|
|
|
Japan’s trade minister fails to win US assurances on tariff exemptions
Legal Business |
2025/03/10 10:41
|
Japan’s trade minister said this week that he has failed to win assurances from U.S. officials that the key U.S. ally will be exempt from tariffs, some of which take effect on Wednesday.
Yoji Muto was in Washington for last ditch negotiations over the tariffs on a range of Japanese exports including cars, steel and aluminum.
Muto said Monday in Washington that Japan, which contributes to the U.S. economy by heavily investing and creating jobs in the United States, “should not be subject to” 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum and auto exports to America.
His meetings with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett came just two days before the steel and aluminum tariffs are due to take effect. President Donald Trump has also said a possible 25% tariff on imported foreign autos could take effect in early April.
Muto said the U.S. officials acknowledged Japanese contributions and agreed to continue talks, but did not approve his request for Japan’s exemption from the steep import duties.
“We did not receive a response that Japan will be exempt,” Muto told reporters. “We must continue to assert our position.”
As Trump’s tariff threats have triggered tensions and vows of retaliation from Canada, Mexico and China, Japan has been working to firm up ties with other countries.
Last week, the foreign and trade ministers from Japan and Britain gathered in Tokyo for their first “two-plus-two” economic dialogue. They agreed to stand up for “fair, rules-based international trade,” though nobody directly mentioned Trump.
Japan depends heavily on exports and the auto tariffs would hurt, because vehicles are its biggest export and the United States is their top destination.
“Clearly companies in Japan are very concerned,” said Rintaro Nishimura, political analyst and associate at Japan Practice of The Asia Group. “Obviously the auto is the crown jewel for Japan, especially in the context of these tariffs.” He says they are concerned also because the Trump administration is carrying it out in just two months after taking office.
Trump also has criticized Japan’s contributions to the two countries’ mutual defense arrangements, adding to tensions with Tokyo.
Muto said the two sides agreed to keep discussing to find ways to establish a “win-win” relationship that would serve national interests of both countries.
The two sides also discussed energy cooperation, including joint development of liquefied natural gas reserves in Alaska, which Trump and Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba agreed on during Ishiba’s visit to the White House in February. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
180 fired CDC employees received emails asking them to come back to work
Legal Business |
2025/03/02 23:19
|
The nation’s top public health agency says about 180 employees who were laid off two weeks ago can come back to work.
Emails went out Tuesday to some Centers for Disease Control and Prevention probationary employees who got termination notices last month, according to current and former CDC employees.
A message seen by the AP was sent with the subject line, “Read this e-mail immediately.” It said that “after further review and consideration,” a Feb. 15 termination notice has been rescinded and the employee was cleared to return to work on Wednesday. “You should return to duty under your previous work schedule,” it said. “We apologize for any disruption that this may have caused.”
About 180 people received reinstatement emails, according to two federal health officials who were briefed on the tally but were not authorized to discuss it and spoke on condition of anonymity.
It’s not clear how many of the reinstated employees returned to work Wednesday. And it’s also unclear whether the employees would be spared from widespread job cuts that are expected soon across government agencies.
The CDC is the latest federal agency trying to coax back workers soon after they were dismissed as part of President Donald Trump’s and billionaire Elon Musk’s cost-cutting purge. Similar reversals have been made among employees responsible for medical device oversight, food safety, bird flu response, nuclear weapons and national parks.
The Atlanta-based CDC is charged with protecting Americans from outbreaks and other public health threats. Before the job cuts, the agency had about 13,000 employees.
Last month, Trump administration officials told the CDC that nearly 1,300 of the agency’s probationary employees would be let go. That tally quickly changed, as the number who actually got termination notices turned out to be 700 to 750.
With 180 more people now being told they can return, the actual number of CDC employees terminated so far would seem to stand somewhere around 550. But federal health officials haven’t confirmed any specifics.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last month pledged “ radical transparency ” at the department, but HHS officials have not provided detail about CDC staff changes and did not respond to emailed requests on Tuesday and Wednesday. An agency spokesman, Andrew Nixon, previously told the AP only that CDC had more full-time employees after the job cuts than it did before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Those who received reinstatement emails included outbreak responders in two fellowship programs — a two-year training that prepares recent graduates to enter the public health workforce through field experience and a laboratory program that brings in doctorate-holding professionals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Troubled electric vehicle maker Nikola files for bankruptcy protection
Legal Business |
2025/02/23 18:28
|
Troubled electric vehicle maker Nikola has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection months after saying that it would likely run out of cash early this year.
Nikola was a hot start-up and rising star on Wall Street before becoming enmeshed in scandal and its founder was convicted in 2022 for misleading investors about the Arizona company’s technology.
At the trial of founder Trevor Milton, prosecutors say a company video of a prototype truck appearing to be driven down a desert highway was actually a video of a nonfunctioning Nikola that had been rolled down a hill.
But the hype around the company was immense. In 2020, Nikola was valued at around $30 billion, exceeding the market capitalization of Ford Motor Co.
Nikola filed for protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and said Wednesday that it has also filed a motion seeking approval to pursue an auction and sale of the business.
The company has about $47 million in cash on hand. rolled
Nikola Corp. plans to to continue limited service and support operations for vehicles on the road, including fueling operations through the end of March, subject to court approval. The company said that it will need to raise more funding to support those types of activities after that time.
“Like other companies in the electric vehicle industry, we have faced various market and macroeconomic factors that have impacted our ability to operate,” CEO Steve Girsky said in a statement.
The executive said the company has made efforts in recent months to raise funds and reduce liabilities and preserve cash, but that it hasn’t been enough.
“The Board has determined that Chapter 11 represents the best possible path forward under the circumstances,” Girsky said.
In December 2023 founder Trevor Milton was sentenced to four years in prison after being convicted of exaggerating claims about his company’s production of zero-emission 18-wheel trucks, leading to sizeable losses for investors.
Milton was convicted of fraud charges, portrayed by prosecutors as a con man six years after he had founded the company in a basement in Utah.
Prosecutors said Milton falsely claimed to have built its own revolutionary truck that was actually a General Motors product with Nikola’s logo stamped onto it.
Called as a government witness, Nikola’s CEO testified that Milton “was prone to exaggeration” when pitching his venture to investors.
Milton resigned in 2020 amid reports of fraud that sent Nikola’s stock prices into a tailspin. Investors suffered heavy losses as reports questioned Milton’s claims that the company had already produced zero-emission 18-wheel trucks.
The company paid $125 million in 2021 to settle a civil case against it by the SEC. Nikola didn’t admit any wrongdoing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A federal judge temporarily blocks Trump’s executive order
Legal Business |
2025/01/28 02:12
|
A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order denying U.S. citizenship to the children of parents living in the country illegally, calling it “blatantly unconstitutional” during the first hearing in a multi-state effort challenging the order.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution promises citizenship to those born on U.S. soil, a measure ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for former slaves after the Civil War. But in an effort to curb unlawful immigration, Trump issued the executive order just after being sworn in for his second term on Monday.
The order would deny citizenship to those born after Feb. 19 whose parents are in the country illegally. It also forbids U.S. agencies from issuing any document or accepting any state document recognizing citizenship for such children.Trump’s order drew immediate legal challenges across the country, with at least five lawsuits being brought by 22 states and a number of immigrants rights groups. A lawsuit brought by Washington, Arizona, Oregon and Illinois was the first to get a hearing.
“I’ve been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is,” U.S. District Judge John Coughenour told a Justice Department attorney. “This is a blatantly unconstitutional order.”
Thursday’s decision prevents the Trump administration from taking steps to implement the executive order for 14 days. In the meantime, the parties will submit further arguments about the merits of Trump’s order. Coughenour scheduled a hearing on Feb. 6 to decide whether to block it long term as the case proceeds.
Coughenour, 84, a Ronald Reagan appointee who was nominated to the federal bench in 1981, grilled the DOJ attorney, Brett Shumate, asking whether Shumate personally believed the order was constitutional.
“I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that this is a constitutional order,” he added.
Shumate assured the judge he did — “absolutely.” He said the arguments the Trump administration is making now have never previously been litigated, and that there was no reason to issue a 14-day temporary restraining order when it would expire before the executive order takes effect.
The Department of Justice later said in a statement that it will “vigorously defend” the president’s executive order, which it said “correctly interprets the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.”
“We look forward to presenting a full merits argument to the Court and to the American people, who are desperate to see our Nation’s laws enforced,” the department said.
The U.S. is among about 30 countries where birthright citizenship — the principle of jus soli or “right of the soil” — is applied. Most are in the Americas, and Canada and Mexico are among them.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, in the aftermath of the Civil War, to ensure citizenship for former slaves and free African Americans. It states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Trump’s order asserts that the children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Arguing for the states on Thursday, Washington assistant attorney general Lane Polozola called that “absurd,” noting that neither those who have immigrated illegally nor their children are immune from U.S. law.
“Are they not subject to the decisions of the immigration courts?” Polozola asked. “Must they not follow the law while they are here?”
Polozola also said the restraining order was warranted because, among other reasons, the executive order would immediately start requiring the states to spend millions to revamp health care and benefits systems to reconsider an applicant’s citizenship status.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump suspends US foreign assistance for 90 days pending reviews
Legal Business |
2025/01/24 10:13
|
President Donald Trump signed an executive order temporarily suspending all U.S. foreign assistance programs for 90 days pending reviews to determine whether they are aligned with his policy goals.
It was not immediately clear how much assistance would initially be affected by the Monday order as funding for many programs has already been appropriated by Congress and is obligated to be spent, if not already spent.
The order, among many Trump signed on his first day back in office, said the “foreign aid industry and bureaucracy are not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values” and “serve to destabilize world peace by promoting ideas in foreign countries that are directly inverse to harmonious and stable relations internal to and among countries.”
Consequently, Trump declared that “no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio told members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during his confirmation hearing last week that “every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions:
“Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?” he said.
The order signed by Trump leaves it up to Rubio or his designee to make such determinations, in consultation with the Office of Management and Budget. The State Department and the U.S. Agency for
International Development are the main agencies that oversee foreign assistance.
Trump has long railed against foreign aid despite the fact that such assistance typically amounts to roughly 1% of the federal budget, except under unusual circumstances such as the billions in weaponry provided to Ukraine. Trump has been critical of the amount shipped to Ukraine to help bolster its defenses against Russia’s invasion.
The last official accounting of foreign aid in the Biden administration dates from mid-December and budget year 2023. It shows that $68 billion had been obligated for programs abroad that range from disaster relief to health and pro-democracy initiatives in 204 countries and regions.
Some of the biggest recipients of U.S. assistance, Israel ($3.3 billion per year), Egypt ($1.5 billion per year) and Jordan ($1.7 billion per year) are unlikely to see dramatic reductions, as those amounts are included in long-term packages that date back decades and are in some cases governed by treaty obligations.
Funding for U.N. agencies, including peacekeeping, human rights and refugee agencies, have been traditional targets for Republican administrations to slash or otherwise cut. The first Trump administration moved to reduce foreign aid spending, suspending payments to various UN agencies, including the U.N. Population Fund, and funding to the Palestinian Authority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pakistani court sentences 4 people to death for blasphemy
Legal Business |
2025/01/21 10:13
|
A Pakistani court Saturday sentenced four people to death for blasphemy, allegedly because they posted sacrilegious material on social media about Islamic religious figures and the Quran. Their lawyer said appeal preparations are underway.
Under the country’s blasphemy laws, anyone found guilty of insulting Islam or its religious figures can be sentenced to death. Authorities have yet to carry out such a penalty, although the accusation of blasphemy and opposition to the law can incite mob violence or reprisals.
Judge Tariq Ayub in the city of Rawalpindi declared that blasphemy, disrespect to holy figures, and desecration of the Quran were unforgivable offenses and left no room for leniency.
Along with the death sentences, the judge imposed collective fines of 4.6 million rupees (around $16,500) and handed down jail terms to each of the four should a higher court overturn their death sentences.
The men’s lawyer, Manzoor Rahmani, criticized the court’s decision and investigating authorities’ lack of evidence.
“The doubts and uncertainties that arise in such cases are ignored by the courts, likely due to the fear of religious backlash and potential mob violence against the judge if the accused is acquitted,” said Rahmani. “We are preparing our appeals against the decision and will go to the High Court.”
Anti-blasphemy measures introduced in Pakistan in the 1980s made it illegal to insult Islam. Since then, people have been accused of insulting the religion, desecrating its texts, or writing offensive remarks on the walls of mosques. Critics of the law say it is used to settle personal disputes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump asks the Supreme Court to delay the start of the TikTok ban
Legal Business |
2024/12/28 19:47
|
President-elect Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Friday to pause the potential TikTok ban from going into effect until his administration can pursue a "political resolution" to the issue.
After President Biden signed a law banning TikTok unless it divests from its China-based owner ByteDance, the viral video app sued to block it, arguing the act violates the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans.
The request came as TikTok and the Biden administration filed opposing briefs to the court, in which the company argued the court should strike down a law that could ban the platform by Jan. 19 while the government emphasized its position that the statute is needed to eliminate a national security risk.
"President Trump takes no position on the underlying merits of this dispute. Instead, he respectfully requests that the Court consider staying the Act's deadline for divestment of January 19, 2025, while it considers the merits of this case," said Trump's amicus brief, which supported neither party in the case and was written by D. John Sauer, Trump's choice for solicitor general.
The argument submitted to the court is the latest example of Trump inserting himself in national issues before he takes office. The Republican president-elect has already begun negotiating with other countries over his plans to impose tariffs, and he intervened earlier this month in a plan to fund the federal government, calling for a bipartisan plan to be rejected and sending Republicans back to the negotiating table.
Trump has also reversed his position on the popular app, having tried to ban it during his first term in office over national security concerns. He joined the app during his 2024 presidential campaign and his team used it to connect with younger voters, especially male voters, by pushing content that was often macho and aimed at going viral.
He said earlier this year that he still believed there were national security risks with TikTok, but that he opposed banning it. This month, Trump also met with TikTok CEO Shou Chew at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. The filings Friday come ahead of oral arguments scheduled for Jan. 10 on whether the law, which requires TikTok to divest from its China-based parent company or face a ban, unlawfully restricts speech in violation of the First Amendment. The law was was signed by President Joe Biden in April after it passed Congress with broad bipartisan support. TikTok and ByteDance filed a legal challenge afterwards.
Earlier this month, a panel of three federal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the statute, leading TikTok to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. The brief from Trump said he opposes banning TikTok at this junction and "seeks the ability to resolve the issues at hand through political means once he takes office."
In their brief to the Supreme Court on Friday, attorneys for TikTok and its parent company ByteDance argued the federal appeals court erred in its ruling and based its decision on "alleged 'risks' that China could exercise control" over TikTok's U.S. platform by pressuring its foreign affiliates.
The Biden administration has argued in court that TikTok poses a national security risk due to its connections to China. Officials say Chinese authorities can compel ByteDance to hand over information on TikTok's U.S. patrons or use the platform to spread or suppress information.
But the government "concedes that it has no evidence China has ever attempted to do so," TikTok's legal filing said, adding that the U.S. fears are predicated on future risks.
In its filing Friday, the Biden administration said because TikTok "is integrated with ByteDance and relies on its propriety engine developed and maintained in China," its corporate structure carries with it risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
