|
|
|
US and Israeli attacks on Iran put further strain on international law
Court News |
2026/03/02 06:38
|
As U.S. and Israeli forces pounded Iran, and Tehran and its affiliates retaliated by firing missiles at targets across the Mideast on Monday, the international legal order was caught in the crossfire. At the heart of the post-World War II global order — United Nations headquarters in New York — Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council on Saturday that U.S. and Israeli airstrikes violated international law, including the U.N. Charter. He also condemned Iran's retaliatory attacks for violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations in the Mideast. Officials in the Trump administration insist that the military campaign is a lawful measure to ensure Tehran does not build nuclear weapons. "It's a matter of global security. And to that end, the United States is taking lawful actions," Trump's U.N. ambassador, Mike Waltz, said. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in a letter to the U.N. on Sunday that the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "constitutes a grave and unprecedented breach of the most fundamental norms governing relations among States." On Monday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth bullishly defended the U.S. military campaign. "No stupid rules of engagement, no nation building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win and we don't waste time or lives," he said at the Pentagon. The war with Iran comes less than two months after U.S. forces swooped into Caracas to capture former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and fly him to New York to face justice. David Crane, an American expert on international law and founding prosecutor of a United Nations court that prosecuted crimes in Sierra Leone, wrote in an analysis that U.S. attacks in Iran and Venezuela "highlight a dangerous trend: the normalization of unilateral force as a tool of foreign policy. Even when the outcome is positive, the violation of international law and constitutional limits sets a precedent that threatens global stability and undermines America's own legal foundations." In Washington, many Democrats have called the strikes illegal. They argue that under the Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war. They say the Trump administration failed to lay out its rationale or plan for the military strikes, and the aftermath. Congress hurriedly scheduled a war powers debate for Monday over Trump's authority to bomb Iran. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump administration reaches a trade deal to lower Taiwan’s tariff barriers
Court News |
2026/02/13 15:25
|
The Trump administration reached a trade deal with Taiwan on Thursday, with Taiwan agreeing to remove or reduce 99% of its tariff barriers, the office of the U.S. Trade Representative said.
The agreement comes as the U.S. remains reliant on Taiwan for its production of computer chips, the exporting of which contributed to a trade imbalance of nearly $127 billion during the first 11 months of 2025, according to the Census Bureau.
Most of Taiwan’s exports to the U.S. will be taxed at a 15% rate, the USTR’s office said. The 15% rate is the same as that levied on other U.S. trading partners in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Japan and South Korea.
Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick attended the signing of the reciprocal agreement, which occurred under the auspices of the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Taiwan’s Vice Premier Li-chiun Cheng and its government minister Jen-ni Yang also attended the signing.
computer chips, the exporting of which contributed to a trade imbalance of nearly $127 billion during the first 11 months of 2025, according to the Census Bureau.
Most of Taiwan’s exports to the U.S. will be taxed at a 15% rate, the USTR’s office said. The 15% rate is the same as that levied on other U.S. trading partners in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Japan and South Korea.
Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick attended the signing of the reciprocal agreement, which occurred under the auspices of the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Taiwan’s Vice Premier Li-chiun Cheng and its government minister Jen-ni Yang also attended the signing.
“President Trump’s leadership in the Asia-Pacific region continues to generate prosperous trade ties for the United States with important partners across Asia, while further advancing the economic and national security interests of the American people,” Greer said in a statement.
The Taiwanese government said in a statement that the tariff rate set in the agreement allows its companies to compete on a level field with Japan, South Korea and the European Union. It also said the agreement “eliminated” the disadvantage from a lack of a free trade agreement between Taiwan and the U.S.
The deal comes ahead of President Donald Trump’s planned visit to China in April and suggests a deepening economic relationship between the U.S. and Taiwan.
Taiwan is a self-ruled democracy that China claims as its own territory, to be annexed by force if necessary. Beijing prohibits all countries it has diplomatic relations with — including the U.S. — from having formal ties with Taipei.
Cheng said Taiwan hopes the agreement will make it a strategic partner with the U.S. “so as to jointly consolidate the democratic camp’s leading position in high technology.”
The agreement would make it easier for the U.S. to sell autos, pharmaceutical drugs and food products in Taiwan. But the critical component might be that Taiwanese companies would invest in the production of computer chips in the U.S., possibly helping to ease the trade imbalance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A federal judge is set to hear arguments on Minnesota’s immigration crackdown
Court News |
2026/01/20 21:27
|
A federal judge will hear arguments Monday on whether she should at least temporarily halt the immigration crackdown in Minnesota that has led to the fatal shootings of two people by government officers.
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul sued the Department of Homeland Security earlier this month, five days after Renee Good was shot by an Immigration and Customs officer. The shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol officer on Saturday has only added urgency to the case.
On Monday, President Donald Trump said he is sending border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota. The president’s statement comes after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino, who had become the public face of the administration’s crackdown, answered questions at news conferences over the weekend about Pretti’s shooting. Trump posted on social media that Homan will report directly to him.
Since the original court filing, the state and cities have substantially added to their original request in an effort to restore the order that existed before the Trump administration launched Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota on Dec. 1.
Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he plans to attend.
The lawsuit asks U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez to order a reduction in the number of federal law enforcement officers and agents in Minnesota back to the level before the surge and to limit the scope of the enforcement operation.
Justice Department attorneys have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous” and said “Minnesota wants a veto over federal law enforcement.” They asked the judge to reject the request or to at least stay her order pending an anticipated appeal.
Ellison said during a news conference Sunday that the lawsuit is needed because of “the unprecedented nature of this surge. It is a novel abuse of the Constitution that we’re looking at right now. No one can remember a time when we’ve seen something like this.”
It is unclear when the judge might rule.
The case has implications for other states that have been or could become targets of ramped-up federal immigration enforcement operations. Attorneys general from 19 states plus the District of Columbia, led by California, filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Minnesota.
“If left unchecked, the federal government will no doubt be emboldened to continue its unlawful conduct in Minnesota and to repeat it elsewhere,” the attorneys general wrote. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
China stages military drills around Taiwan to warn ‘external forces’ after US
Court News |
2025/12/25 08:32
|
China’s military on Monday dispatched air, navy and missile units to conduct joint live-fire drills around the island of Taiwan, which Beijing called a “stern warning” against separatist and “external interference” forces. Taiwan said it was placing its forces on alert and called the Chinese government “the biggest destroyer of peace.”
Taiwan’s aviation authority said more than 100,000 international air travelers would be affected by flight cancellations or diversions.
The drills came after Beijing expressed anger at what could be the largest-ever U.S. arms sale to the self-ruled territory and at a statement by Japan’s prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, saying its military could get involved if China were to take action against Taiwan. China says Taiwan must come under its rule.
The Chinese military did not mention the United States and Japan in its statement on Monday, but Beijing’s foreign ministry accused the Taiwanese ruling party of trying to seek independence through requesting U.S. support.
Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said rapid response exercises were underway, with forces on high alert. “The Chinese Communist Party’s targeted military exercises further confirm its nature as an aggressor and the biggest destroyer of peace,” it said.
Beijing sends warplanes and navy vessels toward the island on a near-daily basis, and in recent years it has stepped up the scope and scale of these exercises.
Senior Col. Shi Yi, spokesperson of China’s People’s Liberation Army’s Eastern Theater Command, said the drills would be conducted in the Taiwan Strait and areas to the north, southwest, southeast and east of the island.
Shi said the activities would focus on sea-air combat readiness patrol, “joint seizure of comprehensive superiority” and blockades on key ports. It was also the first large-scale military drill where the command publicly mentioned one goal was “all-dimensional deterrence outside the island chain.”
“It is a stern warning against ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces and external interference forces, and it is a legitimate and necessary action to safeguard China’s sovereignty and national unity,” Shi said.
China and Taiwan have been governed separately since 1949, when a civil war brought the Communist Party to power in Beijing. Defeated Nationalist Party forces fled to Taiwan. The island has operated since then with its own government, though the mainland’s government claims it as sovereign territory.
The command on Monday deployed destroyers, frigates, fighters, bombers and unmanned aerial vehicles, alongside long-range rockets, to the north and southwest of the Taiwan Strait. It carried out live-fire exercises against targets in the waters as well. Among other training, drills to test the capabilities of sea-air coordination and precise target hunting were conducted in the waters and airspace to the east of the strait.
Hsieh Jih-sheng, deputy chief of the general staff for intelligence of the Taiwanese Defense Ministry, said that as of 3 p.m. Monday, 89 aircraft and drones were operating around the strait, with 67 of them entering the “response zone” — airspace under the force’s monitoring and response. In the sea, the ministry detected 14 navy ships around the strait and four other warships in the Western Pacific, in addition to 14 coast guard vessels.
“Conducting live-fire exercises around the Taiwan Strait ... does not only mean military pressure on us. It may bring more complex impact and challenges to the international community and neighboring countries,” Hsieh told reporters.
Military drills are set to continue Tuesday. Taiwan’s Civil Aviation Administration said Chinese authorities had issued a notice saying seven temporary dangerous zones would be set up around the strait to carry out rocket-firing exercises from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Tuesday, barring aircraft from entering them.
The Taiwanese aviation authority said more than 850 international flights were initially scheduled during that period and the drills would affect over 100,000 travelers. Over 80 domestic flights, involving around 6,000 passengers, were also canceled, it added.
The Chinese command released themed posters about the drills online accompanied by provocative wording. One poster depicted two shields with the Great Wall alongside three military aircraft and two ships. Its social media post said the drills were about the “Shield of Justice, Smashing Illusion,” adding that any foreign interlopers or separatists touching the shields would be eliminated.
In October, the Taiwanese government said it would accelerate the building of a “Taiwan Shield” or “T-Dome” air defense system in the face of the military threat from China.
The military tensions came a day after Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an said he hoped the Taiwan Strait would be associated with peace and prosperity, instead of “crashing waves and howling winds,” during a trip to Shanghai.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The BBC, Both Beloved and Maligned, Faces a $10 Billion Trump Lawsuit
Court News |
2025/12/20 08:19
|
U.S. President Donald Trump is suing the BBC for $10 billion over a television documentary he claims was “false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory and malicious.”
Britain’s national broadcaster has apologized to Trump over the way it edited a speech in the program, but says it will defend itself against the defamation claim.
The BBC is not the first media organization on the receiving end of a lawsuit from the president. But its position is complicated by its status as a taxpayer-funded public broadcaster and its stature as a closely scrutinized national institution.
The BBC was founded in 1922 as a radio service to “inform, educate and entertain,” a mantra still central to its self-image.
It launched the world’s first regularly scheduled television service in 1936, and helped make TV a mass medium when many Britons bought a TV set specifically to watch the 1953 coronation of Queen Elizabeth II.
It operates 15 U.K. national and regional TV channels, several international channels, 10 national radio stations, dozens of local radio stations, the globe-spanning World Service radio and copious digital output including the iPlayer streaming service.
As well as its news output it has a huge global viewership for entertainment shows including “Doctor Who,” “EastEnders,” “The Traitors” and “Strictly Come Dancing.”
The BBC is funded from the public purse
The broadcaster is funded by an annual license fee, currently set at 174.50 pounds ($230), paid by all U.K. households who watch live TV or any BBC content.
The license fee has long had opponents, not least rival commercial broadcasters, and they have grown louder in an era of digital streaming when many people no longer have television sets or follow traditional TV schedules.
The BBC’s governing charter, which sets the license fee, is reviewed once a decade, and the latest round of the process kicked off Tuesday. The center-left Labour government says it will ensure the BBC has “sustainable and fair” funding but has not ruled out replacing the license fee with another funding model.
The broadcaster is bound by the terms of its charter to be impartial in its output. It is not a state broadcaster beholden to the U.K government, but is overseen by a board that includes both BBC staff and political appointees.
It’s frequently a political football, with conservatives seeing a leftist slant in its news programs and some liberals accusing it of having a conservative bias.
It has repeatedly battled British governments over editorial independence, from the 1926 general strike, when Cabinet minister Winston Churchill tried to seize control of the airwaves, to a battle with Tony Blair’s administration over the intelligence used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Recently it has been criticized for its coverage of trans issues and the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. In February, the BBC removed a documentary about Gaza from its streaming service after it emerged that the child narrator was the son of an official in the Hamas-led government.
The lawsuit stems from an edition of the BBC’s “Panorama” current affairs series titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” that was broadcast days before the 2024 U.S. presidential election. The film, made by a third-party production company, spliced together two sections of a speech given by Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, into what appeared to be one quote in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.”
By doing so, it made it look like Trump was giving the green light to his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol as Congress was poised to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election that Trump falsely alleged was stolen from him.
The BBC apologized last month and two of its top executives resigned.
Trump’s lawyers say the program falsely portrayed the president as a “violent insurrectionist,” caused “massive economic damage to his brand value” and was a “brazen attempt” to interfere in the U.S. election.
The lawsuit, filed in a Florida court, seeks $5 billion in damages for defamation and $5 billion for unfair trade practices.
The BBC said in a statement that “we will be defending this case. We are not going to make further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”
Media attorney Mark Stephens said Trump and his lawyers face several hurdles. They must prove that the BBC program was shown in Florida and that people in that state thought less of him as a consequence. Trump’s lawyers argue that U.S. subscribers to BritBox and people using virtual private networks could have watched it, but they must prove it definitively, said Stephens, a consultant at the firm Howard Kennedy.
“Allegations of libel are cheap, but proof is dear,’’ Stephens said.
Stephens said Trump’s lawyers also have to deal with the fact that public figures have “to put up with the slings and arrows of incorrect reporting,’’ which are protected under the First Amendment.
While many legal experts have dismissed the president’s claims against the media as having little merit, he has won some lucrative settlements against U.S. media companies and he could try to leverage the BBC mistake for a payout, potentially to a charity of his choice.
The BBC’s position is complicated by the fact that any money it pays out in legal fees or a settlement comes from British taxpayers’ pocket.
“I think President Trump is banking on the fact that the British public will not want to spend the money to defend the claim, nor will they want to pay any money in damages to him,’’ Stephens said. “So it allows him to continue a narrative of fake news and all of those other things at fairly little cost in the global scheme of things.” |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
