Supreme

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court justices sounded ready on Tuesday to uphold state laws that forbid transgender athletes from competing on school sports teams for girls.

Idaho, West Virginia and 25 other Republican-led states say a student’s biological sex at birth should determine who can play on the girls’ or boys’ teams.

They say it is unfair to girls to permit biological males to compete against them in sports like track and field or swimming. “Biological males are, on average, bigger, stronger and faster than biological females,” West Virginia’s state lawyers said.

While the court’s conservative majority court is likely to rule for these states, the justices said they prefer a narrow decision limited to these laws.

If so, such a ruling for the red states will not directly change the law in California and the more than a dozen other Democratic-led states that forbid discrimination based on gender identity. Those laws protect rights of transgender girls to compete on a girls’ team.

A similar dispute came before the court last year.

Then, the conservative justices ruled Tennessee and other red states may prohibit gender-affirming drugs and medical treatments for teenagers who suffer from gender dysphoria.

The 6-3 majority said this was not unconstitutional discrimination based on the teenagers’ transgender status. But that ruling did not strike down the conflicting law in California.

In recent months, the Trump administration joined the transgender sports cases on the side of West Virginia and Idaho.

But its lawyers argued only that the Constitution permits states to exclude transgender girls from girls’ teams. It does not require that they do so, their lawyers said.

Even a West Virginia lawyer agreed. “There is enough room for California to make a different interpretation,” state solicitor Michael R. Williams told the court.

Deputy Solicitor Gen. Hashim Mooppan said these Democratic states “are violating Title IX,” the education law that allows separate sports teams for girls and boys. But he said the court should not rule on that question now.

Last year, in response to the court’s ruling on gender-affirming care, President Trump cut off federal funds to hospitals and medical facilities that provided such care.

A ruling upholding restrictions on transgender athletes could spur the Trump administration to threaten Democratic states with a loss of federal education funds.

Becky Pepper-Jackson, now 15, has carried on a lonely legal fight to compete on her school’s track team in Bridgeport, W.Va.

Designated male at birth, she says she is the only transgender girl competing in her state and has been the target of complaints and protests.

In middle school, Becky participated in cross-country as a sixth-grader and described herself as slow. She “routinely placed near the back of the pack,” her attorneys told the court.

But upon reaching high school, she has been winning.

In 2024, she “placed in the top three in every track event in which B.P.J. competed, winning most,” the state’s attorneys said. Last spring “focusing on strength events, B.P.J. bumped female competitors out of the state tournament, then placed third in the state in discus and eighth in shot put while competing against much older female athletes,” they told the court.

Her attorney, Joshua Block of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she has been winning in the shot put and discus “through hard work and practice.”

He said she “received puberty-delaying medication and gender-affirming estrogen that allowed her to undergo a hormonal puberty typical of a girl.”

He urged the court to rule for Becky because she does not have a physical advantage due to her biology.

But the justices did not sound inclined to rule on the issue of puberty blockers.

The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on a case about the legality of President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

The high court on Tuesday added a non-argument/conference date on its website, indicating that it could release its ruling, although the court does not announce ahead of time which rulings it intends to issue.

The challenge to Trump’s tariffs has been one of the most closely watched cases on the court’s docket amid the broader impact on the global economy.

In a social media post on Friday, Trump said such a ruling would be a “terrible blow” to the US.

“Because of Tariffs, our Country is financially, AND FROM A NATIONAL SECURITY STANDPOINT, FAR STRONGER AND MORE RESPECTED THAN EVER BEFORE,” Trump said in another post on Monday.

However, data on this is mixed. The US gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 4.3 percent in the third quarter of 2025, marking the biggest increase in two years. Meanwhile, US job growth has slowed, with sectors heavily exposed to tariffs seeing little to no job growth.

“Jobs in sectors with higher import exposure grew more slowly than jobs in sectors with lower import exposure, suggesting tariffs may have weighed on employment,” Johannes Matschke, senior economist for the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve, said in an analysis in December.

Legal arguments

Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in February 2025 on goods imported from individual countries to address, what he called, a national emergency related to US trade deficits.

Arguments challenging the legality of the decision began in November. At the time, the court’s liberal and some conservative justices had doubts about the legality of using the 1977 act.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, whom Trump appointed during his first term, was among those sceptical.

“Congress, as a practical matter, can’t get this power back once it’s handed it over to the president,” Gorsuch said at the time.

Chief Justice John Roberts told Solicitor General D John Sauer, who argued on behalf of the administration, that imposing tariffs and taxes “has always been the core power of Congress”.

The act grants broad executive authority to wield economic power in the case of a national emergency.

The matter reached the Supreme Court after the lower courts ruled against the Trump administration, finding that the use of the law exceeded the administration’s authority.

Among the courts that ruled against the White House was the Court of International Trade. In May, the New York court said that Congress, and not the executive branch, has “exclusive authority to regulate commerce”. This decision was upheld in a Washington, DC, appeals court in August.

Legal experts believe it is likely that the high court will uphold lower court decisions.

“My sense is that, given the different justices’ concerns, the Supreme Court will decide that IEEPA does not provide the ability for the Trump administration to adopt the tariffs,” Greg Shaffer, a law professor at Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera.

If the Trump administration were to lose the case, the US would need to refund some of the tariffs.

“It [ruling against the administration] would mean that those who paid tariffs that were imposed illegally would have to be reimbursed. I would think that that would be the outcome,” Shaffer added.

In September, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said on NBC’s Meet the Press that the US would “have to give a refund on about half the tariffs”.

The Trump administration has said that if the Supreme Court does not rule in its favour, it will use other statutes to push through tariffs.

FANS are only just realising Marty Supreme star Odessa A’zion is a nepo baby who sounds just like her famous mum – but can you guess who it is?

Odessa A’zion, 25, stars alongside Timothee Chalamet in hot new movie Marty Supreme and recently appeared on the Drew Barrymore Show to talk about the film. 

When a clip from the interview was shared on TikTok, fans immediately rushed to comment on the similarities between the actress and her famous mum Pamela Adlon, who voices Bobby from King Of The Hill.

One wrote: “SHE SOUNDS JUST LIKE HER MUM!”

Someone else said: “I was thinking her mannerisms are ALL her mom, it’s wild.”

Another questioned: “Is she a Nepo baby?”

united front

Kylie Jenner & Timothee Chalamet hit back at split rumors & match outfits

su good

Susan Boyle shows off gift from Timothee Chalamet after he revealed he’s a fan

And one follower replied: “Yep, her mother is Pamela Adlon.” 

Pamela, 59, has voiced Bobby Hill in King of the Hill since the show’s debut in 1997.

She has also voiced a number of other famous characters such as Ashley Spinelli in Recess.

Pamela made her acting debut in Grease 2, with other on-screen roles in Californication and Boston Legal.

She was also nominated for an Emmy for her performance in FX series Better Things, which she co-wrote and starred in for five seasons, appearing alongside comic Louis C.K.

Pamela is clearly proud of her daughter following in her showbiz footsteps, sharing an excited Instagram post about Odessa’s role in Marty Supreme.

“By the gods!!!!! I’m the mom——imagine…? I CAN’T handle. My little girly-poo did this,” read her caption as she shared the film trailer on her social media profile.

“She has always manifested like a motherfucker (also…she is very extremely talented) CONGRATULATIONS ODESSA! I can’t wait see this movie!”

Odessa stars in Marty Supreme as Rachel, the childhood sweetheart of Timothee Chalamet’s character Marty Mauser.

The film has opened to rave reviews and debuted on Rotten Tomatoes with an impressive 94% rating.

The up-and-coming actress also plays Tallulah Stiel in new HBO series I Love LA alongside Rachel Sennott.

Odessa recently opened up about landing her role in Marty Supreme – and confessed she was worried about the release being so close to I Love LA.

She told Time: “Marty Supreme was really the first time that I felt like, oh my God, this is the exact role that I’ve always wanted to play.

“I know sometimes people get annoyed when they see someone’s face too much.

“I didn’t know if it was going to be too much at the same time with the show and the movie. I didn’t want to throw people off.”

Are you wondering, like Alixandra Kupcik, where did all the feel-good movies go?

She must have written that story before “Song Sung Blue” came out. Because Hugh Jackman passionately describing the greatness of Neil Diamond’s “Soolaimon” and then demonstrating that song’s grandeur by performing it in the new film “Song Sung Blue” is the definition of corny, feel-good comfort.

Which leads me to my question to you this day: Have you seen “Marty Supreme”? And what feelings — good, bad, uneasy, elated — did that movie arouse in you?

I’m Glenn Whipp, columnist for the Los Angeles Times and host of The Envelope newsletter. Time to wipe down the ping-pong table?

Inside the reactions to ‘Marty Supreme’

He summited the Sphere, exhorting us to “dream big.” He shot a rap music video to debunk the conspiracy theory that he is a popular British rapper. He has popped up at screenings flanked by bodyguards sporting giant orange ping-pong balls for heads.

Leading up to the Christmas Day premiere of his new movie, “Marty Supreme,” Timothée Chalamet was front and center in a promotional tour that was unhinged, delightful and, judging from the weekend’s box office, quite successful.

“Marty Supreme,” the wildly entertaining, over-caffeinated portrait of a single-minded ping-pong player, took in $27 million over the four-day Christmas weekend, the best opening in distributor A24’s history. The numbers surpassed the opening of “A Complete Unknown,” last year’s Chalamet Christmas release that featured the actor playing Bob Dylan in his formative years.

Not everyone was on board with “Marty.” Moviegoers gave the movie a B+ rating with market research company CinemaScore. That’s good, but not great. (“A Complete Unknown,” by comparison, earned an A.)

Podcaster Claira Curtis’ experience seeing the movie at the Grove feels like an accurate representation of the “Marty Supreme” adventure: “Packed ‘Marty Supreme theater had the full range of reactions. There were people walking out halfway through. There were people clapping. There was someone coming out of it saying, ‘Eh, it was fine’ & then their friend went, ‘Are you insane? It was peak!’”

The disparate responses reflect a couple of things.

One, not everyone embraces the Safdie brand of anxiety-inducing cinema. Josh Safdie directed “Marty.” His brother, Benny, made “The Smashing Machine,” released earlier this year. Together, they made “Uncut Gems” and “Good Time,” movies that, take your pick, were exhilarating or excruciating. Or both! (Exclamation point intended. These are exclamation-point films.)

And two, the title character in “Marty Supreme” is a lot — an undeniably talented, relentless self-promoter careening toward his goals of fame and fortune with little regard to the damage he is inflicting on others. He’s despicable, but also, as played by Chalamet, winningly charming. Unless you find Chalamet annoying. Then you’re probably best-served listening to Hugh Jackman sing Neil Diamond songs.

Chalamet has channeled Marty’s earnest energy in his promotional appearances for the film.

“This is a movie about sacrifice in pursuit of a dream,” he told Jimmy Fallon on “The Tonight Show.” “And it’s something I can relate to deeply. And we live in a bleak time, especially for young people, so this film is an attempted antidote to that.”

Chalamet then pivoted to the camera, the better to look into viewers’ eyes.

“And to continue to believe in yourself and to continue to dream big and to follow your dreams and not take no for an answer. That’s the spirit of ‘Marty Supreme,’ out on Christmas Day.”

Judging from the box office, Chalamet has pushed across the message. Will it work on awards voters, giving Chalamet the first Oscar of his career? As we head into the new year, the next phase of the “Marty” tour promises to be the season’s most interesting storyline. Gas up the blimp!

More coverage of ‘Marty Supreme’

The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court has again denied a request from the defence team of former President Jair Bolsonaro to move him from prison to house arrest.

Bolsonaro, 70, has been in and out of hospital over the past week, undergoing multiple treatments for aggressive hiccups and a hernia.

But on Thursday, his petition for house arrest on “humanitarian grounds” was denied, a day after it was filed.

In explaining the court’s decision, Justice Alexandre de Moraes argued that Bolsonaro already has access to round-the-clock medical care in police custody.

The former right-wing leader is currently being held at the federal police headquarters in the capital, Brasilia, after being sentenced to 27 years in prison for attempting to overturn his 2022 electoral defeat.

De Moraes also questioned whether Bolsonaro’s health merited “humanitarian” accommodations.

“Contrary to what the defence alleges, there has been no worsening of Jair Messias Bolsonaro’s health condition,” the justice said in his decision.

“Rather, his clinical condition showed improvement in the discomfort he was experiencing after undergoing elective surgeries, as indicated in the report from his own doctors.”

Multiple requests

This is not the first time the court has rejected a similar petition from Bolsonaro, who has reportedly suffered from lingering conditions, including hiccups, related to an abdominal stabbing he survived on the campaign trail in 2018.

Bolsonaro was taken into custody in November after damaging an ankle monitor that allowed him to remain at home while pursuing appeals. He had been convicted in September.

But shortly after Bolsonaro was remanded into custody, his defence team filed a request for house arrest, warning of life-threatening conditions behind bars.

“It is certain that keeping the petitioner in a prison environment would pose a concrete and immediate risk to his physical integrity and even his life,” his lawyers wrote.

That request, and a subsequent one in December, have been denied.

On December 23, though, the Supreme Court approved Bolsonaro’s request to leave prison, in order to undergo surgery for a hernia, resulting from damage to his abdominal muscles.

He travelled to Brasilia’s DF Star hospital to receive treatment and has since pursued other procedures, including a phrenic nerve block treatment and an endoscopy, to address his persistent hiccups.

Election controversy

A former army captain, Bolsonaro became a rising star in Brazil’s far right and served as president for a single term, from 2019 to 2023.

During his term, he faced scrutiny for comments he made praising Brazil’s military dictatorship, which ruled the country from 1964 to 1985 and oversaw the systematic torture and killings of political dissidents.

He also allegedly used his office to cast doubt on the integrity of Brazil’s electronic voting system.

In 2023, Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court (TSE) would ultimately bar Bolsonaro from holding public office for eight years, citing instances where he broadcast unfounded allegations about the election system on state TV and social media.

Still, Bolsonaro was considered a frontrunner going into the 2022 presidential race, where he faced two-term former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

The race advanced to an October 30 run-off. Lula eked out a narrow win, besting the incumbent Bolsonaro by less than two percentage points, with 50.9 percent of the vote.

In the aftermath, Bolsonaro refused to publicly concede defeat, although media reports indicate he may have done so in private.

Meanwhile, he and his allies filed a legal challenge against the election outcome that was quickly rejected for its “total absence of any evidence”. Bolsonaro’s coalition was fined nearly $4.3m for the “bad faith” petition.

But the unfounded belief that Bolsonaro’s defeat was somehow illegitimate prompted his supporters to take to the streets. Some blocked highways. Others attacked the federal police headquarters.

The tensions culminated on January 8, 2023, a week after Lula’s inauguration, when thousands of Bolsonaro supporters stormed Brasilia’s Three Powers Plaza and broke into buildings representing Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court.

Some supporters expressed hope that they could lead to a military coup that would remove Lula from power.

Legal jeopardy

That attack prompted wide-ranging investigations, and in November 2024, federal police issued a sweeping report accusing Bolsonaro and 36 allies of attempting to “violently dismantle” Brazil’s constitutional order.

The report detailed alleged instances where Bolsonaro and his allies discussed invalidating the election results — or even assassinating Lula.

Last February, prosecutors formally charged Bolsonaro and dozens of codefendants for attempting to overthrow the 2022 election.

His trial unfolded despite high-level international pressure from right-wing figures like United States President Donald Trump, who imposed steep tariffs on Brazil in August to protest against the prosecution.

Still, in September, Bolsonaro was found guilty on five counts, including attempted coup d’etat, armed conspiracy, attempted abolition of the rule of law, destruction of public property and damage to national heritage.

Bolsonaro has denied wrongdoing throughout the case and has called his prosecution an attempt to silence a political rival.

He remains a popular figure on the right, and his eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, announced last month his intention to challenge Lula for the presidency this upcoming October.

Last month, Brazil’s conservative-led Congress also passed a bill that could shorten Bolsonaro’s sentence, though Lula has pledged to veto it.

First clue that someone is serious about pingpong: They call it table tennis.

Second clue: They bring their own paddle.

Timothée Chalamet dropped a third clue on movie sets all over the globe. To prepare for his role in the delightfully frenetic “Marty Supreme,” the two-time Oscar nominee traveled for years with a table in tow, training and presumably enjoying the sport at the center of the current holiday season hit.

Director Josh Safdie enlisted the husband-and-wife table-tennis teaching tandem of Diego Schaaf and Wei Wang — a former U.S. Olympian — to elevate Chalamet’s game as well as serve as technical advisors on set.

But Chalamet was already playing nearly well enough to emulate a world champion on screen. He’d taken lessons and done his homework — setting up a table in the living room of his New York apartment and playing throughout the pandemic.

“Everything I was working on, it was this secret,” Chalamet told the Hollywood Reporter. “I had a table in London while I was making ‘Wonka.’ On ‘Dune: Part Two,’ I had a table in Budapest [and] Jordan. I had a table in Abu Dhabi. I had a table at the Cannes Film Festival for ‘The French Dispatch.’”

It seems implausible that Chalamet was immersed in table tennis while also learning to sing and play guitar for the role of Bob Dylan in “A Complete Unknown.”

“If anyone thinks this is cap, as the kids say — if anyone thinks this is made up — this is all documented, and it’ll be put out,” he said. “These were the two spoiled projects where I got years to work on them. This is the truth. I was working on both these things concurrently.”

Wherever Chalamet found the time, Schaaf was impressed by the result.

“He was singularly dedicated to getting this to be the same quality as the rest of the movie,” Schaaf told the Hollywood Reporter.

Eschewing a stunt double for the table tennis scenes was a point of pride for Chalamet. The only concession to modern moviemaking was that several of the longer sequences during games were choreographed without a ball, which was added later via computer-generated imagery (CGI).

“We realized it had to be scripted to be able to film it,” Schaaf told the Washington Post. “And because it was scripted, we had to practice it first with a real ball. He had to understand the physical layout of the point: Where does he have to go? When does he have to go there? When you later on do [visual effects] and put the ball in there, it’s critical that the player goes to the right place.”

Schaaf said about 60 points were scripted.

“We needed a lot of rehearsal, and I was amazed,” he said. “Timothée wound up getting a better feel for it than most professional players because professional players take the cue from the ball. You take the ball away, they all were like ‘What is the timing?’

“Of course, they have a good sense of timing and then they learned it quickly. But Timothée was right there on top of it.”

The on-screen rival of Chalamet’s character, Marty Mauser, is Koto Endo, portrayed by real-life Japanese table tennis champion Koto Kawaguchi. Their dynamic approximated the real-life rivalry between 1950s U.S. champion Marty Reisman and Japan’s Hiroji Satoh.

In her review of “Marty Supreme,” Times film critic Amy Nicholson noted that well-struck pingpong balls travel up to 70 mph.

“Set in 1952 New York, this deranged caper races after a money-grubbing table tennis hustler (he prefers ‘professional athlete’) who argues like he plays, swatting away protests and annoying his adversaries to exhaustion,” she wrote.

Nicholson offers that Reisman would be pleased by the movie, “which time-travels audiences back seven decades to when American table tennis players were certain bright days were ahead.

“As an athlete, Chalamet seems to have lost muscle for the role. Yet as funny as it is to see a guy this scrawny carry himself like Hercules, he leaps and strikes with conviction.”

Nothing gives an actor — or an athlete — self-assurance like practice, repetitions and rehearsals. Chalamet’s paddle performance is proof.

A ping-pong ball at top speed travels over 70 miles an hour — so fast it could zip across Manhattan in less than two minutes. Director Josh Safdie’s hyperactive, head-spinning “Marty Supreme” keeps pace. Set in 1952 New York, this deranged caper races after a money-grubbing table tennis hustler (he prefers “professional athlete”) named Marty Mauser (Timothée Chalamet) who argues like he plays, swatting away protests and annoying his adversaries to exhaustion.

Hounding his shoe-store co-worker to give him $700 from the safe, Marty hammers the poor sap with every trick he’s got — emotional pressure, physical violence, bribery, humiliation, revenge — until he hits one that wins. The high-strung kid is pure nerve and he looks like one, too; he’s the embodiment of a twitch. But with a paddle in his hands, Marty turns into Gene Kelly in “Singin’ in the Rain.” He could win a match swinging an umbrella.

The character’s inspiration is Marty Reisman, one of the so-called “bad boys of ping-pong,” according to a U.S. Table Tennis Assn. official in 1972, explaining why the rascal wasn’t invited to the USA versus China exhibition games referred to as “ping-pong diplomacy.” You may remember those matches from “Forrest Gump,” but Tom Hanks’ guileless sweetheart would never use the sport to smuggle gold bars out of Hong Kong, as the real Reisman once did.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Reisman’s exploits, immortalized in his 1974 memoir “The Money Player,” are too outrageous to squeeze into one film, even for a chaos-feeding filmmaker such as Safdie, going solo after co-directing “Good Time” and “Uncut Gems” with his brother Benny. (A trilogy, maybe.) Reisman’s biography opened with him fleeing French-occupied Hanoi, Vietnam, the day before it fell to the Viet Minh and detoured to a meeting with the Pope in Rome before drunkenly landing a plane in Brazil. The book was optioned shortly after publication. He felt it should star Robert De Niro.

That movie never happened and Reisman died in 2012 at the age of 82, still insisting he deserved to bask in the spotlight. He’d be happy to see Safdie’s “Marty Supreme,” which time-travels audiences back seven decades to when American table tennis players were certain bright days were ahead.

As an athlete, Chalamet seems to have lost muscle for the role. Yet as funny as it is to see a guy this scrawny carry himself like Hercules, he leaps and strikes with conviction. His Marty yearns for prestige. Safdie even concocts a subplot in which he invents his signature orange ball solely so he can wear all-white like the posh jocks of Wimbledon. He starts the film desperate to fly to a tournament in London, in part to escape the walk-up apartment where he’s always squabbling with his mother (Fran Drescher) and uncle (Larry “Ratso” Sloman) and a nosy neighbor (Sandra Bernhard). Perilously, Marty’s secret lover (a simmering Odessa A’zion) lives with her jealous husband (Emory Cohen) in an apartment one floor below.

Marty and A’zion’s Rachel belong together, if only to quarantine their equally manipulative genes from the general population. Before the opening credits, the couple improvises a lie to get some privacy to mate. Cinematographer Darius Khondji sends the camera inside her body to see Marty’s most aggressive sperm wriggle to the finish line. Rachel’s egg becomes the moon; the moon becomes a ping-pong ball. Game on.

From this scene forward, Marty will dash around the city and the globe, chasing his dreams and out-running his parental responsibilities. Along the way, he trips over a gun-toting gangster named Ezra (Abel Ferrara), a faded movie star, Kay (Gwyneth Paltrow, sullen and aloof), and her callous husband Milton (“Shark Tank” investor Kevin O’Leary), the chief executive of a pen corporation who thinks Marty can make him a mint in ping-pong-crazed Asia. O’Leary, a first-time actor, easily embodies the face of capitalism.

Flaunting that he can turn anyone into an actor, Safdie crowds his New York with bit parts played by big personalities: magician Penn Jillette, fashion designer Isaac Mizrahi, basketball player George “The Iceman” Gervin, highwire artist Philippe Petit, playwright David Mamet, journalist Naomi Fry and grocery tycoon John Catsimatidis. The musician Tyler Okonma, better known as the Tyler, the Creator, is great in his feature film acting debut as Willy, Marty’s gambling wingman. He was previously seen onscreen getting electrocuted by a piano in “Jackass Forever.” Okonma brings that same energy here and it’s perfect.

Marty’s main foe — and personality opposite — is a Japanese player named Koto Endo (Koto Kawaguchi) who lost his hearing in the Tokyo airstrikes that happened seven years before and uses a deadly quiet foam-backed paddle. Marty’s friendliest rival, Béla (Géza Röhrig), survived Auschwitz, and in a jaw-dropper of a scene, shares a story of endurance that actually happened to the Polish player Alex Ehrlich. Imprisoned in the camps shortly after winning silver at the World Championships in 1939, Ehrlich was renowned for a record-breaking competitive volley that lasted over two hours, a back-and-forth so relentless that the referee quit with a sore neck. The rhythm of it could be a metronome for this movie’s plot — it whips us around to the point of delighted collapse.

The soundtrack is an unexpected backbeat of synth hits by Tears for Fears and New Order that bleeds into a Tangerine Dream-esque score by Daniel Lopatin — a startling choice for an era where people act like World War II happened yesterday. But to our modern ears, the music has its own vintage: It’s the sound of the greed-is-good 1980s, when movies rooted for ruthless strivers such as “Risky Business’” Tom Cruise, who opened a brothel in his parents’ bedroom.

Safdie’s script, co-written by Ronald Bronstein, is even structured like an ’80s movie that builds up to the big showdown, be it a ski race, a car-washing competition or a frat house decathlon à la “Revenge of the Nerds.” The catch is that Marty — not Endo — may be the bully who deserves to lose. How loudly are we willing to cheer for a callow guy who thinks of WWII as an opportunity for trash talk, boasting he’ll “drop a third bomb” on Endo’s fans? (In fairness, Tokyo promotes their rematch with a poster of Marty that looks uncomfortably close to antisemitic Nazi propaganda, a pointed choice by Safdie and the production designer Jack Fisk.)

Marty is convinced he’s a self-made success who doesn’t need anyone’s help; the people we see him squeeze and squash would disagree. He’s similar to Adam Sandler’s rapacious jeweler in “Uncut Gems,” except that scoundrel contained his damage to the Diamond District and people as shady as him. Safdie sends Marty out to bedevil the world, shipping him to Paris where he gets snippy with a maître d’ who doesn’t speak English and then to Cairo where he steals a chunk of the Great Pyramids.

Listening to a Japanese newsreel describe him as a villain referred to only as “the American,” you realize that “Marty Supreme” is more than a caricature of Reisman. It’s a biography of our national ego, with Marty brashly lecturing the British head of the International Table Tennis Assn. that a champion from the United States would boost the sport’s global reputation. After the commissioner makes this conceited Yank grovel, Marty simply replies: “It’s every man for himself where I come from.”

Like Marty, Chalamet was raised in New York City, and since he arrived on the scene, there’s never been a doubt he’ll win an Oscar. The only question is, when? To Chalamet’s credit, he’s doing it the hard way, avoiding sentimental pictures for pricklier roles about his own naked ambitions. For “A Complete Unknown,” he taught himself to play guitar like Bob Dylan while revealing that the bard was a rat, and in the even-better “Dune: Part Two,” played a naif radicalized into a galaxy-destroying messiah.

Here, Chalamet again fuses his personal drive into his performance, claiming that he spent seven years training to play ping-pong like Reisman, and unlike Tom Hanks in “Gump,” he’s doing his own stunts. Voters seem content to let the young talent dangle, trusting that he’ll continue flogging himself to make more great pictures like this.

The movie’s moxie makes it impossible not to get caught up in Marty’s crusade. We’re giddy even when he’s miserable. Performing with the Harlem Globetrotters in some of the most war-scarred, joy-desperate corners of the planet, his own shame prevents him from appreciating how much he’s entertaining the crowd. When you weigh his selfish desires against any other character’s needs, Marty is as hollow as a ping-pong ball. It really is all about his balls. Their embossing reads: “Marty Supreme — Made in America.”

WASHINGTON — In a dramatic development that threatens William Lucas’ nomination as the government’s chief civil rights enforcer, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) Thursday withdrew his endorsement a day after introducing Lucas to the Senate Judiciary Committee with warm praise.

Conyers told a hushed session of the panel that he was taking the unusual action with “a slightly heavy heart” because of Lucas’ hands-off position on recent Supreme Court rulings that civil rights leaders regard as disastrous setbacks.

“I want someone who is deeply disturbed” by the decisions, Conyers said, contending that they had plunged the civil rights movement into a crisis.

Conyers’ reversal could provide Lucas’ foes with crucial momentum in their struggle against his nomination as assistant attorney general for civil rights. Conyers is an influential black leader in Congress and the Administration had turned to him to introduce Lucas, who also is black, after the nominee’s two home state Michigan senators broke with tradition and declined to do so.

In another blow to Lucas’ prospects, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joseph R. Biden Jr.(D-Del.), who advised civil rights leaders last week that he was inclined to vote for Lucas, told the same officials Thursday at the panel hearing that he is now leaning against confirmation.

Biden cited Lucas’ lack of an opinion when he asked him about the Supreme Court rulings, whether the country was moving in the right direction on civil rights and whether the Ronald Reagan Administration had been for or against civil rights.

Despite the setbacks, David Runkel, spokesman for Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh, said: “I still expect Bill Lucas to be confirmed.”

Conyers’ withdrawal of support–he said he was not asking the committee to vote against recommending Lucas’ confirmation–came after he met Thursday morning with Lucas and John Mackey of the Justice Department’s office of congressional affairs.

Justice Department officials then discussed with Conyers’ staff issuing a joint statement that “they share a commitment to civil rights,” but Conyers, after reviewing Lucas’ testimony, decided that did not go far enough, sources familiar with the meeting said.

In introducing his longtime friend Wednesday to the Senate committee, Conyers had said he was “convinced Bill Lucas will go to greatness” in the high-level Justice Department post. “If he doesn’t, I will be the first one calling for his head on a pike.”

But after reviewing a transcript of Lucas’ testimony on “the most enormous question facing the civil rights community,” which he did not remain in Wednesday’s session to hear, Conyers said he “was frankly astounded.”

Lucas, echoing comments by Thornburgh, President Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle, said he did not view the high court rulings as having substantial impact on civil rights law and promised to monitor them aggressively instead of proposing legislation to counteract the rulings. The rulings narrowed the use of affirmative action and plaintiffs’ options in job discrimination complaints.

He contended that the Justice Department’s civil rights division believes that the rulings have “a sound basis in law” and that they have not undermined civil rights, an assessment that Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.) said he found hard to believe.

“He said he could live with these cases,” Conyers told the hearing. “I can’t live with these cases.”

In predicting that Lucas would win Senate confirmation, Runkel said: “This guy went up there and voiced the views of the Administration. It’s unrealistic to think that he would do other than that. If the expectation of some people is that a liberal Democrat is going to be nominated” to the civil rights post, “they’re wrong. It ain’t going to happen.”

Lucas, a former Wayne County, Mich., sheriff and county executive, has also drawn criticism from the NAACP.

In other testimony Thursday, Henry Sanders, president of the Alabama New South Coalition, one of that state’s major civil rights groups, said: “I submit to you that if Mr. Lucas was white that there would be no problem in rejecting him. But he’s black, and it’s civil rights and both of those have a different standard.

“I think it’s terrible when you have to deal with a different standard.”

Although Conyers’ reversal and Biden’s comment mark significant setbacks for Lucas, his opponents were cautious in assessing the impact.

“I think it’s very close,” said Ralph G. Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. “He came out of the hearings in much worse shape than he went into them.”

In addition to Biden, Sens. Howard M. Metzenbaum (D-Ohio), Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), Howell Heflin (D-Ala.), Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Simon have all seemed concerned by Lucas’ testimony. The committee has 14 members, and Lucas went into the hearing backed by five Republicans and one of the panel’s eight Democrats, Sen. Dennis DeConcini of Arizona.