united states

The attack on alleged drug smugglers brings death toll of US military campaign against suspected drug boats to about 150.

The United States military has announced another strike in the Caribbean Sea that it said targeted drug smugglers, killing three people.

The Southern Command of the US military (SOUTHCOM) shared footage of the attack on Monday, showing a small boat exploding and going up in flames after the strike.

“Intelligence confirmed the vessel was transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Caribbean and was engaged in narco-trafficking operations,” SOUTHCOM said in a statement.

“Three male narco-terrorists were killed during this action. No US military forces were harmed.”

The attack brings the death toll from US boat strikes on boats allegedly smuggling drugs, which began last year, to about 150.

Rights advocates have said the US military campaign targeting alleged drug smugglers amounts to extrajudicial killings and risks violating international and domestic laws.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has argued that all the targeted boats were carrying drugs, but it has offered little evidence other than grainy footage of the strikes.

United Nations experts warned last year that the attacks “appear to be unlawful killings carried out by order of a Government, without judicial or legal process allowing due process of law”.

“Unprovoked attacks and killings on international waters also violate international maritime laws,” the experts added.

“We have condemned and raised concerns about these attacks at sea to the United States Government.”

The strikes started in September last year, as the US was building up its military assets in the Caribbean amid tensions with Venezuela. Since then, the attacks have expanded to also targeting boats in the eastern Pacific Ocean.

A separate US strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat on Friday also killed three people.

The campaign has continued even after US forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro early in 2026.

Trump and other US officials have argued, without providing evidence, that each bombing saves thousands of lives from overdose deaths. But it is not clear whether the deadly campaign has significantly affected the drug trade in the region.

The latest attack comes as Mexican authorities push to curb violence by drug cartels after the killing of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel leader, Nemesio Ruben Oseguera Cervantes, also known as “El Mencho”.

Trump has been pushing to present himself as launching a literal war on drugs across the Western Hemisphere.

“Mexico must step up their effort on Cartels and Drugs!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday.

The US has often accused its critics in Latin America, including Colombian President Gustavo Petro, of ties to the drug trade.

Meanwhile, in December, Trump pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was serving a 45-year prison sentence in US jails after being convicted of drug trafficking.

More talks are planned for Thursday between Iran and the United States, which is mobilising its largest military force since the invasion of Iraq more than two decades ago.

Amid mixed messages from US President Donald Trump, Tehran says it wants talks, but is ready for war, too.

So, where do both sides stand?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests:

Jamal Abdi – President of the National Iranian American Council

Hassan Ahmadian – Associate professor at the University of Tehran

Richard Weitz – Senior fellow at the NATO Defense College

The White House is set to impose a 15 percent tariff through Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 after the US Supreme Court ruled against Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

United States President Donald Trump has ramped up tariff threats following last week’s US Supreme Court decision that ruled that Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, were unlawful.

On Monday, Trump said that any countries that wanted to “play games” after the high court’s ruling would be hit “with a much higher tariff ” in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

In a separate post on the platform, Trump claimed that he does not need the approval of the US Congress for tariffs.

“As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs . It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago! They were also just reaffirmed by the ridiculous and poorly crafted supreme court decision!” Trump said in the post.

Trump does have some authority to impose other tariffs, but they are much more limited.

Following the court’s 6–3 decision on Friday, the president said he would introduce a 10 percent tariff, raising it to 15 percent by Saturday under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, the maximum limit under the statute that enables the White House to impose tariffs for 150 days.

The statute only requires a presidential declaration and does not require further investigation. Section 122 is only temporary; the tariffs would then expire unless Congress extends them.

Trump’s tariffs are overwhelmingly unpopular. A new Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found that 64 percent of Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of tariffs.

Looming uncertainty

Experts warn that Trump’s newly imposed tariffs will fuel further economic uncertainty.

“What we do know is that it would continue to require all those parties affected to continue to live in uncertainty and, as many have already pointed out, such uncertainty is not good for our economy and has negative impacts on American consumers,” Max Kulyk, partner and CEO of Chicory Wealth, a private wealth advisory firm, told Al Jazeera.

“It’s impossible to plan. You hear that tariffs are off, and you are considering how to get refunds. Then a few hours later, it’s 10 percent. Then it’s 15 percent the next day…. Not having that stable framework is hurtful for activity, hiring, investment,” Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon, told the Reuters news agency.

Gold, which is considered a safe investment in times of economic uncertainty, surged by 2 percent on Monday, hitting a three-week high as tariff pressures remain unclear.

US markets are also taking a hit. The tech-heavy Nasdaq is down 1.1 percent in midday trading. The S&P 500 is also down by 1 percent, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average slumped by 1.5 percent since the market opened on Monday.

Stalling trade deals

Trump’s erratic approach has also deterred movement on looming trade deals.

On Monday, the European Parliament opted to postpone voting on a trade deal with the US. It is the second time the bloc has pushed back the vote. The first was in protest against Trump’s unsolicited attempts to acquire Greenland.

The assembly had been considering removing several European Union import duties on US goods. Committee chair Bernd Lange said the new temporary US tariff could mean increased levies for some EU exports, and no one knew what would happen after they expire in 150 days. EU lawmakers will reconvene on March 4 to assess if the US has clarified the situation and confirmed its commitment to last year’s deal.

US skier Lindsey Vonn revealed that her leg was injured so severely in her Olympic crash that amputation was a possibility until her doctor was able to relieve the traumatic injury.

On Sunday, Mexican security forces killed 59-year-old Nemesio Ruben Oseguera Cervantes, alias “El Mencho”, the leader of the notorious Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), based in western Mexico’s Jalisco state.

The Mexican defence ministry acknowledged that the lethal operation had been conducted with “complementary information” from the United States, whose “peacemaker” president, Donald Trump, has repeatedly threatened to attack Mexico to combat the drug cartels.

Mind you, these are organisations that owe their very existence to US policy and drug consumption in the first place.

US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau greeted the news of El Mencho’s death with glee, taking to X to proclaim: “This is a great development for Mexico, the US, Latin America, and the world.”

And yet things aren’t looking quite so “great” thus far.

As anyone who has ever paid remote attention to global affairs might have predicted, violence has broken out across several Mexican states in the aftermath of the killing – which is generally what happens when you take out a cartel kingpin.

Gunmen have torched vehicles and blocked highways in various locales while various US media have reported sensationally on the plight of American tourists “stranded” in Mexican resort cities on account of the upheaval.

Shortly after his initial enthusiastic post, Landau returned to X with a “PS, I’m watching the scenes of violence from Mexico with great sadness and concern.” But no matter: “We must never lose our nerve.”

The deputy secretary of state ended his “PS” with some words of encouragement in Spanish for the Mexican nation: “¡Animo Mexico!” (Cheer up, Mexico!)

But again, there is hardly room for cheer given that there is not a single example in pretty much the entire history of the world in which the killing of one cartel boss has resolved the narcotrafficking problem – or anything else, for that matter.

Recall the case of Pablo Escobar of the Medellin Cartel, killed in 1993 by Colombian police with a whole lot of help from the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).

Despite Escobar’s absence, the international drug trade proceeded apace, and ensuing decades played host to spectacular levels of violence in Colombia – much of it coincidentally perpetrated by heavily US-backed state security forces.

In one particularly memorable episode, members of the Colombian army slaughtered an estimated 10,000 civilians and passed the cadavers off as left-wing “terrorists”.

To this day, Colombia remains the world’s top producer of cocaine.

In other words, to hail El Mencho’s demise as a “great development” for Mexico or anyone else is at best preposterously delusional.

On Sunday I phoned a Mexican friend in the southern state of Oaxaca, a supporter of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, for our requisite argument over the day’s events. In his view, Mexico’s government had simply been “doing its job” in the “war on drugs” by eliminating El Mencho, and the US had nothing substantial to do with it.

Indeed, much like her predecessor and mentor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, Sheinbaum has perfected the art of doing the gringos’ dirty work while purporting to act in a “sovereign” fashion – and even to defy the imperial overlords to the north.

Granted, she does not have a whole lot of room to manoeuvre given the recent kidnapping by the US of Venezuelan head of state Nicolas Maduro – and the fact that Trump has made it known that he is beholden to no law, whether domestic or international.

But while Sheinbaum may have seen no choice but to temporarily placate the Americans and satisfy Trump’s need for blood, Mexicans will pay a heavy price.

A brief review of contemporary Mexican history confirms as much. No sooner did then-Mexican President Felipe Calderon launch his “drug war” under US guidance in 2006 than homicides and enforced disappearances skyrocketed in the country.

Well over half a million people have since been killed and disappeared, many of them victims of militarised agents of the state who often operate in cahoots with organised crime.

Nary a dent has been put in the northward flow of drugs while the southward flow of US-manufactured weapons continues unabated.

The state of Jalisco itself happens to have the highest number of enforced disappearances in all of Mexico and made headlines last year with the discovery of a clandestine crematorium on a ranch outside Guadalajara, one of the host cities of the upcoming World Cup.

The ranch was reportedly used by the CJNG as a recruitment and training centre as well as an extermination site.

And the removal of El Mencho from the equation will do precisely nothing in terms of pacifying the landscape – just as the respective extraditions to the US of Sinaloa cartel leaders Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman and Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada merely set off an ongoing violent battle for power.

Contrary to lofty soundbites from US officials, the empire is not at all interested in getting rid of either drug trafficking or violence south of the border as both phenomena provide a perennial excuse for US interference in Mexico and beyond.

Were the gringos actually serious about ridding “Mexico, the US, Latin America, and the world” of the whole cartel problem, a decriminalisation of drugs would do much to nip the business in the bud by rendering the movement of drugs far less fantastically lucrative.

A moratorium on the US’s obsessive manufacture of weapons would also help.

Obviously, nothing so much as resembling those potential solutions is even on the horizon. If it were, that would be one hell of a “great development” indeed.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

United States Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has faced condemnation from Arab and Muslim countries after suggesting Israel has a biblical right to much of the Middle East.

In an interview with prominent right-wing American commentator Tucker Carlson, Huckabee suggested that Israel has a God-given right to land stretching from the Euphrates River to the Nile, which would encompass Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Saudi Arabia.

“It would be fine if they took it all,” he said, arguing that the geographical borders of Israel are rooted in the Bible, a belief shared by Christian Zionists.

The US diplomat, a self-professed Christian Zionist and staunch supporter of Israel, later walked back his comments, calling them “somewhat hyperbolic” and adding that Israel is not seeking expansion but has a right to security within its current borders.

But were his comments indeed hyperbolic in the Christian Zionist worldview? Or is that precisely what he and his fellow proponents of the ideology believe?

How did Christian Zionism begin, and what are its tenets?

In 1878, William Blackstone, a student of the prominent American evangelist Dwight Moody and a believer in the biblical restoration of Israel, published a book titled Jesus Is Coming. The best-selling work popularised among Americans a belief held by some Christian leaders: that God had given the land of Israel to the Jewish people.

This conviction, often taken from a Protestant evangelical perspective, draws on the ancient biblical idea that, nearly four millennia ago, God promised the land to the Jews, who would rule it until the return of Jesus to Jerusalem for the rapture. According to this theology, Christians will be saved upon Christ’s return while non-Christians who do not convert will face damnation.

The most commonly quoted Bible verse relating to this covenant is Genesis 12:3, in which God tells Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you and I will curse those who curse you and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed,” according to the Religion Media Centre.

According to ChristianZionism.org, a website run by professors, pastors and leaders of church-related organisations, four themes can be found in Christian Zionist thought: One, the founding of today’s nation-state of Israel in 1948 marked the final human era and signals an end of times. Two, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is a part of God’s plan with a great and final war preceding the second coming of Christ. Three, God’s covenant with Israel is eternal and unconditional. And four, failing to support Israel’s political dominance today will incur divine judgement.

Writer and historian David Swift said that although many Christians – evangelical or otherwise – supported the creation of Israel before 1948, they cannot be called Christian Zionists in the modern parlance.

“This is because Christian Zionism essentially fuses religious belief with a military, strategic and even economic programme,” Swift told Al Jazeera.

“Specifically, Christian Zionism is not just the belief that the biblical land of Israel is the ordained country of the Jewish people but that it is in America’s strategic, military and economic interest to support the expansion of Israel.”

Fathi Nimer, a policy fellow at Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, described the movement as one that “translates into absolute unquestioning support for the Israeli regime”.

He described hearing a podcast about a Christian Zionist woman visiting Bethlehem who, after seeing the separation wall, Israeli soldiers and the harsh conditions in Palestinian refugee camps, remarked: “I feel bad for them, but scripture is scripture.”

“‘Scripture is scripture’ – that overrides everything,” Nimer told Al Jazeera.

“That’s why it’s such a powerful tool for brainwashing.”

How many American Christian Zionists are there?

According to author and academic Tristan Sturm, the largest population of Christian Zionists is in the US, and it numbers more than 30 million. Most are affiliated with evangelical churches in the southeast and south-central regions, often referred to as the “Bible Belt”.

The biggest organisation is Christians United for Israel, which itself boasts 10 million members, Nimer said.

“They are overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, found mostly in the Bible Belt, but also other places in the United States, and they form one of the most formidable voting blocs in the Republican Party,” he said.

Swift stated that only a few million from this group, however, are “fully signed up to the political, military and religious aspects of Christian Zionism”.

What impact do Christian Zionists have on US policy?

Nimer argued that Christian Zionists are “deeply intertwined” with American politics. “A lot of the major donors to the Republican Party and also the Democratic Party are Christian Zionists,” Nimer said.

According to the analyst, Christian Zionists are a cornerstone of Israeli lobbying groups, ranging from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to the Anti-Defamation League, “that work to spread the Israeli narrative” in American society.

Meanwhile, a lot of members of the US Congress are “openly” Christian Zionist, Nimer said.

“[Politicians like] Mike Huckabee, … they reached the highest echelons of the state. And they bring these beliefs into their politics, into their policies,” the analyst said.

US foreign policy on Israel is, therefore, heavily influenced and shaped around the underlying biblical premise that the Jewish people are divinely destined to be restored to Palestine, he argued.

“When it comes to Palestine and the region in general, as you see right now with the [potential] war in Iran, they’re saying that the ballistic missile programme is now on the table,” Nimer said.

“It has nothing to do with the nuclear deal, … but the idea is that Israel must be able to maintain its superiority over every country in the region, and that’s a decree by God because if Israel prospers, then that’s another step towards the end of the world.”

Christian Zionist groups have also backed Israel’s illegal settlement project in the occupied West Bank and other measures that they see as reinforcing Israeli Jewish sovereignty.

Furthermore, for two decades, organisations such as HaYovel have been bringing in hundreds of American Christian volunteers to work in Israeli settlement agricultural projects, especially during the genocidal war on Gaza, when Jewish Israelis were called for military duty. Many also strongly endorsed US President Donald Trump’s moving of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2017.

Swift, however, said Christian Zionists have played only a minor role in shaping US support for Israel and their influence is waning.

He argued that while Christian Zionism is integrated with a “broader neoconservative foreign policy agenda” also tied to the “US defence industry and broader military-industrial complex”, the group does not have much influence in American politics, and, in fact, it is declining.

Traditionally, US government support for Israel was driven by Cold War considerations and by pressure from the Jewish community within the US and lobbying groups like AIPAC. What played less of a role was support for Israel from evangelical Christians and the smaller community of Christian Zionists, Swift said.

“The US president is finally de facto abandoning the previous theoretical support for a two-state solution – although not for Christian Zionist reasons. When Trump talks of ethnically cleansing Gaza and turning it into a beach resort, he uses the language of real estate, not the Old Testament,” the historian said.

According to the analysts, very representative.

“It is pretty representative: Christian Zionists derive their understanding of the proper borders of Israel from the same place as people like [Israeli National Security Minister] Itamar Ben-Gvir and [Israeli Finance Minister] Bezalel Smotrich: the Old Testament. Therefore, they think Israel should expand to include all of the territory of ‘biblical Israel’,” Swift said, referring to the far-right Israeli cabinet members who have worked to expand and protect Israeli settlements and outposts in the occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law.

Nimer said Huckabee’s statement is also not something that can be criticised within the Christian Zionist community.

“You’re not allowed to criticise that because it’s like you’re criticising prophecy and you’re criticising God and the return of Jesus,” he said.

Huckabee’s comments, therefore, come as no surprise despite infringing upon the sovereignty of US allies in the Middle East, Nimer said.

On Monday, Smotrich said Israel would eventually occupy the Gaza Strip and establish a Jewish settlement there despite a “ceasefire” that went into effect in October.

“We are giving US President Donald Trump the opportunity to do it in his own way. If he does not succeed in eliminating Hamas, the Israeli army will get international legitimacy and American support to do it,” he said in statements to Israeli radio.

How do Jewish Israelis view Christian Zionists?

Mimi Kirk, the director of the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism and the associate director of Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, writes that “despite the matter of their supposed end-of-times demise according to this view, Jewish Israeli leaders have embraced the money and influence on US foreign policy that Christian Zionists offer,” especially as its adherents include top officials from the first Trump administration, including former Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Nimer said it’s a rather “cynical relationship”, given that the Christian Zionist worldview, which sees all non-Christians going to hell, is “anti-Semitic to the bone”.

“But they support Israel, so it’s fine,” the policy analyst said.

“They care about what they can get out of them right now as the biggest support base in the West currently.”

Israel is further banking on this support because it is quickly losing its “progressive facade” of a “liberal democracy” with “all these progressive rights”, Nimer added.

“This has completely faded over the last few decades, and especially since the genocide in Gaza, this has become completely unacceptable.”

How do Christians in Palestine view Christian Zionists?

Palestinian Christians have long voiced concern that the Christian Zionist position threatens their existence, further entrenching Israel’s occupation while marginalising their community and undermining the historic churches of the Holy Land.

Just last month, the Patriarchs and Heads of the Churches in Jerusalem said activities by local individuals advancing “damaging ideologies, such as Christian Zionism” “mislead the public, sow confusion, and harm the unity of our flock”.

The Christian leaders warned that these efforts could undermine the Christian presence not only in the Holy Land but across the wider Middle East.

The statement came amid growing concern among Palestinian Christians that Israel’s policies – including land confiscation, settlement expansion and pressure on church property – are accelerating the erosion of one of the world’s oldest Christian communities.

Are there critiques of Christian Zionism among other Christians?

Criticism of Christian Zionists from within Christianity is abundant.

In the US, the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism was created to critique and combat the movement through liberation theology, seeking justice for Palestinians and a resolution to the ongoing conflict.

Swift pointed out that many of the world’s most Catholic countries, from Ireland to those in South America and Southern Europe, “tend to be quite pro-Palestinian”.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Christian scholars “have written very detailed theological critiques of Christian Zionism”, Nimer said, as have pastors from other parts of the Global South.

A prize awarded by the Nelson Mandela Foundation last year was explicitly aimed at initiatives working against Christian Zionism, and a conference next month in Turkiye is being organised to combat the ideology, Nimer said.

“The world is waking up to how insidious this ideology is and how it creeps into societies and makes it impossible to have any kind of solidarity with Palestinians as long as they believe it,” he said.

United States Secret Service ⁠agents and local police shot and killed a man who drove into the secure perimeter of President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Washington, DC – President Donald Trump has long been fixated on how voting in the United States is administered, claiming without evidence that his 2020 presidential election loss was the result of malfeasance.

Fast forward more than five years, and Trump is set to be in office for one of the most consequential midterm races in recent times.

It is unclear how the US president might involve himself in the midterms, which will determine whether his Republican Party maintains control over both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The results will decide whether Trump can continue to enact his agenda with relative ease or if he will face congressional pushback at every turn.

The Republican leader’s approach so far appears to be twofold, according to Michael Traugott, a political scientist and professor emeritus at the University of Michigan.

On one hand, Trump has embarked on a messaging campaign to cast doubt on any results that seem unfavourable.

“Part of what the Trump administration is doing is trying to create the impression of fraud and mismanagement in local elections so that they can argue eventually that some outcomes are not legitimate or real or should be discounted,” Traugott told Al Jazeera.

On the other hand, Trump also appears to be conducting a stress test of pre-existing election law, to see how much the federal government can intervene.

“There are actions that he could take or try to take, which would likely be stopped in the courts,” Traugott said.

“The behaviour in the Trump administration is to appeal, appeal, appeal, until it gets to the Supreme Court,” he added. “I imagine that would be their strategy.”

Calls to ‘nationalise’ election administration

Trump has been explicit about his desire to assert more federal control over the election, saying in early February that “Republicans ought to nationalise the voting”.

He pointed to what he described as “horrible corruption on elections” in some parts of the US.

The US Constitution assigns states the power to determine the “times, places and manner” of elections for federal office.

Congress, meanwhile, has the ability to “make or alter” rules related to voting through legislation or, in extreme cases, constitutional amendments.

“It’s important to remember that, in the United States, we don’t really have national elections. We have a series of state and local elections that are held more or less on the same day,” Traugott explained.

The president, meanwhile, has no constitutional role in how elections are administered, beyond signing any legislation Congress passes.

Still, it is possible for a president to leverage executive branch agencies that interact with state election administration. Trump too has explicitly blurred the lines between federal and state power.

In the Oval Office on February 3, he told reporters, “A state is an agent for the federal government in elections. I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway.”

His statements were swiftly condemned by voting rights groups.

The League of Women Voters, a voting rights group founded in 1920, called Trump’s remarks a “calculated effort to dismantle the integrity of the electoral system as we know it”.

“Time and again, the President’s claims of widespread fraud have been disproven by nonpartisan election officials, the courts, and the Department of Justice,” it added.

Despite Trump’s claims, voter fraud is exceedingly rare in the US, and any isolated instances typically have little effect on election outcomes.

Even the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind the Trump-aligned Project 2025, has documented an inconsequential rate of voter fraud in its catalogue of cases running back to 1982.

An analysis from the centre-left Brookings Institution found that fraudulent votes failed to amount to one ten-thousandth of a percentage point of the ballots cast in states where elections tend to be the closest.

For example, Arizona is a perennial battleground in presidential elections, but it has seen just 36 reported cases of voter fraud since 1982, out of more than 42 million ballots cast. That put the percentage of fraud at 0.0000845, according to the analysis.

Department of Justice pushes boundaries

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has heaped pressure on the Department of Justice to increase its probes into alleged voter fraud.

The attorney general has demanded that 47 states and Washington, DC, a federal district, hand over their complete voter registration lists, according to a tally from the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan policy group.

Eleven states have complied or agreed to comply. The Trump administration has launched lawsuits against the 20 others that refused.

The Department of Justice has also stepped up its cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security to identify non-citizen voters.

Some critics have even accused the Justice Department of deploying coercive tactics to fulfil its demands for state voter information.

On January 24, for instance, US Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote a letter to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz suggesting three “common sense solutions” to “restore the rule of law” in the state.

One of those proposals was to allow the Justice Department to “access voter rolls”.

Bondi’s remarks came after a federal immigration crackdown in Minnesota had turned deadly, resulting in two on-camera shootings of US citizens.

While her letter did not directly offer a quid pro quo – access to the rolls in exchange for ending the crackdown – critics said the message it sent was clear. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, for instance, called the letter tantamount to “blackmail”.

But four days later, on January 28, the Justice Department went even further, seizing voting records and ballots in a raid on an election facility in Fulton County, Georgia.

The state has been a sore point for Trump: Georgia voted for a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time in more than two decades during the 2020 race.

At the time, Trump infamously pressured Georgia’s secretary of state to “find more votes” following his loss. He has spread rumours about fraud in Georgia’s election system ever since.

Local officials condemned the January raid as a “flagrant constitutional violation”, saying in a lawsuit that an affidavit submitted by the FBI to obtain a search warrant relied on hypotheticals.

In other words, it failed to establish probable cause that any crime had occurred, Fulton County officials argued.

That affidavit also revealed the investigation was the direct result of a referral from Kurt Olsen, who was appointed to a White House role as Trump’s head of election security in October.

Before entering the White House, Olsen led unsuccessful legal challenges to the 2020 election results, in what Trump dubbed the “Stop the Steal” campaign.

Fulton County officials noted “multiple courts have sanctioned Olsen for his unsubstantiated, speculative claims about elections”.

What is Tulsi Gabbard’s role?

The apparent role of Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, in the election investigations has also raised questions.

Gabbard was present at the Fulton County raid, with Trump later telling reporters that she was “working very hard on trying to keep the election safe”.

Who authorised her presence, however, was the subject of contradictory statements from the Trump administration.

Gabbard said she had been sent on behalf of Trump, even though the president attempted to distance himself from the raid. The Justice Department later said Bondi had requested Gabbard’s presence. Gabbard finally said both Trump and Bondi had asked her to attend.

Whatever the case, Traugott, the political scientist, said that her presence at the scene was highly unusual.

“The director of national intelligence has been associated with observation and information gathering from foreign countries, not from domestic entities,” Traugott explained. “So historically, this is without precedent”.

In a statement, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said he was concerned that Gabbard had exceeded the powers of her office. He said the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, where he is vice chairman, had not been briefed on any “foreign intelligence nexus” related to the Fulton County raid.

Either Gabbard was flouting her responsibility to keep the committee informed, Warner said, or she is “injecting the nonpartisan intelligence community she is supposed to be leading into a domestic political stunt designed to legitimize conspiracy theories that undermine our democracy”.

Gabbard, who is expected to testify before the Senate committee in March, responded in early February that she had been acting under her “broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate, and analyse intelligence related to election security”.

She maintained her office would “not irresponsibly share incomplete intelligence assessments concerning foreign or other malign interference in US elections”.

Voter ID law

But it’s not just executive agencies like the Department of Justice and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence pushing Trump’s agenda for the midterm races.

Experts say Trump has been angling to use the Republican majorities in Congress to pass restrictive voter laws ahead of November’s election.

Trump has supported a bill, dubbed the SAVE Act, which would require citizens to provide more documentation – such as a passport or a birth certificate – when registering to vote, as well as photo identification when casting a ballot.

Rights groups have long argued that such requirements would disenfranchise some voters who lack access to such materials. As of 2023, the US State Department reported that only 48 percent of US citizens had a valid passport.

The bill would also require states to provide voter lists to the Department of Homeland Security to identify and remove non-citizens, raising concerns about voter privacy.

The legislation, which has been passed by the House, is likely to face an uphill battle in the Senate. It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote.

Even without the legislation, though, Trump has threatened to sign an executive order requiring local election organisers to require voter identification before distributing ballots.

Trump already signed a similar order last March seeking to impose new rules on elections, including voter ID requirements, reviews of electronic voting machines and restrictions on how long votes can be counted.

Nearly all of the provisions have since been blocked by federal judges. The most recent ruling by US District Judge John Chun related to restrictions like tying federal election funding to “proof of citizenship” requirements.

“In granting this relief,” Chun wrote in his decision, “the Court seeks to restore the proper balance of power among the Executive Branch, the states, and Congress envisioned by the Framers.”

VERONA, Italy — In fair Verona, L.A., unofficially, takes the torch.

While the Olympic flag passed from Italy to France at Sunday’s closing ceremony, handing off the Winter Games from Milan-Cortina to the French Alps, the flame will burn next in L.A.

In just over two years, the United States will host the country’s first Summer Games since 1996, welcoming an Olympic movement that is surging in popularity but unsteady in a changing world, as the Games return to Los Angeles for the third time.

The Milan-Cortina Olympics are expected to rake in record TV numbers for NBC. They already produced the most-watched women’s hockey game on record when an average of 5.3 million viewers took in the United States’ thrilling overtime win over Canada. The rivalry game contributed to the largest weekday audience for a Winter Games since 2014 with an average of 26.7 million viewers who also watched U.S. star Alysa Liu win the country’s first Olympic gold medal for women’s singles figure skating in 24 years.

The smiling 20-year-old with horizontal stripes in her hair became a sensation in Milan just as 41-year-old mother of two Elana Meyers Taylor did in Cortina d’Ampezzo after the five-time Olympian won her first gold medal in bobsled, jumping into the arms of her nanny and, through tears, signing to her deaf children, “Mommy won.”

No matter protests, politics or planning hurdles, the Olympics sought to remain a stage for those athletes to shine.

“You showed us what excellence, respect and friendship look like in a world that sometimes forgets these values,” International Olympic Committee President Kirsty Coventry said to the Olympians in her speech while standing on a platform in the stands placed in front of the Italian delegation. “You showed us that the Olympic Games are a place for everyone. A place where sport brings us together.”

After record numbers from the 2024 Paris Summer Games, the Milan-Cortina Games sold 1.3 million tickets, which, accounting for 80% of the expected tickets, was “beyond our expectations,” Milano Cortina 2026 chief executive officer Andrea Varnier said at a news conference. Of the 63% of international fans who attended the Games, the United States, at 14%, bought the second-most tickets.

Fans filled arenas that were finished just in time in Milan. They withstood snowstorms in Livigno, cheered the debut of ski mountaineering in Bormio and held their breath while multiple skiers got airlifted off the downhill course in Cortina.

The most widespread Games in history created distinct pockets of Olympic spirit separated by hours on trains and miles of winding mountain roads. The Olympics that preached harmony finally united in a single city known for love, beauty and grudges. The Milan-Cortina Games represented seemingly every Shakespearean theme.

Athletes got engaged. Sponsors organized hair and makeup sessions in the Olympic villages, which went through an average of 365 kilograms of pasta and 10,000 eggs a day. A cheating scandal rocked curling.

The closing ceremony set at the Roman amphitheater at the heart of the city that inspired “Romeo and Juliet” celebrated the Games as “beauty in action.” But beneath the glittering gold medals, there was pain.

Alpine skier Lindsey Vonn suffered a horrific crash and has already undergone four surgeries on her broken leg. Ukrainian skeleton athlete Vladyslav Heraskevych was disqualified when he refused to compete without his helmet honoring Ukrainian athletes who’ve been killed in the war with Russia.

Artists perform during the closing ceremony of the 2026 Winter Olympics in Verona, Italy.

(Bernat Armangue / Associated Press)

Already holding the weight of their personal dreams, U.S. athletes faced additional pressure answering questions about the country’s political landscape. After freestyle skier Hunter Hess he said he had “mixed emotions” representing the United States at the Olympics, President Trump called the 27-year-old “a real loser” on social media.

Two weeks later, Hess held his thumb and forefinger in the shape of an “L” to his forehead after his first qualifying run.

Athletes pleaded for assistance navigating an onslaught of social media threats as the Olympic spotlight grows with every Games. Coventry said at a news conference last week that the IOC has a safeguarding unit that monitors the organization’s social media platforms for hateful messages. More than 10,000 such comments were taken down during the Paris Games, IOC spokesperson Mark Adams said. The number for the Milan-Cortina Games hadn’t been finalized.

With the largest delegation of any country at the Games, the United States won the second-most medals with 33, including 12 golds, the most Olympic titles for the country at any single Winter Games. The total gold medals surpassed the 10 won in Salt Lake City in 2002, the last time the United States hosted an Olympic Games.

After more than two decades away, the Games will return to the United States twice in the next eight years. L.A. will host the 2028 Games and Utah will have the 2034 Winter Games.

Approaching the final stretch of an 11-year planning period, the L.A. Games confronted another challenge this month when a growing number of local politicians called for LA28 chairman Casey Wasserman’s resignation after racy emails he exchanged with Ghislaine Maxwell were revealed in the Epstein files. After initial hesitation, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and other leaders joined the chorus calling for Wasserman’s dismissal.

But LA28 doubled down on his role. The executive committee of the LA28 board stood by Wasserman after a review from an outside legal firm found that the Hollywood mogul’s relationship with Maxwell “did not go beyond what has already been publicly documented.”

As with his 2026 organizing committee counterpart Giovanni Malago, Wasserman would be expected to deliver speeches in 2028.

Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi has confirmed that further talks between the United States and Iran will take place on Thursday amid spiralling tensions between the two countries.

“Pleased to confirm US-Iran negotiations are now set for Geneva this Thursday, with a positive push to go the extra mile towards finalizing the deal,” Albusaidi said in a social media post on Sunday.

The announcement comes as the US continues to amass military assets in the Middle East, raising concerns about an all-out war against Iran.

Hours before Oman’s announcement, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran was ready to put in place a “full monitoring mechanism” to guarantee the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme and ease tensions.

Asked by Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan why Iran would want to pursue enrichment on its soil rather than buy enriched uranium from abroad, given the US military build-up and risk of an escalation, Araghchi said the issue was a matter of “dignity and pride” for Iranians.

“We have developed this technology by ourselves, by our scientists, and it is very dear to us because we have created it – we have paid a huge expense for that,” he said.

Araghchi cited among the costs two decades of US sanctions, the targeted killings of Iranian scientists, and US-Israeli attacks on nuclear facilities in June.

“We’re not going to give [our nuclear programme] up; there is no legal reason to do that while everything is peaceful and safeguarded” by the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Araghchi said.

As a “committed member” of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which requires non-nuclear-weapon states not to seek or acquire nuclear weapons, Iran is “ready to cooperate with the agency in full”, Araghchi added.

But he stressed that under the treaty, Tehran also has “every right to enjoy a peaceful nuclear energy, including enrichment”.

“Enrichment is a sensitive part of our negotiations. The American team knows about our position, and we know their position. We have already exchanged our concerns, and I think a solution is achievable,” the minister noted.

Enrichment is the process of isolating and garnering a rare variant, or isotope, of uranium that can produce nuclear fission. At low levels, enriched uranium can power electric plants. If enriched to approximately 90 percent, it can be used for nuclear weapons.

US officials, including President Donald Trump, have previously suggested that Washington is seeking “zero enrichment” by Tehran.

Earlier this month, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said any deal with Iran would need to include agreements on ballistic missiles and support for its allies in the region.

Araghchi, however, said on Sunday that Iran was “negotiating only nuclear” at the present time.

“There is no other subject,” he told CBS News, adding that he was optimistic that a deal could be reached.

The second round of nuclear talks concluded in Geneva on February 17. The US and Iran also held indirect talks in Oman earlier this month.

The Iranian delegation is working ahead of the meeting to present a draft that includes “elements which can accommodate both sides’ concerns and interests” to reach a “fast deal”, Araghchi said.

The top Iranian diplomat added the agreement would likely be “better” than the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), negotiated by former US President Barack Obama in 2015.

“There are elements that could be much better than the previous deal,” he said, without elaborating. “Right now, there is no need for too much detail. But we can agree on our nuclear programme to remain peaceful forever and at the same time, for more sanctions [to be] lifted.”

Some observers were less optimistic about the chances of striking a deal. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, told Al Jazeera that Iran is likely to put forward a proposal that goes beyond anything they ever offered, but even that may not be enough.

“Trump has been sold a narrative by the Israelis that portrays Iran far, far weaker than it actually is. As a result, he’s adopting maximalist capitulation positions that are simply unrealistic based on how the power reality actually looks,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.

“Unless this gets corrected, even if the Iranians put forward a very far-leaning proposal that is extremely attractive to the US, Trump may still say no because he’s under the false belief that he can get something even better.”

Lula says he wants to tell US President Trump that Brazil wishes for all countries to be treated ‘equally’.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva says his country does not want a “new Cold War”, ahead of his visit to the United States.

“I want to tell the US President Donald Trump that we don’t want a new Cold War. We don’t want interference in any other country; we want all countries to be treated equally,” Lula told a news conference at the end of his three-day trip to India on Sunday.

The Brazilian president has refused to comment on Friday’s US Supreme Court decision, which struck down many of Trump’s tariffs on goods entering the US. In response to the Supreme Court decision, Trump said that 15 percent levies would replace it under a different law.

Still, Lula said he is “convinced that Brazil-US relations will go back to normalcy after our conversation”, adding that Brazil has only wanted to “live in peace, generate jobs, and improve [the] lives of our people”.

“The world doesn’t need more turbulence; it needs peace,” he added.

Lula said he expects to meet Trump during the first week of March, and his agenda will include trade, immigration, and investment.

While Lula has differed with Trump on issues such as tariffs, Israel’s war on Gaza, the US abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and Trump’s Board of Peace – a group of nations assembled to plan Gaza’s future – US and Brazil ties appear to be mending.

In November, for instance, Trump’s administration exempted key Brazilian exports from the 40 percent tariffs that had been imposed on the country.

Brazil-India

On Saturday, Lula met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the Brazilian leader arrived in New Delhi on Wednesday to attend a summit on AI.

The two leaders agreed to boost cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths, looking to diversify their trade.

Lula and Modi agreed on a non-binding memorandum of understanding on rare earths, which establishes a framework for cooperation, focusing on reciprocal investment, exploration, mining and other issues.

They also agreed on legal frameworks and other topics, including entrepreneurship, health, scientific research and education.

US President Donald Trump has announced a 15 percent across-the-board tariff on all imports.

The move comes just a day after he set tariffs at 10 percent, enraged by a Supreme Court ruling that struck down much of his tariff regime.

Governments across the world, including those that already struck tariff deals with the United States, will be analysing the new policy.

What will the implications be for them? And how is the global economy reacting to Trump’s latest decision?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Deborah Elms – head of trade policy, Hinrich Foundation

Rebecca Christie – senior fellow, Bruegel think tank

Garima Kapoor – deputy head of research, Elara Securities

US President Donald Trump writes on Truth Social that a ‘great hospital boat’ is going to Greenland as he mocks its healthcare system.

Greenland said “no thanks” to US President Donald Trump’s plan to send a hospital ship to the Arctic island after he repeatedly threatened to seize the Danish autonomous territory for “national security” reasons.

Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said in a post on Facebook on Sunday that Trump’s proposal to send the US medical vessel had been “noted”.

“But we have a public healthcare system where treatment is free for citizens. It is a deliberate choice,” Nielsen said, reiterating Greenland remained open to dialogue and cooperation.

“But talk to us instead of just making more or less random outbursts on social media,” he added.

The historically strong bilateral ties after World War II between NATO allies Denmark and the United States have come under severe strain in recent months as Trump ratcheted up talk of a possible US takeover of the mineral-rich and strategically located Arctic island.

Danish Defence Minister Troels Lund Poulsen told Danish broadcaster DR that the population of Greenland “receives the healthcare it needs”.

“They receive it either in Greenland or, if they require specialised treatment, they receive it in Denmark,” he said. “It’s not as if there’s a need for a special healthcare initiative in Greenland.”

On Saturday, Trump said in a post on his Truth Social account – with an AI-generated image of the US Navy vessel the USNS Mercy – that it was on its way to Greenland to treat those being medically neglected.

“We are going to send a great hospital boat to Greenland to take care of the many people who are sick, and not being taken care of there. It’s on the way!!!” Trump wrote.

Trump has repeatedly expressed his interest in the US taking control of Greenland, citing it as a way to secure US national security. However, Greenland and Europe rejected the US desire to take the Arctic island and have upheld Greenlandic sovereignty.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she was “happy to live in a country where access to healthcare is free and equal for all”.

Greenland is a place “where insurance or wealth does not determine whether one receives dignified treatment,” she added in an apparent criticism of the US healthcare system, which is not universal.

Threats to take Greenland ebbed after Trump struck a “framework” deal with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte in January to ensure greater US influence.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

The incident in Florida took place on Sunday when US President Donald Trump was in Washington, DC.

The United States Secret Service ⁠says its agents have shot and killed a man who attempted to break into a secure perimeter at President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

The man, in his 20s, appeared to be armed with a shotgun and fuel can, according to the Secret Service’s communications chief Anthony Guglielmi. He was shot at about 1:30am Sunday morning (06:30 GMT).

Trump was in Washington, DC, not Mar-a-Lago, when the incident took place. No other individuals under Secret Service protection were present, said the agency.

Guglielmi said Secret Service agents and a deputy from the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office confronted the armed individual, whose identity has not yet been disclosed, after he approached Mar-a-Lago’s north gate. The individual was pronounced dead after being shot by law enforcement officials.

“The incident, including the individual’s background, actions, potential motive and the use of force, is under investigation by the FBI, the US Secret Service and the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office,” said Guglielmi.

This is a breaking news story…

Garcia is the new world champion after a unanimous points decision victory against title holder.

Ryan Garcia has won the WBC welterweight title with a dominant unanimous decision over Mario Barrios.

Garcia dropped Barrios in the opening seconds on Saturday night in Las Vegas, Nevada, and controlled the fight with sharp combinations. The 27-year-old stayed patient after the early knockdown and turned more conservative late with a big lead.

The judges scored the fight 119-108, 120-107 and 118-109 for Garcia (25-2, 20 knockouts) of Victorville, California. The Associated Press news agency had it 119-109.

“It feels good to finally be a world champion,” Garcia said. “It’s something I’ve been dreaming of since I was seven years old.”

Garcia already has begun to turn to his future, looking at WBO super lightweight champion Shakur Stevenson and saying he wanted him next.

This was the second underwhelming bout in a row for Barrios (29-3-2, 18 KOs) of San Antonio, Texas, after he was fortunate to escape with a majority draw victory over Manny Pacquiao in July.

The win capped a turbulent stretch for Garcia, including a suspension, fines and other controversies.

In the co-main event, Gary Antuanne Russell kept his title against Andy Hiraoka.

Police say the ex-Purdue University star died of a suspected self-inflicted gunshot wound in his hometown in Indiana.

Rondale Moore, the National Football League (NFL) receiver who suffered season-ending training camp knee injuries in each of the last two years after a standout college career at Purdue and a promising start with the Arizona Cardinals, was found dead on Saturday, authorities say.

Police said Moore, aged 25, died of a suspected self-inflicted gunshot wound. Moore was found dead in the garage of a property in his hometown of New Albany, police chief Todd Bailey said. The death remains under investigation.

Floyd County Coroner Matthew Tomlin confirmed Moore’s death. He said an autopsy would be conducted on Sunday.

After being traded to the Atlanta Falcons in 2024, Moore dislocated his right knee during training camp and never played for them. He signed with the Minnesota Vikings in 2025, but he injured his left knee while returning a punt in their first exhibition game and spent another full season on injured reserve. Moore was so distraught after immediately realising the seriousness of that injury that he slammed his hand down on a cart so hard the sound was audible throughout the stadium.

The Vikings said they had spoken with Moore’s family to offer condolences and support.

“I am devastated by the news of Rondale’s death. While Rondale had been a member of the Vikings for a short time, he was someone we came to know well and care about deeply,” coach Kevin O’Connell said in a statement distributed by the team.

“He was a humble, soft-spoken, and respectful young man who was proud of his Indiana roots. As a player, he was disciplined, dedicated and resilient despite facing adversity multiple times as injuries sidelined him throughout his career. We are all heartbroken by the fact he won’t continue to live out his NFL dream, and we won’t all have a chance to watch him flourish.”

In a statement, the Cardinals said they were “devastated and heartbroken”.

“Our thoughts and deepest condolences are with his family, friends, teammates, and everyone who loved him and had the privilege of knowing such a special person,” the team said in a social media post.

Moore grew up in New Albany, just across the Indiana border from Louisville, Kentucky, and was a first-team All-American as a freshman at Purdue in 2018.

Drafted in the second round by the Cardinals in 2021, Moore had 1,201 receiving yards and three touchdowns, plus 249 rushing yards and one score over three seasons. He served as their primary returner for kickoffs and punts as a rookie before injuries pushed him away from that role.

“Can’t even begin to fathom or process this,” former Cardinals teammate JJ Watt said on social media. “There’s just no way. Way too soon. Way too special. So much left to give. Rest in peace Rondale.”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian says Tehran will not bow to US pressure over nuclear talks, after Donald Trump warned on Thursday that ‘bad things’ will happen if Iran fails to reach a deal within 15 days.

President Donald Trump has said he will raise global tariffs on imported goods to 15 percent after the United States Supreme Court struck down his previous trade measures.

The president announced his decision on Saturday, revising an earlier decision to impose a new 10 percent worldwide tariff after the Supreme Court ruling, which triggered immediate concern and responses from governments and markets.

The US top court’s ruling and Trump’s new tariffs have left countries grappling with the legal and economic fallout, raising questions about ongoing agreements, tariff reductions, and the legality of past duties.

Governments are now evaluating how the new levy will affect key industries, investment plans, and trade negotiations, while analysts warn that uncertainty could persist until legal and trade frameworks are clarified.

South Korea

In South Korea, one of the US’s closest allies, the presidential office, Blue House, has released a statement, saying the government will review the trade deal and make decisions in the national interest, casting a question mark over the agreement signed in November last year, which lowered tariffs from 25 to 15 percent in exchange for $350bn in cash and investments from South Korea in the US.

“For major South Korean companies in chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductors, the Supreme Court ruling has been positive: Even if Trump introduces the new 10 percent tariffs under Section 122, they would still pay a lower rate,” said Jack Barton, an Al Jazeera correspondent in Seoul.

“However, exporters of automobiles, more than half of which go to the US, remain subject to the 25 percent tariff, and steel exports are still hit with 50 percent duties under Section 232, which was not affected by the ruling.”

The South Korean government is expected to move cautiously. Exports account for 85 percent of South Korea’s gross domestic product, with the US as the second-largest market.

“Officials have indicated that rapid changes could jeopardise major agreements, including a recent multibillion-dollar shipbuilding deal with the US and other investments,” said Barton.

“While no definitive policy statement has been made yet, the Blue House has said that the trade deal will be under careful review and changes are likely.”

India

India has faced some of the highest US tariffs under Trump’s previous use of emergency trade powers. The president first imposed a 25 percent levy on Indian imports and later added another 25 percent on the country’s purchases of Russian oil, bringing the total to 50 percent.

Earlier this month, the US and India reached a framework trade deal. Trump said Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed to stop buying Russian oil and that US tariffs would be lowered to 18 percent for India’s top exports to the US, including clothing, pharmaceuticals, precious stones, and textiles. Meanwhile, India said it will eliminate or reduce tariffs on all US industrial goods and a range of agricultural products.

According to political economist MK Venu, founding editor of Indian publication, The Wire, “Critics have argued New Delhi should have waited for the US Supreme Court decision before finalising the interim trade deal and even trade analysts previously connected with the government have maintained it would have been wiser to wait for the court verdict.”

Venu added that Trump was eager to finalise the trade deal, which includes a commitment to buy $500bn worth of new imports in defence, energy, and artificial intelligence (AI) from the US over the next five years.

While India, he said, welcomed the reduction of tariffs to 18 percent and the removal of penal duties on Russian imports, uncertainty remains over negotiations, as the Supreme Court ruling affects the legal basis of past tariffs.

“The Indian trade delegation is likely to wait for the final outcome of the Supreme Court verdict before proceeding with further negotiations, and countries around the world are expected to follow the court’s ruling rather than rush into trade agreements under legislation deemed unconstitutional,” he said.

China

China has reacted in a muted way to the Supreme Court ruling, with much of the country still on the Lunar New Year break.

Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride, reporting from Beijing, said, “The Chinese embassy in Washington has issued a blanket statement, noting that trade wars benefit nobody, and that the decision is likely to be broadly welcomed in China, which has long been a primary target of Trump’s tariff policies.”

Since last April, he said, China has faced multiple layers of tariffs, including 10 percent on chemicals used in fentanyl production exported to the US and 100 percent on electric vehicles.

Analysts have estimated that the overall tariff level, about 36 percent, could now fall to about 21 percent, providing some relief to an economy already under strain from the COVID-19 pandemic, a prolonged property market crisis, and declining exports.

Shipments from China to the US have reportedly fallen by roughly a fifth over the past year.

“Beijing has sought to offset losses in the US market by strengthening trade ties with Southeast Asian nations and pursuing agreements with the European Union,” McBride said.

“The Supreme Court ruling may also create a more favourable atmosphere ahead of a planned state visit by Trump in early April, when he is expected to meet President Xi Jinping, potentially opening space for a reset in relations between the world’s two largest economies.”

Canada

Canada has welcomed the US Supreme Court’s decision but has pointed out that there are still some challenges ahead.

Regional leaders across the country, including those of British Columbia and Ontario, have signalled that the ruling is a positive step, according to Al Jazeera’s Ian Wood, reporting from Toronto.

However, Minister for Canada-US trade Dominic LeBlanc has said that significant work remains, as Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminium, softwood lumber, and automobiles have remained in place.

Meanwhile, Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford has added that while optimism has grown, tension has persisted over what Donald Trump will do next, Wood said.

Mexico

Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, said her government would be carefully reviewing the Supreme Court’s decision to assess its scope and the extent to which Mexico might be affected.

“The reality is that despite all we’ve heard over the last year about tariffs or the threat of tariffs, Mexico has actually ended up in quite a privileged, even competitive position, especially when compared to other countries,” said Al Jazeera’s Julia Gliano, reporting from Mexico City.

“We have to remember Mexico is the US’s largest trading partner, and the two countries, along with Canada, share a vast trading agreement that shields most products from the so-called reciprocal tariffs that President Trump announced.

“There were also punitive tariffs related to fentanyl and illegal immigration along the US border, which Mexico had managed to suspend while negotiations continued on those matters. Now the tariffs that Mexico has been subjected to on steel, aluminium, and car parts are not affected by today’s decision.”

So, the government here in Mexico, she said, is now standing by to see what the Trump administration comes up with next as it reels from today’s decision by the Supreme Court.

France

French President Emmanuel Macron hailed “the existence of checks and balances in democracies” after the Supreme Court’s decision, telling reporters at an event in the capital that his country wanted to continue exporting “under the fairest rules possible and not be subject to unilateral decisions”.

The country’s finance minister, Nicolas Forissier, told UK newspaper The Financial Times that the EU has the tools to hit back at the US over its tariff policy, suggesting a more combative approach.

Germany

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he expected the tariff burden on his country’s economy to be lower after the US Supreme Court ruling, raising the prospect of German companies recouping billions in refunds.

Flagging an upcoming visit to Washington, Merz told Germany’s ARD broadcaster that he would present a “coordinated European position” on the matter, pointing out that tariff policy is determined by the European Union rather than individual member states.

Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said Europe was strengthening its independence and sovereignty, building new trade relationships worldwide and concluding free trade agreements.

Limits of Trump’s tariff powers

A senior legal scholar told Al Jazeera that the US Supreme Court ruling marks a key moment in the legal battle over Trump’s tariffs, focusing on constitutional limits rather than economics.

Frank Bowman, professor emeritus at the University of Missouri School of Law, told Al Jazeera that the court has for the first time confronted what he called Trump’s broader challenge to the rule of law.

“This is a ruling that is important in several respects. The first, more broadly, is that this is the first time in the last year that the Supreme Court has stepped in and attempted to do something about Donald Trump’s generalised attack on the rule of law in the United States.

“And make no mistake, although tariffs certainly are about economics, what Trump has done over the last year is essentially to defy the law. And the Supreme Court happily decided that they had had enough and that they would say no. So, they’re not ruling on economic policy. They made a decision that the president simply exceeded his constitutional authority.”

United States President Donald Trump has doubled down on his new global tariffs, raising them from 10 to 15 percent, days after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping levies on imports.

The move on Saturday came as businesses and governments around the world sought repayment for the estimated $133bn that Washington has already collected.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump announced the raise “effective immediately” and said the move was based on a review of the “ridiculous, poorly written and extraordinarily anti-American decision” issued by the Supreme Court on Friday.

By a six-to-three vote, the court had ruled that it was unconstitutional for Trump to unilaterally set and change tariffs, because the power to tax lies with the US Congress.

The court’s decision struck down tariffs that Trump had imposed on nearly every country using an emergency powers law, known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Trump railed against the majority justices as “fools and lapdogs” in a news conference after the ruling, calling them an “embarrassment to their families”. He quickly signed an executive order – resting on a different statute, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 – to impose the blanket 10 percent tariff, starting on Tuesday.

The 15 percent hike announced on Saturday is the highest rate allowed under that law.

However, those tariffs are limited to 150 days unless they are extended by Congress. No president has previously invoked Section 122, and its use could lead to further legal challenges.

It was not immediately clear whether an updated executive order was forthcoming.

The White House said the Section 122 tariffs include exemptions for certain products, including critical minerals, metals and energy products, according to the Reuters news agency.

Lawsuits

Trump wrote on Saturday that his administration will continue to work on issuing other permissible tariffs.

“During the next short number of months, the Trump Administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs, which will continue our extraordinarily successful process of Making America Great Again,” he said.

The president has already said his administration intends to rely on two other statutes that permit import taxes on specific products or countries based on investigations into national ‌security or unfair trade practices.

Tariffs have been central to Trump’s economic agenda, which he has used as a tool to address a range of goals – from reviving domestic manufacturing to pressuring other nations to crack down on drug trafficking, and pushing warring countries toward peace.

He has also wielded tariffs, or the threat of them, as leverage to extract trade concessions from foreign governments.

Federal data shows the US Treasury had collected more than $133bn from the import taxes the president has imposed under the emergency powers law as of December.

Since the Supreme Court’s ruling, more than a thousand lawsuits have been filed by importers in the US to seek refunds, and more cases are on the way.

While legally sound, the path forward for such claims is not straightforward, especially for smaller firms, said John Diamond, director of the Center for Tax and Budget Policy at Rice University.

“It’s pretty clear that they will win in court, but it’ll take some time,” Diamond said. “Once we get the court orders in effect, I don’t think those refunds will be all that messy for larger firms. Smaller firms are going to have a much more difficult time getting through the process.”

But foreign governments are managing “the real mess”, Diamond said.

“What do you do if you’re Taiwan, or Great Britain, and you have this existing trade deal, but now it’s kind of been turned upside down?”

The US-Taiwan trade deal lowers the general tariff on Taiwanese goods from 20 percent to 15 percent, the same level as Asian trade partners South Korea and Japan, in exchange for Taipei agreeing to buy about $85bn of US energy, aircraft and equipment.

The US-United Kingdom deal imposes a 10 percent tariff on imports of most UK goods, and reduces higher tariffs on imports of UK cars, steel and aluminium.

‘Pickpocketing the American people’

After ⁠the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump’s trade representative, Jamieson Greer, told Fox News on Friday that those countries must honour their agreements ⁠even if they call for higher rates than the Section 122 tariffs.

Exports to the US from countries such as Malaysia and Cambodia would continue to be taxed at their negotiated rates of 19 percent, even though the universal rate is lower, Greer said.

Indonesia’s chief negotiator for US tariffs, Airlangga Hartarto, said the trade deal between the countries that set US tariffs at 19 percent, which was signed on Friday, remains in force despite the court decision.

The ‌ruling could spell good news for countries like Brazil, which has not negotiated a deal with Washington to lower its 40 percent tariff rate but could now see its tariff rate drop to 15 percent, at least temporarily.

Governments around the world have reacted to the Supreme Court decision – as well as Trump’s subsequent tariff announcement – with a mix of cautious optimism, trepidation and frustration.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he would coordinate a joint European stance before talks with Trump in early March, while Hong Kong’s secretary for financial services and the Treasury, Christopher Hiu, described the situation surrounding Trump’s new tariff moves as a “fiasco”.

With the November midterm elections in the US looming, Trump’s approval rating on his handling of the economy has steadily declined during his year in office.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Monday showed 34 percent of ‌respondents ‌saying they approved of Trump’s handling of the economy, while 57 percent said they did not approve.

Democrats, who need to flip only three Republican-held seats in the US House of Representatives in November to win a majority, have blamed Trump’s tariffs for exacerbating the rising cost of living.

They were quick to condemn Trump’s new tariff threat on Saturday.

Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee accused Trump of “pickpocketing the American people” with his newly announced higher tariff.

“A little over 24 hours after his tariffs were ruled illegal, he’s doing anything he can to make sure he can still jack up your costs,” they wrote on social media.

California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, a Trump nemesis, added that “he [Trump] does not care about you”.

Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, denounce US ambassador’s remarks suggesting Israel has right to much of the Middle East.

United States Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has triggered an avalanche of criticism from Arab and Muslim countries after suggesting Israel has a right to expand its territory across a large swath of the Middle East.

Huckabee delivered the remarks during a sit-down interview with US commentator Tucker Carlson, broadcast on Friday, as he was pressed about the geographical borders of Israel.

Carlson asked Huckabee, a self-professed Christian Zionist and staunch supporter of Israel, to clarify his stance on the Biblical promise of the land spanning the area between the Euphrates River in Iraq and the Nile River in Egypt to the descendants of Abraham, and if the modern Israeli state had the right to claim that lineage.

“It would be fine if they took it all,” said Huckabee.

Such territory would encompass modern-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and parts of Saudi Arabia.

The US ambassador later appeared to walk back the claim, saying it was “somewhat of a hyperbolic statement”. He also said Israel was not looking to expand its territory and has a right to security in the land it currently holds.

‘Extremist rhetoric’

Huckabee’s comments sparked immediate backlash from neighbouring Egypt and Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and the League of Arab States, which in separate statements called them “extremist”, “provocative” and “not in line with Washington’s official position”.

Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry described Huckabee’s comments as “extremist rhetoric” and “unacceptable”, and called for the US Department of State to provide clarification.

Egypt’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the remarks a “blatant violation” of international law, adding that “Israel has no sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian territory or other Arab lands.”

Jordan’s foreign ministry dismissed them as “absurd and provocative,” a violation of diplomatic norms and “an infringement on the sovereignty of states in the region”.

“Statements of this nature — extremist and lacking any sound basis — serve only to inflame sentiments and stir religious and national emotions”, the League of Arab States also said in a statement.

Huckabee, whom US President Donald Trump nominated as ambassador in 2024, has long opposed the idea of a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinian people, and denied the existence of an illegal Israeli occupation of the West Bank. Back in 2008, Huckabee went so far as to question Palestinian identity altogether, saying, “There’s really no such thing as a Palestinian.”

In 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is illegal and must cease immediately.

But Israeli law does not clearly demarcate the country’s borders. Israel also occupies the Golan Heights in Syria, which it illegally annexed in 1981.

The US is the only country that recognises Israel’s claimed sovereignty over the Syrian territory, and only since 2019, during Trump’s first term as president.

After its 2024 war with Hezbollah, Israel also set up military outposts in five points inside Lebanon.

Some Israeli politicians, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have openly promoted the idea of a “Greater Israel” with expanded borders.

US President Donald Trump’s tariff regime has been ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court, removing a central policy plank of his second term.

Trump’s promised replacement tariffs will take effect within days.

What is the impact of the court’s ruling? And how will it play out internationally?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Melanie Brusseler – US programme director at the think tank Common Wealth

James Davis – founder and president of Touchdown Strategies and Republican adviser

Claire Finkelstein – Algernon Biddle professor of law and philosophy, University of Pennsylvania

Artemis 2 is a precursor to the US space agency’s planned astronaut moon landing with Artemis III scheduled for 2028.

NASA chief Jared Isaacman says Artemis 2 – the first crewed flyby mission to the moon in more than 50 years – will not launch next month because of technical problems.

Workers detected an issue with helium flow to the massive Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that will “take the March launch window out of consideration”, Issacman said in a post on social media Saturday.

Solid helium flow is essential for purging the rocket’s engines and pressurising its fuel tanks.

“I understand people are disappointed by this development. That disappointment is felt most by the team at NASA who have been working tirelessly to prepare for this great endeavor,” Isaacman said.

NASA’s next opportunity for the launch would be at the beginning or end of April.

The US space agency hopes to put humans back on the moon as China forges ahead with a rival effort that is targeting 2030 at the latest for its first crewed mission.

China’s uncrewed Chang’e 7 mission is expected to be launched in 2026 for an exploration of the moon’s south pole, and testing of its crewed spacecraft Mengzhou is also set to go ahead this year.

Multiple postponements

NASA surprised many late last year when it said Artemis 2 could happen as soon as February – an acceleration explained by the administration of US President Donald Trump’s wish to beat China to the punch.

But the programme has been plagued by delays. The uncrewed Artemis 1 mission took place in November 2022 after multiple postponements and two failed launch attempts.

Then, technical problems in early February – which included a liquid hydrogen leak – cut short a so-called wet dress rehearsal for the Artemis 2 launch. That was finally completed earlier this week.

The wet dress rehearsal was conducted under real conditions – with full rocket tanks and technical checks – at Cape Canaveral in Florida, with engineers practising the manoeuvres needed to carry out an actual launch.

The space agency revealed the latest technical problem just one day after targeting March 6 for the launch of the Artemis 2 mission.

The towering SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft will be rolled back into the Vehicle Assembly Building at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida to investigate the technical issues and make any necessary repairs, Isaacman said. He said a bad filter, valve, or connection plate could be to blame for the stalled helium flow.

Isaacman added that a complete briefing will follow in the coming days.

The goal of the Artemis 2 mission, a 10-day flight around the moon and back, is to “explore the Moon for scientific discovery, economic benefits, and to build the foundation for the first crewed missions to Mars”, according to NASA.

The planned Artemis 2 crew includes three US astronauts – Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch – and Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen. The mission is poised to be the farthest human flight into space ever, and the first crewed moon mission since the US Apollo programme more than half a century ago.

Artemis 2 is a precursor to NASA’s planned astronaut moon landing with Artemis 3, which is scheduled for 2028.