Trump Power

Tehran has not been bombed into submission, leaving America unable to enforce its demands without a ground war that it does not wantHas Iran won a war it didn’t start against the United States? It is not a victory in any conventional military sense: about 3,500 Iranians have been reported killed and the US-led bombing has caused anywhere between $150bn and $270bn of damage.Yet Donald Trump’s decision to pause, rather than intensify, the 13-night summer bombing campaign in effect represents a degree of recognition that the US cannot achieve its stated goals by military power alone. Continue reading...

• The Trump administration is attempting to seize control of election powers through a multifaceted blitz to overhaul voting rules, sparking warnings from US courts, state officials, and Democrats. • Senator Markwayne Mullin escalated the conflict by threatening local election officials with jail time if they fail to comply with the administration's policy changes. • Critics, including voting experts and former Justice Department officials, argue these moves are dangerous political exercises designed to boost Trump's power and ensure GOP control of Congress.

US courts, state officials and Democrats warn that moves are endangering voting rights and the rule of lawThe Trump administration continues to expand its authoritarian and radical drive to revamp voting rules and seize state election powers, though it faces growing resistance from US courts, state officials and Democrats, who warn the moves are sparking “chaos” and endangering voting rights and the rule of law.Donald Trump’s unprecedented drive to change election rules, which states legally set, is fueled by his obsession with his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, which he falsely attributes to voting fraud, coupled with his fear that Democrats will “find a reason to impeach me” if they take control of the House in November’s midterms elections, say former election officials and legal experts. Continue reading...

Resolution, which comes after similar one in June, is largely symbolic, as Trump administration says it’s unconstitutionalUS politics live – latest updatesThe US House of Representatives on Thursday for the second time passed a war powers resolution directing Donald Trump to withdraw the US military from the conflict with Iran, amid renewed fighting in the Middle East that has driven oil prices to their highest levels in weeks.The resolution proposed by Democrat Pramila Jayapal passed by a 214-208 vote, with four Republicans joining all Democrats in attendance to vote in favor. Continue reading...

• Iran has responded to warnings from U.S. President Donald Trump, who stated that any attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz would trigger U.S. strikes on Iranian bridges and power plants. • Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei asserted that the Strait of Hormuz will never return to pre-war conditions following these threats. • Baqaei further condemned potential U.S. attacks on "peaceful nuclear facilities," claiming such actions would violate international law and the U.N. Charter.

• Donald Trump has vowed to retaliate against Iran by targeting a bridge or power plant every time Tehran strikes ships in the Strait of Hormuz. • Iran has accused the U.S. of using the suspected underground nuclear site at Pickaxe Mountain as a pretext for further military aggression. • Separately, a potential 30-year deal involving U.S. technology and expertise to develop Saudi Arabia's nuclear program may be announced as early as Wednesday.

US president says he will knock out all Iran’s power plants and bridges next week in bid to force Tehran to agree to a dealMiddle East crisis – live updatesPresident Donald Trump has threatened to expand US strikes on Iran next week to target power plants and bridges if Tehran does not agree to a deal amid a continuing dispute over the strait of Hormuz.“Next week it gets really bad for them because next week comes the power plants. Next week comes the bridges,” Trump said in a Fox News interview on Tuesday. “We’re going to knock out all their power plants. We’re going to knock out all their bridges unless they get to the table and negotiate.” Continue reading...

• The Supreme Court concluded a divisive term that significantly expanded the executive powers of President Donald Trump. • In a key 6-3 ruling, the court decided that federal courts lack the authority to review the president's decisions regarding the termination of temporary humanitarian protections for individuals from Haiti and Syria. • This shift is critical as it removes judicial oversight from several important administrative decisions, effectively shielding presidential actions from legal challenges.

• The Supreme Court concluded a divisive term marked by several rulings that expanded the executive power of President Donald Trump. • In a 6-3 majority decision, the court ruled that federal courts lack the authority to review the president's decisions regarding the termination of temporary humanitarian protections for people from Haiti and Syria. • This outcome is significant as it effectively removes judicial oversight from specific presidential actions, limiting the ability of courts to challenge executive mandates.

• The Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. Slaughter, effectively endorsing the "unitary executive theory" and significantly expanding the legal powers of the U.S. president. • This judicial approval grants the executive branch greater autonomy and control over government functions, reducing the constraints previously placed on presidential authority. • Political science scholars warn that this shift is one of the most consequential constitutional developments in decades, as it threatens to upend traditional American governance and the system of checks and balances.

• The Supreme Court issued a series of rulings that delivered mixed results for President Trump's agenda, granting him some expansive powers while blocking other initiatives. • A key decision loosened campaign finance rules, which analysts suggest will provide a strategic advantage to Republicans over Democrats. • These legal developments occur as Trump faces low approval ratings and public frustration over elevated gas prices ahead of upcoming elections.

• The Supreme Court issued several rulings that resulted in legal losses for President Trump by determining his actions conflicted with federal law. • Despite these specific setbacks, a series of other decisions by the court's conservative majority significantly expanded the scope of presidential power. • This legal shift is critical as it alters the balance of authority between the executive branch and federal statutory constraints.

• The Supreme Court has delivered a mixed set of rulings on President Trump's agenda, granting him more expansive powers while blocking specific initiatives. • In February, the court ruled against the president regarding his use of tariffs, prompting Trump to publicly label the dissenting conservative justices as "disloyal." • While Trump views tariffs as essential tools for global negotiations, polling suggests voters are less supportive of these policies.

• The U.S. Supreme Court concluded its nine-month term on July 1 by issuing rulings on three major cases, including a significant loss for Donald Trump regarding birthright citizenship. • The Court rejected Trump's attempt to narrow the definition of who is considered a U.S. citizen upon being born in the United States. • Conversely, the Court previously granted Trump a level of power that dissenting justices argued exceeded that of historical English monarchs.

• The Supreme Court has issued several rulings that broaden presidential power, despite some setbacks regarding tariffs and birthright citizenship. • The court upheld the ability of immigration agents to turn asylum seekers away before they reach U.S. soil, effectively bypassing laws that allow individuals to apply for safety. • In a separate decision, the court sided with Vice President JD Vance and other Republicans to remove restrictions on electoral spending, permitting unlimited donations from wealthy donors to political parties.

• The U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in the Slaughter case that critics argue grants the presidency expanded, untrammeled power. • The decision is framed as a dangerous precedent that could allow a president to weaponize regulatory and law enforcement agencies against political opponents. • This legal shift is compared to democratic backsliding seen in other nations, such as Israel, where the Supreme Court recently intervened to protect the Attorney General from political interference by Benjamin Netanyahu.

• The US Supreme Court concluded its term with a series of rulings that provided significant advantages to Donald Trump and the Republican Party. • The court loosened campaign finance restrictions and spending limits, potentially benefiting the GOP, which holds over $125 million compared to a debt-ridden Democratic Party. • In April, six conservative justices struck down a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling that congressional districts designed to increase minority voting power are unconstitutional.

• The Supreme Court issued several rulings regarding Donald Trump's agenda, balancing the expansion of presidential authority with significant legal setbacks. • The Court rejected the government's attempt to fire Federal Reserve official Cook, ruling that doing so would improperly transform "for-cause protection" into "at-will employment" and threaten central bank independence. • In a separate decision, the Court ruled that states may count mail-in ballots cast by Election Day even if they arrive later, dismissing a GOP challenge to Mississippi's specific ballot laws.

Today is the final day for the supreme court to lay out the last rulings of its nine-month termHello, and welcome to the US politics live blog.In a significant victory for the president on Monday, the court granted him the ability to fire leaders of some independent US agencies at will, in a move one advocacy group called “disastrous.” Continue reading...

• The Supreme Court has issued a ruling allowing President Donald Trump to fire agency heads, marking a significant expansion of presidential executive power. • Separately, federal law enforcement is coordinating a massive security operation in Washington D.C. to protect hundreds of thousands of visitors attending the America 250 celebrations. • These security measures are heightened due to rising political violence and recent assassination attempts targeting the president.

• The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that President Donald Trump cannot currently fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from her position. • The court returned the "Cook Lawsuit," which challenged her suitability for the Federal Reserve Board, based on strictly procedural grounds. • Trump responded on Truth Social, stating he will take "appropriate action immediately" to ensure those who have committed wrongdoing do not make vital national decisions.

• President Trump praised a recent Supreme Court ruling that expands presidential authority over the executive branch. • The decision allows the president to remove executive branch officers and agency appointees, overturning previous legal precedents. • This shift significantly increases the president's control over federal agencies and the personnel who lead them.

• The Supreme Court issued twin rulings clarifying the extent of President Trump's authority to remove independent regulators from their positions. • The Court ruled that the President may fire certain independent regulators for any reason, significantly expanding executive power over administrative agencies. • However, the justices affirmed the independence of the Federal Reserve, ruling that its governors cannot be dismissed at will.

• Liberal Supreme Court justices issued a blistering dissent against a ruling that expands the president's authority to fire regulators, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor comparing the power to that of the "English crown." • The decision sparks concerns over the independence of federal agencies, though Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook emphasized that the central bank must remain free from political interference to ensure sound economic stewardship. • In a separate victory for Democrats, the Court ruled in Watson v. Republican National Committee that ballots mailed on time can be counted even if they arrive after Election Day.

Legal and labor experts say Trump v Slaughter decision upends settled constitutional law in favor of ‘loyalty test’As a reality TV show host, Donald Trump rose to fame with the catchphrase: “You’re fired!” On Monday, the US supreme court handed him – and all future presidents – the power to fire leaders of independent agencies or commissions, overturning 90 years of court precedent curbing executive power.While Trump celebrated the decision on Truth Social as a “big win”, labor advocates, unions, and consumer advocacy groups criticized the supreme court decision on the case, Trump v Slaughter, and warned of the long-term impacts for democracy in the US.Court rules Trump can fire leaders of independent agenciesCourt rules geofence warrants require constitutional privacy protectionsCourt rules Trump’s firing of Lisa Cook from Fed was unconstitutionalCourt upholds law to count mail-in ballots arriving after election dayCourt rejects Trump’s bid to appeal $5m E Jean Carroll Continue reading...

• The Supreme Court ruled on Monday, June 29, 2026, that the president has the authority to fire the heads of independent agencies without cause. • The decision specifically allows President Donald Trump to remove Democratic member Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission, whom he fired last year. • This ruling strikes down a nearly century-old legal precedent designed to protect independent agencies from executive political influence.

• The Supreme Court issued a ruling that strengthens President Trump’s authority to fire independent agency members, a move Trump described as a historic expansion of presidential power. • Despite this broader authority, the Court specifically protected Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, ruling that Fed governors can only be fired "for cause" rather than for any reason. • This decision is significant as Trump seeks to transform the U.S. government by replacing independent officials with political allies to ensure executive control.

• The Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump cannot fire Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook, protecting her position within the central bank. • Conversely, the Court granted the president broader authority to remove officials from other independent agencies, specifically green-lighting the firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. • This split decision balances the independence of the Federal Reserve against the president's desire for greater executive control over various federal regulatory bodies.