influencers and their fans.“It’s undeniable,” Lutz said, “that the trend in memecoin popularity among younger people – in particular young men – is part of the same trend where you’re seeing a loss of trust in institutions and a loss of confidence that traditional paths to success work out.”“These are the same tenets that have brought young men into the fold of the Maga-verse or to influencers like Andrew Tate. There’s overlap between them because they both stem from the same frustrations affecting so many young people, in particular young men, who feel more anger, bitterness, disillusionment and nihilism than a generation ago.”Some people don’t even seem to care that they’re being scammed, according to Lutz. “It’s remarkable to see the culture in these ecosystems, because someone will rug-pull a project – what you would consider to be a scam in that they’re running you out of the money – but that’s kind of an accepted practice and people are like, ‘Hey, good for them, I got screwed over, on to the next one.’”“There are too many cases to count of people who’ve lost their entire savings gambling on new coins. If you’re a gambler at a casino, there’s Gamblers Anonymous and an existing infrastructure to deal with people who are addicted to gambling. At casinos you have ‘no play’ lists in compliance with existing laws. There’s no existing infrastructure to aid people who lose all of their savings on memecoins.”Some memecoins try to claim that they’re more than just high-stakes gambling, in order to ensnare more willing buyers. These coins are often accompanied by the false promise of some kind of utility, be it “roadmaps”, “airdrops” ( free tokens given out for marketing purposes), off-chain value mechanisms, games where you can “spend” the coins, and various incomprehensible frameworks using the coin to vote or create some sort of ecosystem. The utility almost never materialises. $Batman coin promised to integrate “entertainment, gaming, and real-world utility”. Logan Paul’s $ZooToken supposedly allowed buyers to play a Pokemon-like game which never worked.The exception, the one memecoin to offer a tangible benefit in the real world, is the one sold by the president.President MemeOn 17 January, three days before his second inauguration, Trump launched his own memecoin, $Trump. At the time of writing, the coin’s market cap is over $2.5bn, spurred on by Trump offering a dinner and White House tour to the top owners of the coin, which took place last weekend.Unlike other memecoins, it offered something concrete: access to the president. This made its value soar.View image in fullscreenRight now, only 20% of the token’s total “supply” is currently in circulation. The remaining 80% is supposedly held by Trump and his business partners.Trump and his business partners are supposedly only allowed to sell off their holdings in $Trump when they are “unlocked” in tranches over time, according to their own made-up rules. As Gerard puts it: “They own the fake money, but they can’t sell it until it’s unlocked in tranches. Note that the limits are artificial. I mean, they could just ‘print’ more.”But already, “58 wallets have made over $10m each from President Donald Trump’s meme coin, totaling $1.1bn in profits”, while “764,000 wallets of mostly small holders have lost money on $TRUMP”, according to CNBC.Gerard said: “A lot of his own fans bought the coin. They thought it would be a fabulous success because Trump is a ‘business genius’. He ripped off his own fans.“The coins’ creators and original sponsors get free $Trump coins and they can dump those on the market at will every time a tranche is released. And they do. And are people ever going to make money on those $Trump coins they bought? Probably not. The money goes to the Trump family, and that’s the direction it was created to make it go in. So yeah, it’s a memecoin dump. He’s just dumping the coins on the suckers and it’s a textbook case.”Trump and his business partners also profit in transaction fees every time $Trump is traded, so far earning $100m.Whether this is all legal or not is up for debate, but soon after launching his own memecoin, Trump replaced the head of the regulator responsible for memecoins, the SEC, with a pro-crypto appointee.Lutz said: “In the last few months, the SEC has either dismissed or withdrawn all of its crypto-related lawsuits against every big crypto company in the United States and closed all of its investigations. I mean, the SEC is hosting roundtables almost every week with crypto companies, asking how it can be more helpful to the industry.”Trump has also enthusiastically supported a legal framework for stablecoins. Stablecoins are theoretically stabilised in value by being “pegged” to the value of another asset like the US dollar, but in reality have often become “de-pegged” and therefore unstable.Right now, the Stable Bill and the Genius Bill, which reference Trump calling himself a “stable genius” in 2018, are trying to make their way through Congress. They pave the way for the US government to use stablecoins to pay everything from housing grants to social security payments. And Trump himself just so happens to have a stablecoin of his own – through the World Liberty Financial company – which would shoot up in value if these bills pass, earning his family trust potential billions.The Trump family has a claim on 75% of net revenues from World Liberty’s token sales.“It is absolutely the government’s job to stop mis-selling of investments – that’s why ordinary retail mums and dads cannot buy into binary options,” Gerard said. “It’s absolutely open slather for crypto in the US now. This is really bad. A lot of people are going to get skinned. It’s going to be terrible.”The advice? Stay awayIs there any cause for hope? According to Gerard, while it may appear everyone is investing in memecoins, this is mainly exaggerated by the media. Sure, lots of young people have dabbled, but only the real crypto geeks are actually buying the things.“The good news is most people are not falling for it. And our evidence for this is the retail dollar trading volumes at Coinbase, the largest crypto dollar exchange. Coinbase happens to be a public company so that means they have to give accurate numbers to the SEC. So they disclosed their retail trading volumes. They’re down 17% in the first quarter of 2025 from where they were in December 2024. They’ve gone down with the Trump coin regime. That gives hope.”As far as my own memecoins go, even the Tate fans who invested appear to have become aware of the scam they fell for.Shortly after the stream went dead, I received an email from a Tate follower titled: “MATT SHAE WE NEED YOUR HELP.” He, along with other Tate fans, claimed they were victims of Tate rug-pulling them. They wanted me to help spread awareness of their community’s plight – by publicizing a new memecoin they had minted called $RRT (Real Rugger Tate).I didn’t write back. More

    • 225 Shares62 Views

      in US Politics

      So long, Elon: the cuts didn’t go to plan, but you completely shredded your reputation | Marina Hyde

      by

      I can’t believe that Elon Musk is leaving Doge, the government department he named after a tired and basic meme that most of the internet had moved on from around a decade ago. “As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end,” Musk wrote this week (capital letters: model’s own), “I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful government spending.” Oh man. “Thank you for the opportunity”?! At some level you have to salute Donald Trump’s ability to turn even the world’s richest man into an Apprentice candidate who leaves in week four after completely wiping out in the hotdog stand task.Musk arrived in government promising to slash spending by $2tn. He leaves it a mere $1.86tn short of that target, even by his own estimations. Meanwhile, the president’s new tax bill is set to add $2.3tn to the deficit. I imagine Musk thought his government finale would be a spectacular extravaganza – “you’re welcome, Washington!” – involving 2,000 chainsaw-wielding chorus girls. Instead, it’s a tweet. And yes – we DO all still call them tweets.Ironically, the thing that Musk has been most stunningly effective at slashing is his own reputation. Think about it. He arrived in Trump’s orbit as a somewhat mysterious man, widely regarded as a tech genius, and a titan of the age. He leaves it with vast numbers of people woken up to the fact he’s a weird and creepy breeding fetishist, who desperately pretends to be good at video games, and wasn’t remotely as key to SpaceX or Tesla’s engineering prowess as they’d vaguely thought. Also, with a number of them apparently convinced he had a botched penile implant. Rightly or wrongly convinced – sure. I’m just asking questions.But look, it’s good news for Tesla investors, who have managed to end Musk’s practice of WFWH (working from White House), and are now demanding he puts in a 40-hour week to save the company whose stock he has spent the past few months tanking. As the world order dramatically seeks to rearrange itself in the new era of US unreliability, no one should ever be able to unsee the president of the United States’s decision to turn the White House lawn into a car sales lot for his sad friend. Did it work? It seems not. Musk spent a lot of this week airing his hurt feelings about his brrm-brrm cars. “People were burning Teslas,” he whined to Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post. “Why would you do that? That’s really uncool.”Well, one thing we will no longer have to endure is this guy’s decrees on what is or isn’t cool. The timeworn thing about money and power is that they allow nerds to reinvent themselves as cool. You see it on Wall Street, where sea-beast financiers get manscaped by trophy wives who are no longer out of their league. You see it in Hollywood, where weird little guys become alpha movie producers. You see it in Bezos’s transformation from puffy-chinos-wearing, dress-down-Friday dweeb to Bilderberg Vin Diesel impersonator. What you rarely see is the alchemy of that process in reverse, live and in real time. But we got that with Elon, and we have to take our laughs where we can. In some other businesses, Musk could have convinced himself it wasn’t happening, but politics is a place where pollsters literally ask real people what they think of public figures every single week. Elon’s approval ratings are underwater.No doubt we’re this close to him identifying the real problem: that we simply need new voters. Musk has long been convinced that people don’t know how to handle his genius in all fields. Four years ago, he hosted Saturday Night Live, and sometime afterwards revealed on a podcast how the cast and writers had reacted to the uncontainably hilarious suggestions made by him and his team of bros. “We come in just, like, guns blazing with ideas,” he honked, explaining he’d pitched a … bit, is it? … where he was “going to take my cock out. So I’m going to reach down into my pants … and then I pull out a baby rooster. Like, ‘This is my tiny cock.’” Oh very good, sir. Absolute genius, sir. Presumably terrified that they would lose their jobs for ever to this superlative talent, the SNL team declined to “yes-and” this genius sketch into the final show running order, but Musk managed to get his own back – at least in his account of hosting an episode with a flattering 13% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. “There’s a bunch of things that I said that were just not on the script. They have these cue cards for what you’re supposed to say, and I just didn’t say it. I just went off the rails.”Mm. Just like you have now. As for where Musk goes next, he’s obviously building a Texan compound for the mothers of his many babies. But, psychologically, Mars would seem to be the answer. After a humiliation this big, only colonising another planet feels like the appropriately sized salve. It doesn’t matter that Mars is an obvious shithole that looks like the least appealing disused quarry on Earth – a place so bleak and empty that if they found one single fossilised flower it would be celebrated like the holy grail, even though the impossible majesty of the Amazon rainforest is right here. But of course, the point of Mars is that it would be the place of Elon, Teslamandias, king of kings. And you know, I feel more confident than ever that we could all look upon his works and despair.

      Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist More

    • 88 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      Has RFK Jr misdiagnosed America? – podcast

      by

      Archive: AP, ABC News, CBS News, Face the Nation, Fox News, PBS Newshour
      Read Alaina Demopoulos’s feature on Maha moms
      Subscribe to the Guardian’s new narrative series Missing in the Amazon
      Send your questions and feedback to politicsweeklyamerica@theguardian.com
      Help support the Guardian. Go to theguardian.com/politcspodus More

    • 175 Shares92 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: tariffs reinstated, for now, after rollercoaster of court decisions

      by

      President Trump’s tariffs remain in place, at least for now, after an appeals court ruled that his administration can continue to collect import fees.The latest ruling came just a day after a separate court ruled that Trump had overstepped his power, a judgment that his administration has pushed back against.White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Thursday that America cannot function when diplomatic or trade negotiations are “railroaded by activist judges”.Here are the key stories at a glance:Trump wins breathing space after major blow to tariff policyThe Trump administration is racing to halt a major blow to the president’s sweeping tariffs after a US court ruled they “exceed any authority granted to the president.”A US trade court ruled the US president’s tariffs regime was illegal on Wednesday in a dramatic twist that could block Trump’s controversial global trade policy.On Thursday, an appeals court agreed to a temporary pause in the decision pending an appeal hearing. The Trump administration is expected to take the case to the supreme court if it loses.Read the full storyTrump allies rail against court’s tariff rulingRepublicans and close allies of Donald Trump are railing against a federal judicial panel that blocked a wide swath of the US president’s tariffs Wednesday night, including those against China.Some attempted to frame the decision as part of a broader fight between the Trump administration and US justice system. Trump has frequently complained about legal decisions that don’t go his way, attacking judges on social media in ways that have alarmed civic society experts.Read the full storyTariffs derailed by law firm that received money from Trump backersDonald Trump’s tariff policy was derailed by a libertarian public interest law firm that has received money from some of his richest backers.The Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit against the US president’s “reciprocal” tariffs on behalf of five small businesses, which it said were harmed by the policy.Previous backers of the firm include billionaires Robert Mercer and Richard Uihlein, who were also financial backers of Trump’s presidential campaigns.Read the full storyChina condemns US decision to revoke student visasChina has lodged a formal protest over the US declaration that it will “aggressively” revoke the visas of Chinese students, with the foreign ministry saying it had objected to the announcement made a day earlier by Marco Rubio.Read the full storyFed asserts independence from Trump over interest ratesThe Federal Reserve issued a rare, strongly worded statement on Thursday after chair Jerome Powell spoke with Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday morning, holding firm on the central bank’s independence amid pressure from Trump to lower interest rates.The three-paragraph statement emphasized the Fed’s independent, non-partisan role in setting monetary policy based on economic data.“Chair Powell did not discuss his expectations for monetary policy, except to stress that the path of policy will depend entirely on incoming economic information and what that means for the outlook,” the statement read.Read the full storyTrump violating right to life with anti-environment orders, youth lawsuit saysTwenty two young Americans have filed a new lawsuit against the Trump administration over its anti-environment executive orders. By intentionally boosting oil and gas production and stymying carbon-free energy, federal officials are violating their constitutional rights to life and liberty, alleges the lawsuit, filed on Thursday.Read the full storyImmigration agents get quota to arrest 3,000 people a dayThe Trump administration has set aggressive new goals in its anti-immigration agenda, demanding that federal agents arrest 3,000 people a day – or more than a million in a year.The new target, tripling arrest figures from earlier this year, was delivered to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) leaders by Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, and Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary, in a strained meeting last week.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      Robert F Kennedy Jr’s flagship health commission report contains citations to studies that do not exist, according to an investigation by the US publication Notus.

      Top House Democrat Jamie Raskin has demanded Donald Trump reveal a list of who attended his private dinner last week for major investors in his meme coin, as questions swirl about the deep and secretive connections between the Trump administration and the cryptocurrency industry.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 28 May 2025. More

    • 213 Shares88 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Trump’s tariffs: the courts have drawn a line. So must Congress | Editorial

      by

      If one thing is more challenging to the rule of law than a genuine emergency, it is the invention of a phoney one. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has upended global trade and international relations, wiping billions off the stock market in the process, by imposing tariffs that he claims are a necessary response to an emergency. Yet that emergency does not really exist, except in the manner that Mr Trump himself has created it.The president claimed, on 2 April, that a lack of reciprocity in US overseas trade arrangements was “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States”. He claimed that this justified him in declaring an emergency and governing by executive decree under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Congress, which normally has the responsibility to decide US trade policy, was thus wholly ignored. Statutory consultative arrangements, traditionally an essential preliminary, went out of the window too. Mr Trump was effectively exercising an executive power grab.Now, after this week’s ruling by a US federal trade court, most of Mr Trump’s tariffs have been blocked. In a case brought by a coalition of businesses and US states, the court of international trade found that most of the tariffs “exceed any authority granted” to the president under the 1977 law. The White House will appeal. Meanwhile, trade talks aimed at creating so-called deals between the US and nation-state victims of the Trump policies are likely to be paused, while existing deals, including that with the UK, may be affected too.There will be a worldwide sense of relief for as long as it lasts. But the higher courts now face an important political responsibility as well as a judicial one. The ruling has left nations and businesses hanging. Some tariffs will remain, such as those on steel, aluminium and cars. Many others are suspended. Markets hate uncertainty.The issues at stake are very large. They are immediate, because the ruling suspends many but not all tariffs, and also strategic, because it challenges Mr Trump’s wide-ranging attempts to rule by executive order. Both are extremely important. Global trade and economic recovery, in Britain among many other countries, rest on the outcome. But so does Mr Trump’s strategy, which dates back to his first term, of using IEEPA powers to rule by decree, not merely on trade issues but, for example, in sanctioning officials from the international criminal court.The good news is that the president’s plans to impose tariffs on almost every country on the planet will now be subjected to something approaching the legal and constitutional scrutiny that they should have had in the first place. The rule of law, thankfully, has struck back, at least for now.The bad news is that Congress still shows no sign of reining Mr Trump in, as it should. Ironically, the IEEPA was originally a Jimmy Carter-era legislative attempt to boost congressional oversight of presidential emergency powers. Under Mr Trump, that role has been trashed. The worst of all outcomes would be for Congress to now give Mr Trump the powers to which he has laid claim. That is a real danger. The best outcome would be for Congress to give the IEEPA a fresh set of teeth. These would ensure that emergency powers are properly defined and applied, and never again abused by this or any other overmighty president.

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 113 Shares60 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Trump always chickens out’: Taco jibe ruffles president’s feathers

      by

      Trump Always Chickens Out – or Taco for short. Investors like narratives to explain the financial world, and they appear to have seized on this one: whenever Donald Trump faces a market backlash, he will back down.It would be fair to say the US president did not take kindly to the suggestion that he was being a “chicken” when asked by a reporter at the White House about the term that is gaining traction on Wall Street.“Oh isn’t that nice – ‘I chicken out.’ I’ve never heard that,” Trump mused on Wednesday in response to the reporter’s question on the so-called Taco trade. He then launched into extended comments on how high the tariffs he imposed on China were, and how he had “helped” China by cutting them.“But don’t ever say what you said,” he added to the reporter. “That’s a nasty question.” Apparently riled, he later returned to the theme, insisting that he was no chicken, and that often people accused him of being too tough.But recurrent retreats by Trump have become the basis for stock markets rebounding after falls, even as the US president has raised tariffs to their highest level in more than a century.The S&P 500, the US stock market benchmark, has gained about 1% during 2025, despite a deep slump in April as Trump announced “liberation day” tariffs on trade with most countries in the world.The stock market rise appears to have been aided by the Taco trade narrative: that market turmoil will correct the president’s course and allow companies to keep on making strong profits. That belief will strengthen if courts uphold Wednesday night’s ruling by New York’s court of international trade that Trump’s tariffs have been imposed illegally.When the Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong coined the Taco acronym on 2 May, it was a pithy observation of market reaction to Trump’s chaotic policymaking. However, less than a month on, one question is whether being accused of being “chicken” will needle the president to take a harder line with trading partners.On some fronts – notably on transporting people to El Salvador without due process – the Trump administration has indeed defied barrages of criticism and several court orders. Yet on financial markets, the pattern is clear of a harsh initial position followed by a sizeable retreat. The partial climbdowns have often followed close behind slumping bond prices – increasing US government borrowing costs – a dynamic that could expose the world’s largest economy if left unchecked.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe liberation day tariff announcement was followed by a 90-day pause. Trump said he would raise EU tariffs to 50%, before delaying that until 9 July. He ratcheted up levies to a punitive 145% on China, before dropping them to 30% during a 90-day pause. And he toyed with forcing out the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, only to backtrack quickly once investor displeasure became clear.However, the market optimism has not matched economic forecasts, which suggest that the White House’s actions are still historically significant. More