restart

Two federal judges told the U.S. Department of Agriculture in separate rulings Friday that it must begin using billions of dollars in contingency funding to provide federal food assistance to poor American families despite the federal shutdown, but gave the agency until Monday to decide how to do so.

Both Obama-appointed judges rejected Trump administration arguments that more than $5 billion in USDA contingency funds could not legally be tapped to continue Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for nearly 42 million Americans while the federal government remains closed. But both also left unclear how exactly the relief should be provided, or when it will arrive for millions of families set to lose benefits starting Saturday.

The two rulings came almost simultaneously Friday.

In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani stopped short of granting California and a coalition of 24 other Democrat-led states a temporary restraining order they had requested. But she ruled that the states were likely to succeed in their arguments that the USDA’s total shutoff of SNAP benefits — despite having billions in emergency contingency funds on hand — was unlawful.

Talwani gave USDA until Monday to tell her whether they would authorize “only reduced SNAP benefits” using the contingency funding — which would not cover the total $8.5 billion to $9 billion needed for all November benefits, according to the USDA — or would authorize “full SNAP benefits using both the Contingency Funds and additional available funds.”

Separately, in Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John McConnell granted a temporary restraining order requested by nonprofit organizations, ruling from the bench that SNAP must be funded with at least the contingency funds, and requesting an update on progress by Monday.

The White House referred questions about the ruling to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It was not immediately clear if the administration would appeal the rulings.

The Massachusetts order was a win for California and the other Democrat-led states, which sued over the interruption to SNAP benefits — which were previously known as food stamps — as Republicans and Democrats continue to squabble over reopening the government in Washington.

However, it will not mean that all of the nation’s SNAP recipients — including 5.5 million Californians — will be spared a lapse in their food aid, state officials stressed, as state and local food banks continued scrambling to prepare for a deluge of need starting Saturday.

Asked Thursday if a ruling in the states’ favor would mean SNAP funds would be immediately loaded onto CalFresh and other benefits cards, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta — whose office helped bring the states’ lawsuit — said “the answer is no, unfortunately.”

“Our best estimates are that [SNAP benefit] cards could be loaded and used in about a week,” he said, calling that lag “problematic.”

“There could be about a week where people are hungry and need food,” he said. For new applicants to the program, he said, it could take even longer.

The rulings came as the now monthlong shutdown continued Friday with no immediate end in sight. The Senate adjourned Thursday with no plans to meet again until Monday.

It also came after President Trump called Thursday for the Senate to end the shutdown by first ending the filibuster, a longstanding rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections to legislation. The rule has traditionally been favored by lawmakers as a means of blocking particularly partisan measures, and is currently being used by Democrats to resist the will of the current 53-seat Republican majority.

“It is now time for the Republicans to play their ‘TRUMP CARD,’ and go for what is called the Nuclear Option — Get rid of the Filibuster, and get rid of it, NOW!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Los Angeles Regional Food Bank Chief Executive Michael Flood, standing alongside Bonta as members of the California National Guard worked behind them stuffing food boxes, said his organization was preparing for massive lines come Saturday, the first of the month.

He said he expected long lines of families in need of food appearing outside food distribution locations throughout the region, just as they did during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This is a disaster type of situation for us here in Los Angeles County, throughout the state of California and throughout the country,” Flood said.

“5.5 million Californians, 1.5 million children and adults in L.A. County alone, will be left high and dry — illegally so, unnecessarily so, in a way that is morally bankrupt,” Bonta said.

Bonta blamed the shutdown on Trump and his administration, and said the USDA has billions of dollars in contingency funds designed to ensure SNAP benefits continue during emergencies and broke the law by not tapping those funds in the current situation.

Bonta said SNAP benefits have never been disrupted during previous federal government shutdowns, and should never have been disrupted during this shutdown, either.

“That was avoidable,” he said. “Trump created this problem.”

The Trump administration has blamed the shutdown and the looming disruption to SNAP benefits entirely on Democrats in Congress, who have blocked short-term spending measures to restart the government and fund SNAP. Democrats are holding out to pressure Republicans into rescinding massive cuts to subsidies that help millions of Americans afford health insurance.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, previously told The Times that Democrats should be the ones getting asked “when the shutdown will end,” because “they are the ones who have decided to shut down the government so they can use working Americans and SNAP benefits as ‘leverage’ to pursue their radical left wing agenda.”

“Americans are suffering because of Democrats,” Jackson said.

In their opposition to the states’ request for a temporary restraining order requiring the disbursement of funds, attorneys for the USDA argued that using emergency funds to cover November SNAP benefits would deplete funds meant to provide “critical support in the event of natural disasters and other uncontrollable catastrophes,” and could actually cause more disruption to benefits down the line.

They wrote that SNAP requires between $8.5 billion and $9 billion each month, and the USDA’s contingency fund has only about $5.25 billion, meaning it could not fully fund November benefits even if it did release contingency funding. Meanwhile, “a partial payment has never been made — and for good reason,” because it would force every state to recalculate benefits for recipients and then recalibrate their systems to provide the new amounts, they wrote.

That “would take weeks, if it can be done at all,” and would then have to be undone in order to issue December benefits at normal levels, assuming the shutdown would have lifted by then, they wrote. “The disruption this would entail, with each State required to repeatedly reprogram its systems, would lead to chaos and uncertainty for the following months, even after a lapse concludes,” they wrote.

Simply pausing the benefits to immediately be reissued whenever the shutdown ends is the smarter and less disruptive course of action, they argued.

During a Thursday hearing in the states’ case, Talwani had suggested that existing rules required action by the government to prevent the sort of suffering that a total disruption to food assistance would cause, regardless of whatever political showdown is occurring between the parties in Washington.

“If you don’t have money, you tighten your belt,” she said in court. “You are not going to make everyone drop dead because it’s a political game someplace.”

In addition to suing the administration, California and its leaders have been rushing to ensure that hungry families have something to eat in coming days. Gov. Gavin Newsom directed $80 million to food banks to stock up on provisions, and activated the National Guard to help package food for those who need it.

Counties have also been working to offset the need, including by directing additional funding to food banks and other resource centers and asking partners in the private sector to assist.

Dozens of organizations in California have written to Newsom calling on him to use state funds to fully cover the missing federal benefits, in order to prevent “a crisis of unthinkable magnitude,” but Newsom has suggested that is not possible given the scale of funding withheld.

According to the USDA, about 41.7 million Americans were served through SNAP per month in fiscal 2024, at an annual cost of nearly $100 billion. Of the 5.5 million Californian recipients, children and older people account for more than 63%.

This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.

Joint statement comes more than a month after the E3 countries triggered a mechanism reinstating UN sanctions against Iran.

The United Kingdom, France and Germany have said they wish to restart stalled nuclear talks with Iran and the United States, more than a month after the three European countries triggered a mechanism reinstating the United Nations sanctions on Iran for the first time in a decade.

The E3 countries’ joint statement on Friday came nearly two weeks after UN sanctions were reimposed on Iran, under a “snapback” process that the three nations had initiated on August 28 and that became effective one month later.

In response, Iran recalled its envoys to the three European countries for consultations.

Iran has said that, following those revived sanctions, it would not immediately resume nuclear talks.

The sanctions set up a global ban on cooperation with Iran on nuclear, military, banking and shipping industries.

The sanctions are aimed at imposing new economic pain to pressure Iran, but it remains to be seen if all countries will enforce them. On September 27, the day before the sanctions came into effect, Iran’s national currency, the rial, fell to new all-time lows.

In their joint statement, the UK, France and Germany said: “We are determined to reinitiate negotiations with Iran and the United States towards a comprehensive, durable and verifiable agreement that ensures Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon.”

A spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Esmaeil Baghaei, said on Monday that “we have no plans for negotiations at this stage”.

He added that Iran was examining the “consequences and implications” of the restart of sanctions.

“Of course, diplomacy – in the sense of maintaining contacts and consultations – will continue,” Baghaei said. “Whenever we feel that diplomacy can be effective, we will certainly make decisions based on the country’s interests and priorities.”

Nuclear fears

Western countries, spearheaded by the US and joined by Israel, accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons – a charge Tehran has long denied.

During a 12-day June conflict, the US bombed nuclear sites in Iran, joining an Israeli air campaign that targeted Iran’s top generals and nuclear scientists, as well as civilians in residential areas. Iran retaliated with barrages of missiles and drones against Israel and sites linked to the US. According to Amnesty International, Israeli attacks on Iran killed at least 1,100 people.

The E3 said in Friday’s statement that “it was right that the snapback mechanism had been triggered”.

“Iran’s nuclear programme poses a serious threat to global peace and security,” the bloc of nations added.

In 2015, the US, along with the E3, Russia and China, concluded an agreement with Iran providing for the regulation of Iranian nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

US President Donald Trump decided during his first term in 2018 to withdraw the US from the deal and to reinstate US sanctions.

In retaliation, Iran pulled back from some of its commitments, particularly on uranium enrichment.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran is the only country without a nuclear weapons programme to enrich uranium to 60 percent. That is close to the threshold of 90 percent required for a bomb, and well above the far lower level needed for civilian nuclear use.

Getty Images

Evtec

‘Toothless support’

After taking multiple economic hits in his household, Gurvinder Singh, a 47-year-old farmer in Gurdaspur, in India’s Punjab state, took a million-rupee loan ($11,000) from a private lender to marry off his eldest daughter. He saved a portion of that and used it to sow 3 acres (1.2 hectares) of paddy.

He placed his bet on the high-yielding pearl variety of aromatic Basmati rice. A good sale would have given him an earning of nearly 1 million rupees per acre ($11,400 per 0.4 hectares).

But now, Singh’s pearl paddy grains lie submerged in floodwater, buried under layers of soil and sediment.

“I cannot afford this shocking flood at this time in my life. We are ruined,” Singh told Al Jazeera. “This year’s harvest was supposed to cover our debts. But this field is a lake now, and I don’t know how I will start again.”

Singh also had to temporarily leave his home, along with his wife and two children, after the devastating floods hit their village earlier this month. “What will I go back to?” he wondered.

‘A lasting repercussion’

Northern Indian states have been reeling under the impact of heavy monsoon rains, flash floods and swelling rivers that have submerged entire villages and thousands of hectares of farmland.

In Punjab, where more than 35 percent of the population relies on agriculture, the situation is particularly grim. Here, farmers are facing the worst floods in the last four decades, with large tracts of paddy fields inundated just weeks before harvest. The state cultivates rice in nearly two-thirds of its total geographical area.

Gurdaspur, where Singh lives with his family, has been among the worst flood-hit districts in a region that borders three overflowing rivers – Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej – following heavy rainfall in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh state.

At least 51 people have died due to floods in Punjab, and 400,000 more people have been displaced.

Singh’s field of paddy contributes to India’s $6bn worth of Basmati exports. Punjab alone accounts for 40 percent of the total production. Across the border, Pakistan’s Punjab province, also submerged in floods, accounts for 90 percent of the country’s Basmati output, generating nearly $900m.

Initial official estimates put the complete loss of crops in more than 450,000 acres (182,100 hectares) — almost the area of Mauritius — of farmland in India’s Punjab. Independent agricultural economists told Al Jazeera that the final impact of floods could be five times higher than the official estimate.

“The crop is completely spoiled, their machinery is submerged, and the farmers’ houses have washed away,” said Lakhwinder Singh, director of the Patiala-based Punjabi University’s Centre for Development Economics and Innovations Studies.

“Punjab’s farmers have to restart from scratch. They would require a lot of support and investment from the government,” Singh told Al Jazeera.

So far, the Punjab government – governed by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which is nationally in opposition to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party – has announced a 20,000 Indian rupees ($230) allowance for farmers who lost their crops to flood. But that may be too little to deal with the monumental challenges that lie ahead for farmers, said Singh.

Nearly 6 percent of that basmati rice is shipped to the United States, which has slapped a 50 percent tariff on New Delhi. India has traditionally been protectionist towards its agricultural sector, which employs half of India’s population (the world’s largest) – a sticking point in trade negotiations with the administration of US President Donald Trump .

Singh warned the government of India against using the impact of the floods as leverage to liberalise policy to import food grains. “The government must not push the farmers under the bus to reduce the tariffs and get a deal with Trump,” he said. “These Punjab floods could have a lasting repercussion on the future of the agricultural economy.”

‘All we have is water’

The immediate and daunting challenge for Punjab’s farmers will be to get rid of the soil and sediment that have settled over their farmlands, agriculture experts have said.

Indra Shekhar Singh, an independent agricultural policy analyst, said that the extent of the damage could only be determined after the water receded from the fields. “There is excessive sedimentation and mud on farmers’ fields,” he told Al Jazeera. “Another problem is levelling the field, which is another cost, and readying it for the next season.”

In India, the monsoon or “kharif” crop makes up about 80 percent of the total rice production, which is harvested in late September to October. Now, experts say, Punjab’s farmers are racing against time to ready their fields for the next season’s crop, winter’s wheat, which must start by early November to avoid yield losses.

“Paddy fields are taking the worst hit in the floods,” said Shekhar Singh. “Unless there is a miracle, even the conservative numbers suggest heavy losses to farmers.

Other than the new diseases from floodwaters that may affect the standing crops, Shekhar Singh said that the farmers are also staring at a critical nutritional crisis for the Rabi season.

India’s farmers rely on urea, containing about 46 percent nitrogen, as their main fertiliser; the country is also the world’s largest importer of urea. But stocks have been dwindling: Urea stocks dropped from 8.64 million tonnes in August 2024 to 3.71 million tonnes in August this year.

This monsoon also saw panic buying of urea by farmers across several Indian states. Now, the floods have struck amid an underlying fear that fertilisers may fall short for the upcoming Rabi sowing. There has been a global surge as well in urea prices, rising from $400 per tonne in May 2025 to $530 per tonne in September.

“This would lead to black marketing for fertilisers in impacted states like Punjab, and adds to an existing problem of fake pesticides circulation,” added Shekhar Singh.

Punjabi University’s Singh said that farmers face a “prolonged economic crisis for them that will continue in the coming months”.

Meanwhile, Singh, the farmer from Punjab’s Gurdaspur, is pondering what the future holds for his family.

He had married off his daughter earlier this year to another farmer in Amritsar, one of Punjab’s biggest cities that borders Pakistan. Their farmland is submerged, too.

“I cannot travel to visit them even when we are suffering from the same disease,” he said, before reflecting on the tragedies confronting a region where two sides of a tense border are grappling with the same crisis.

“We were ready to fight a war for these rivers,” Singh said, referring to the hostilities between India and Pakistan earlier this year after an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir killed 26 civilians. India had suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, which distributes the six rivers between the nuclear-armed neighbours, in response – a move that Pakistan described as an “act of war”.

“All we have now is water,” Singh said.

June 30 (UPI) — Ottawa announced late Sunday that it was rescinding a tax on technology firms generating revenue from Canadians just hours before it was to take effect, in an effort to move forward trade negotiations with the United States.

Ottawa’s Department of Finance announced in a statement that because they were scrapping the Digital Services Tax, Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump have agreed to resume trade negotiations with the goal of signing a deal by July 21.

“Rescinding the digital services tax will allow the negotiations of a new economic and security relationship with the United States to make vital progress and reinforce our work to create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians,” Minister of Finance and National Revenue Francois-Philippe Champagne said.

Announced in 2020, the Digital Services Tax sought to ensure domestic and foreign companies profiting off Canadians online were paying taxes on that revenue. According to Ottawa, it levied a 3% tax on revenue earned from certain digital services that rely on the engagement data and content of Canadian users as well as certain sales of Canadian user data.

Companies to be affected were online market place and advertising services as well as social media companies, including Google, Apple, Amazon and Meta.

The tax was to take effect Monday, amid ongoing trade negotiations between Canada and the United States.

However, Trump on Friday unilaterally called the talks off after being informed American technology companies would be hit with the 3% tax, which he described as “a direct and blatant attack on our Country.”

“Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately,” Trump said on his Truth Social platform, while stating he will inform Ottawa within seven days of “the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America.”

Trump has yet to comment on the latest announcement.

To rescind the tax, it will require legislative approval, so in the meantime Ottawa said it will halt collection.

Relations between the United States and Canada have deteriorated under the second Trump administration due to Trump’s trade war.

Trump has imposed a 25% tariff on all Canadian imports not subjected to the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, as well as a 10% tariff on energy products, a 25% tariff on all cars and trucks built north of the border and a 50% tariff on aluminum and steel imports.

Canada has responded with a slew of tariffs of its own, including a 25% levy on certain goods from the United States.

Prime Minister Mark Carney, whose Liberal Party won a minority government in Parliament in late April, campaigned on standing up against Trump, while referring to the Ottawa-Washington relationship as having been changed and the U.S. tariffs as a “betrayal.”

Amid the tariff fight, Carney has sought to strengthen other relationships while lessening Canada’s trade and security dependence on the United States.

Earlier this month, Canada and the European Union agreed to deepen their security and defense relationship as they launch negotiations across multiple areas, from digital policy to climate.

US president says Iranian Supreme Leader’s alleged ‘anger, hatred, disgust’ led him to drop work on sanctions relief.

President Donald Trump has hit out at Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s claim that Iran won its recent 12-day war with Israel, also saying the United States will “absolutely” bomb the country again if it pursues nuclear weapons.

The US president launched a torrent of abuse at Iran’s Supreme Leader on his Truth Social platform on Friday, claiming he had saved Khamenei from “A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH” and accusing him of “blatantly and foolishly” lying when he claimed “victory” in the war the previous day.

In his first sortie since the Israel-Iran war ended with a ceasefire earlier this week, Khamenei had also said Iran “slapped America in the face” by launching missiles at a major US base in Qatar following US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz.

In Friday’s post, Trump said he had demanded Israel pull back from “the final knockout”.

“His Country was decimated, his three evil Nuclear Sites were OBLITERATED, and I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life,” he said.

The question of whether US attacks destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities is moot – a leaked intelligence report contradicted Trump’s account of events, suggesting the military’s strikes had set the country back by mere months.

The US president said that Khamenei’s comments, which he described as “a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust”, had led him to drop work on “the possible removal of sanctions, and other things, which would have given a much better chance to Iran at a full, fast, and complete recovery”.

Future of nuclear programme

Trump’s rant against Khamenei came on the back of bellicose comments earlier that day at a White House news conference. Asked whether he would consider new air strikes if the recent attacks had not succeeded in ending Iran’s nuclear weapons programme, Trump said, “Sure, without question, absolutely.”

He said he would like inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or another respected source to be able to inspect Iran’s nuclear sites.

But Iran has approved a bill to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, a move widely seen as a direct response to the strikes.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi indicated on Friday that Tehran may reject any request by the agency for visits to Iranian nuclear sites.

“[IAEA Director General] Grossi’s insistence on visiting the bombed sites under the pretext of safeguards is meaningless and possibly even malign in intent,” Araghchi said on X. “Iran reserves the right to take any steps in defence of its interests, its people and its sovereignty.”

Grossi said on Wednesday that ensuring the resumption of IAEA inspections was his top priority, as none had taken place since Israel began bombing on June 13.

Meanwhile, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz indicated on Friday that his country might still be on a war footing with Iran, saying he had instructed the military to prepare an enforcement plan against the country.

The plan “includes maintaining Israel’s air superiority, preventing nuclear advancement and missile production, and responses to Iran for supporting terrorist activities against Israel”, Katz said.

Katz said on Thursday that Israel had wanted to “eliminate” Khamenei and would not have required US permission to do so.

DUBAI — President Trump said on Friday that he expects Iran to open itself to international inspection to verify that it doesn’t restart its nuclear program.

Asked during a White House news conference if he would demand during expected talks with Iran that the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, or some other organization be authorized to conduct inspections, Trump responded that the Islamic Republic would have to cooperate with the group “or somebody that we respect, including ourselves.”

Earlier, Iran’s top diplomat said that the possibility of new negotiations with the United States on his country’s nuclear program has been “complicated” by the American attack on three of the sites, which he conceded caused “serious damage.”

The U.S. was one of the parties to the 2015 nuclear deal in which Iran agreed to limits on its uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief and other benefits.

Nuclear talks

That deal unraveled after Trump unilaterally pulled out the U.S. during his first term. Trump has suggested he’s interested in new talks with Iran and said the two sides would meet next week.

In an interview on Iranian state television broadcast late Thursday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left open the possibility that his country would again enter talks on its nuclear program, but suggested it wouldn’t be anytime soon.

“No agreement has been made for resuming the negotiations,” he said. “No time has been set, no promise has been made, and we haven’t even talked about restarting the talks.”

The American decision to intervene militarily “made it more complicated and more difficult” for talks on Iran’s nuclear program, Araghchi said.

Friday prayers

Many imams, during Friday prayers, stressed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s message from Thursday that the war had been a victory for Iran.

Cleric Hamzeh Khalili, who is also the deputy chief justice of Iran, vowed during a prayer service in Tehran that the courts would prosecute people accused of spying for Israel “in a special way.”

During the war with Israel, Iran hanged several people whom it already had in custody on espionage charges, sparking fears from activists that it could conduct a wave of executions after the conflict ended. Authorities reportedly have detained dozens in various cities on the charge of cooperating with Israel.

Israel relentlessly attacked Iran beginning on June 13, targeting its nuclear sites, defense systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists.

In 12 days of strikes, Israel said that it killed around 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists, while hitting eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group.

Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted, but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people.

Israeli military spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin said Friday that in some areas, it had exceeded its operational goals, but needed to remain vigilant.

“We are under no illusion, the enemy has not changed its intentions,” he said.

The U.S. stepped in on Sunday to hit three of Iran’s nuclear sites with bunker busters dropped by B-2 bombers — explosives designed to penetrate deep into the ground to damage the heavily fortified targets. Iran, in retaliation, fired missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar on Monday, but caused no known casualties.

Trump and Khamenei claims

Trump said that the American attacks “completely and fully obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program. However, Khamenei on Thursday accused the U.S. president of exaggerating the damage, saying the strikes didn’t “achieve anything significant.”

In response, Trump told reporters Friday that the sites were “bombed to hell.” He even directed a message to the supreme leader: “Look, you’re a man of great faith. A man who’s highly respected in his country. You have to tell the truth. You got beat to hell.”

A senior Israeli military official said Friday that their intelligence shows that Israel’s strikes on various targets neutralized Iran’s ability to enrich uranium to 90% for “a prolonged period.” It was unclear whether that contradicted a preliminary U.S. report that suggested the program had been set back months.

There has been speculation that Iran moved much of its highly-enriched uranium before the strikes, something that it told the IAEA that it planned to do.

Even if that turns out to be true, IAEA Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi told Radio France International that the damage done to the Fordo site, which was built into a mountain, “is very, very, very considerable.”

Among other things, he said, centrifuges are “quite precise machines,” and it’s “not possible” that the concussion from multiple 30,000-pound bombs wouldn’t have caused “important physical damage.”

“These centrifuges are no longer operational,” he said.

Araghchi himself acknowledged “the level of damage is high, and it’s serious damage.”

He added that Iran hadn’t yet decided whether to allow in IAEA inspectors to assess the damage, but they would be kept out “for the time being.”

Rising and Amiri write for the Associated Press. AP writers Aamer Madhani in Washington, Julia Frankel and Sam Mednick in Jerusalem contributed to this story.

Dissenting justice warns court actions expose ‘thousands to the risk of torture or death’.

A divided Supreme Court has allowed the administration of United States President Donald Trump to restart swift removals of migrants to countries other than their homeland, lifting a court order that requires they get a chance to challenge the deportations.

The high court majority did not detail its reasoning in the brief order issued on Monday, as is typical on its emergency docket. All three liberal justices dissented.

In May, immigration officials put eight people on a plane to South Sudan, though they were diverted to a US naval base in Djibouti after a judge stepped in.

The refugees and migrants from countries including Myanmar, Vietnam and Cuba had been convicted of violent crimes in the US. Immigration officials have said that they were unable to return them quickly to their home countries.

The case comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by Trump’s administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living undocumented in the US.

In a scathing 19-page dissent, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the court’s action exposes “thousands to the risk of torture or death.”

“The government has made clear in word and deed that it feels itself unconstrained by law, free to deport anyone anywhere without notice or an opportunity to be heard,” she wrote in the dissent, which was joined by the other two liberal judges, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Lawyers for some of the migrants who had been on the flight to South Sudan said they would continue to press their case in court. “The ramifications of Supreme Court’s order will be horrifying,” said Trina Realmuto, the executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance.

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, meanwhile, said in a social media post that the decision was a “MAJOR win for the safety and security of the American people”.

The department did not immediately respond to an email request for comment.

District judge concerned about danger facing deportees

The Supreme Court action halts an order from US District Judge Brian E Murphy in Boston, who decided in April that people must have a chance to argue that deportation to a third country would put them in danger – even if they have otherwise exhausted their legal appeals.

He found that the May deportation flight to South Sudan violated his order and told immigration authorities to allow people to raise those concerns through their lawyers. Immigration officials housed the migrants in a converted shipping container in Djibouti, where they and the officers guarding them faced rough conditions.

The administration has reached agreements with other countries, including Panama and Costa Rica, to house immigrants because some countries do not accept US deportations. South Sudan, meanwhile, has endured repeated waves of violence since gaining independence in 2011.

Murphy’s order does not prohibit deportations to third countries. But it says migrants must have a real chance to argue they could be in serious danger of torture if sent to another country.

The third-country deportation case has been one of several legal flashpoints as the Trump administration rails against judges whose rulings have slowed the president’s policies.

Another order from Murphy, who was appointed by former Democratic President Joe Biden, resulted in the Trump administration returning a gay Guatemalan man who had been wrongly deported to Mexico, where he says he had been raped and extorted.

The man, identified in court papers as OCG, was the first person known to have been returned to US custody after deportation since the start of Trump’s second term.