Fox News Politics Newsletter: SCOTUS Upholds Ban on Trans Treatments for Minors
Welcome to the Fox News Politics newsletter, with the latest updates on the Trump administration, Capitol Hill and more Fox News politics content. Here's what's happening…
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a Tennessee law banning specific transgender medical treatments for adolescents in the state is not discriminatory, ruling 6-3 to uphold the law.
At issue in the case, United States v. Skrmetti, was whether Tennessee's Senate Bill 1, which "prohibits all medical treatments intended to allow 'a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor's sex' or to treat 'purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor's sex and asserted identity,'" violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
That law prohibits states from allowing medical providers to deliver puberty blockers and hormones to facilitate a minor's transition to another sex… READ MORE.
CLEAR RED LINE: White House maintains Trump consistent in firm stance on Iran nukes — and shows off receipts
SURVEY SAYS: Where Trump stands in the eyes of Americans five months into his second presidency
GLOBAL GAGGLE: G7 with early Trump departure does not yield agreements on matters like world conflicts
ANTISEMITISM SPREADS: UN commission accuses Israel of 'extermination' in controversial report
KEEPING FAITH: 'Jewish Matchmaking' star living in Israel has hope amid conflicts with Hamas, Iran
DEADLY REACH: In Iran's 'forever war' against the US, regime has targeted, killed Americans worldwide
CONFLICT INTENSIFIES: Iran warns US joining conflict would mean 'all-out war,' refuses demands to give up disputed nuclear program
'VERY BIG': Trump weighs striking Iranian nuclear facilities: 'I may do it, I may not do it'
DRONE FORCE RISING: 'Eyes in the sky': Army drone expert explains US strategy on innovation as global conflict looms
TROUBLING PATTERN: FBI Director Patel says man who threatened Trump used same message as Comey's 'destructive' Instagram post
ENEMY AT THE GATES: Senators Ricketts, Fetterman unite against China's quiet invasion of US farmland
PRESIDENCY IN NAME: Senate hearing on who was 'really running' Biden White House kicks off Wednesday
TAXPAYER TAB: Migrant influx helping drive $1B shelter bill in Massachusetts, report shows
MAINTAINING ORDER: Trump admin deploys 2,000 more troops to blue city for anti-ICE riots
ONE ON THE RUN: Third illegal immigrant captured after ICE facility breakout
MASSIVE BUST: Louisiana racetrack ICE raid nets more than 80 illegal migrants during worksite enforcement operation
EVIL KNOCKING: Suspected Tren de Aragua gang members terrorize apartment complex in shocking doorbell video
SAFETY AND SECURITY: Potential Youngkin successor focused on message to keep Virginia 'red'
COMEBACK OR COLLAPSE: Cuomo's lead shrinks with under one week until New York City mayoral primary: poll
POLITICAL TOUCHDOWN: State senator, Indian immigrant, pulls upset in Virginia Democratic lieutenant governor's race
PRIVACY BETRAYED: Republicans demand answers on California program accused of leaking patient health data to Big Tech
'BETRAYED OUR STATE': GOP Louisiana state senator says he's running for US Senate because incumbent Republican 'sucks'
Get the latest updates on the Trump administration and Congress, exclusive interviews and more on FoxNews.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In a scathing dissent, Justice Jackson says the Supreme Court gives the impression it favors 'moneyed interests'
WASHINGTON — Liberal Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized her colleagues on Friday in a scathing dissent on a case involving vehicle emissions regulations. In her dissenting opinion, she argued that the court's opinion gives the impression it favors 'moneyed interests' in the way they decide which cases to hear and how they rule in them. The court had ruled 7-2 in favor of fuel producers seeking to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's approval of California clean vehicle emissions regulations. She also said she was concerned that the ruling could have "a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests." With the Trump administration reversing course on many of Biden's environmental policies, including on California's electric vehicle mandates, the case is likely moot, or soon to be, Jackson wrote, making her wonder why the court felt the need to decide it. "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this court than ordinary citizens," Jackson wrote. The case said that the producers had legal standing to bring their claims, resting on a theory "that the court has refused to apply in cases brought by less powerful plaintiffs," she added. The decision has little practical importance now, but in future, "will no doubt aid future attempts by the fuel industry to attack the Clean Air Act," she said. "Also, I worry that the fuel industry's gain comes at a reputational cost for this court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests," she added. The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has often faced claims that it is particularly receptive to arguments made by big business. The conservative justices have been especially skeptical of broad government regulations and they have consistently made it harder for consumers and workers to bring class action lawsuits. Last year, the court overturned a 40-year precedent much loathed by business interests that empowered federal agencies in the regulatory process. Some legal experts have pushed back, saying such allegations are misleading. Jackson concluded her dissent by noting the court's "simultaneous aversion to hearing cases involving the potential vindication of less powerful litigants — workers, criminal defendants, and the condemned, among others." Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who authored the majority opinion, responded to her claims, saying that a review of standing cases "disproves that suggestion." He mentioned several recent rulings in which liberal justices were in the majority, including one last year finding that anti-abortion doctors who challenged the abortion pill mifepristone did not have standing to sue. The bottom line, he added, is that the government "may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders." Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law whose scholarship pushes back on Jackson's theory, said it was notable that no other justices, including her two fellow liberals, signed on to her dissent. "I don't think this case is an example of the court being inconsistent or somehow more favorable to moneyed interests than other sorts of interests," he said in an interview with NBC News. "It's not like the court has closed the door on environmental groups." Adler, who Jackson cited in her dissent, said it can be "very simplistic" to classify cases as pro-business or anti-business simply because there can often be wealthy interests on both sides. The underlying case stems from the EPA's authority to issue national vehicle emissions standards under the federal Clean Air Act. In recognition of California's historic role in regulating emissions, the law allows the EPA to give the state a waiver from the nationwide standards so that it can adopt its own. The case focused on a request made by California in 2012 that EPA approve new regulations, not the state's 2024 plan to eliminate gasoline-powered cars by 2035 for which it also sought a waiver. The Republican-controlled Congress voted earlier this month to revoke that waiver. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Pledge of Quick China Magnet Flows Has Yet to Materialize
(Bloomberg) -- Almost 10 days since President Donald Trump declared a 'done' trade deal with Beijing, US companies remain largely in the dark on when they'll receive crucial magnets from China — and whether Washington, in turn, will allow a host of other exports to resume. Security Concerns Hit Some of the World's 'Most Livable Cities' One Architect's Quest to Save Mumbai's Heritage From Disappearing JFK AirTrain Cuts Fares 50% This Summer to Lure Riders Off Roads NYC Congestion Toll Cuts Manhattan Gridlock by 25%, RPA Reports Taser-Maker Axon Triggers a NIMBY Backlash in its Hometown While there has been a trickle of required permits, many American firms that need Chinese minerals are still waiting on Beijing's approval for shipments, according to people familiar with the process. China's system is improving but remains cumbersome, they said, contrary to Trump's assurances rare earths would flow 'up front' after a June 11 accord struck in London. The delays are holding an array of American industries hostage to the rocky US-China relationship, as some firms wait for magnets and others face restrictions selling to China. That friction risks derailing a fragile tariff truce clinched by Washington and Beijing in Geneva last month, and triggering fresh rounds of retaliation. Interviews with multiple Western buyers, industry insiders and officials familiar with discussions revealed frustration over vague policies in both countries and lingering confusion about what level of magnet approvals from China would trigger Trump to abandon his tit-for-tat export curbs. 'Even if export approvals accelerate, there are so many unknowns about the licensing regime that it's impossible for companies to have a strong sense of certainty about future supply,' said Christopher Beddor, deputy China research director at Gavekal Research. 'At a minimum, they need to factor in a real possibility that talks could break down again, and exports will be halted.' In response to China's sluggishness on magnets, Trump last month restricted US firms from exporting chip software, jet engines and a key ingredient to make plastic to China until President Xi Jinping restores rare-earth exports. Companies subject to Washington's curbs have halted billions of dollars in planned shipments as they wait for players in unrelated sectors to secure permits from Beijing, which could take weeks or even months to process, given the current pace. Corporate chiefs affected by the export-control spat have sought clarity from the administration on its strategy, according to people familiar with the matter. The Commerce Department — which administers the rules — has offered few details, they added. Oil industry executives have tried to convince Trump officials that blocking exports of ethane — a gas used to make plastics — is contrary to US national security interests, according to people familiar with the deliberations. Business leaders have asked for export restrictions to be removed but that's been unsuccessful so far, the people said. Energy and chemical giant INEOS Group Holdings SA has one tanker full of ethane waiting to go, while Enterprise Products Partners has three to four cargo ships stuck in limbo, according to a person familiar with the matter. That's particularly galling because China has adequate ethane supplies in reserve and can switch to using naphtha from the Middle East and other regions for much of their production, the people said. Representatives from the companies did not respond to requests for comment. Industry figures have consistently told the Trump administration the ethane export restrictions are inflicting more pain on US interests than on China, according to the people. China's Ministry of Commerce, which administers export licenses, hasn't responded to Bloomberg's questions on how many for rare earths have been granted since the London talks. At a regular briefing in Beijing on Thursday, spokesperson He Yadong said Beijing was 'accelerating' its process and had given the go-ahead to a 'certain number of compliant applications.' Access to rare earths is an issue 'that is going to continue to metastasize until there is resolution,' said Adam Johnson, chief executive officer of Principal Mineral, which invests in US mineral supply chains for industrial defense. 'This is just a spigot that can be turned on and off by China.' China only agreed to grant licenses — if at all — for six months, before companies need to reapply for approvals. Firms doing business in the US and China could see recurring interruptions, unless the Commerce Ministry significantly increases its pace of process applications. Adding an extra layer of jeopardy for US companies, Chinese suppliers to America's military-industrial base are unlikely to get any magnet permits. After Trump imposed sky-high tariffs in April, Beijing put samarium — a metal essential for weapons such as guided missiles, smart bombs and fighter jets — on a dual-use list that specifically prohibits its shipment for military use. Denying such permits could cause ties to further spiral if Trump believes those actions violate the agreement, the terms of which were never publicized in writing by either side. That sticking point went unresolved during roughly 20 hours of negotiations last week in the UK capital, people familiar with the details said. Complicating the issue, companies often buy magnets from third-party suppliers, which serve both defense and auto firms, according to a person familiar with the matter. That creates a high burden to prove to Chinese authorities a shipment's final destination is a motor not a missile, the person added. Beijing still hasn't officially spelled out the deal's requirements, nor has Xi publicly signaled his endorsement of it — a step Trump said was necessary. 'The Geneva and London talks made solid progress towards negotiating an eventual comprehensive trade deal with China,' White House spokesman Kush Desai said. 'The administration continues to monitor China's compliance with the agreement reached at Geneva.' China's Commerce Ministry is working to facilitate more approvals even as it asks for reams of information on how the materials will be used, according to people familiar with the process. In some cases, companies have been asked to supply data including detailed product designs, one of the people said. Morris Hammer, who leads the US rare-earth magnet business for South Korean steelmaker Posco Holdings Inc., said Chinese officials have expedited shipments for some major US and European automakers since Trump announced the agreement. China's Advanced Technology & Materials said Wednesday it had obtained permits for some magnet orders, without specifying for which destinations. The company's customers include European aerospace giant Airbus SE, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Around half of US suppliers to Toyota Motor Corp., for example, have had export licenses granted, the company said – but they're still waiting for those materials to actually be delivered. It's likely some of the delays are transport-related, one of the people said. Even with permits coming online, rare-earth materials are still scarce because overseas shipments were halted for two months starting in April, depleting inventories. Trump's agreement 'will allow for rare earths to flow out of the country for a short period of time, but it's not helping the auto industry because they're still talking shutdowns,' Hammer said. 'Nobody trusts that this thaw is going to last.' For many automakers, the situation remains unpredictable – forcing some to hunt for alternatives to Chinese supplies. Two days after Trump touted a finalized trade accord in London, Ford Motor Co. Chief Executive Officer Jim Farley described a 'day-to-day' dynamic around rare-earths licenses – which have already forced the company to temporarily shutter one plant. General Motors Co. has emphasized it's on firmer footing in the longer term, because it invested in domestic magnet making back in 2021. The automaker has an exclusive deal to get the products from MP Materials Corp. in Texas, with production starting later in the year. It has another deal with eVAC of Germany to get magnets from a South Carolina plant starting in 2026. In the meantime, GM and its suppliers have applied for permits to get magnets from China, a person familiar with the matter said. Scott Keogh, the CEO of Scout Motors — the upstart EV brand of Volkswagen AG — told Bloomberg Television his company is re—engineering brakes and drive units to reduce the need for rare earths. Scout is building a plant in South Carolina to make fully electric and hybrid SUVs as well as trucks starting in 2027. Until the rare-earth supply line is re-opened to Washington's satisfaction, Trump has indicated that the US is likely to keep in place its own export restrictions. Senior US officials have suggested the curbs are about building and using leverage, rather than their official justification: national security. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the measures were used to 'annoy' China into complying with a deal US negotiators thought they'd already reached. Restrictions on sales to China of electronic design automation software for chipmaking are emblematic of the standoff. Those EDA tools are used to design everything, from the highest-end processors for the likes of Nvidia Corp. and Apple Inc. to simple parts, such as power-regulation components. Fully limiting China's access to the best software, made by a trio of Western firms, has been a longtime priority in some Washington national security circles — and would build on years of US measures targeting China's semiconductor prowess. While some senior Trump officials specifically indicated the administration would relax some semiconductor-related curbs if Beijing relents on rare earths, EDA companies still lack details on when, and whether, their China access will be restored, said industry officials who requested anonymity to speak candidly. Even if that happens, there's worry that heightened geopolitical risks will push Chinese customers to hunt for other suppliers or further develop domestic capabilities. 'The risk is there for the London deal to fall apart,' said Alicia Garcia Herrero, chief economist for Asia Pacific at Natixis. 'Because rare earths is a very granular issue and mistakes can be made.' --With assistance from Jennifer A. Dlouhy, David Welch, Lucille Liu, James Mayger, Jing Li, Joe Ryan and Nicholas Lua. Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags Ken Griffin on Trump, Harvard and Why Novice Investors Won't Beat the Pros Is Mark Cuban the Loudmouth Billionaire that Democrats Need for 2028? The US Has More Copper Than China But No Way to Refine All of It Can 'MAMUWT' Be to Musk What 'TACO' Is to Trump? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawmaker queries retailers in probe of link between tariffs and grocery prices
This story was originally published on Grocery Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Grocery Dive newsletter. Sen. Maggie Hassan has asked Albertsons, Kroger, Walmart, Costco and Dollar General for information about how increased tariffs the Trump administration has imposed on imported steel and aluminum could affect stores, suppliers and costs in the grocery supply chain. In June 18 letters to the chief executives of the retailers, the New Hampshire senator requested details including how they expect tariffs on the metals — which doubled to 50% on June 4 — to impact the cost of private label products, particularly canned foods and frozen meals. Hassan, the ranking member of Congress' Joint Economic Committee, indicated that Democrats on the Republican-controlled panel are especially interested in how increases in metal prices could impact canned good costs. She asked the retailers for details about their costs, revenue and profit margins for their best-selling canned food and aluminum foil products over the past five quarters. In addition, Hassan requested information about how customers who receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits shop for canned goods, including a breakdown of their purchases in terms of brand name and private label products. Hassan also said she wants an estimate of the number of jobs the retailers support in industries such as construction, food packaging and food processing. 'High grocery prices are a top economic concern for Americans, and experts state that tariffs could significantly increase the cost of canned foods,' Hassan wrote. 'Experts have also noted potential impacts from tariffs on the costs of shelving, equipment, transportation, and other inputs that grocery stores and their suppliers need to operate, which, in turn, could also lead to higher food prices for customers.' In the letters, Hassan cited data from the Consumer Brands Association indicating that the 50% levy on imported steel could push prices for canned foods up by between 9% and 15%. She also pointed to statistics showing that the U.S. imports almost 70% of the steel used for canned fruits and vegetables. Hassan gave the retailers until July 9 to supply the information she requested. Grocery prices rose at an annual rate of 2.2% in May, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported June 11. By comparison, food-at-home inflation came in at 2% in April and 2.4% in March. Recommended Reading Trump tariffs could hike canned food prices up to 15%, trade group says Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
