US Supreme Court

In a 6-3 ruling, the court upheld the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship, while dissenting justices warned of far-reaching implications for US immigration policy

The Supreme Court is expected to hear the case ​in its next term, which begins in October

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship, rejecting President Donald Trump's executive order declaring that children born to people who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens. The justices relied on a long-settled understanding of the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, and more recent federal laws in ruling that anyone born in the country, with very limited exceptions, is a citizen. "Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights-to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to every free-born person in this land," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court, citing congressional debate over the amendment, "We keep that promise today.

The Supreme Court on Monday dramatically expanded presidential power, upholding President Donald Trump's firings of the heads of independent federal agencies with one important exception, the Federal Reserve. The justices allowed Fed governor Lisa Cook to stay in her job while she fights the Republican president's effort to fire her over allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied. But other than at the nation's central bank, with its role of setting interest rates, the court held that presidents have free rein to fire agency heads at will, despite federal laws that require a cause for such dismissals and a 91-year-old decision that had limited executive authority. With the six conservative justices in the majority, the nine-member court jettisoned its unanimous decision in Humphrey's Executor that had limited when presidents can fire agency board members - in part to try to ensure decision-making free of political influence. The justices ruled in the case of former Federal

The court handed President Trump victories in his push to rescind deportation protections for hundreds of thousands of people and turn away migrants at the southern border

The suit accused TCS of exploiting software access granted to Transamerica employees, who were transferred to TCS in a $2 billion deal

Tata had appealed ‌after a lower court upheld a judge's decision to set the award at $56 million in compensatory damages and $112 million in punitive damages to Ashburn, Virginia-based DXC

TCS, which had already set aside $150 million for the case, said it will book a further $70 million towards damages, interest and legal costs as a one-time exceptional charge in the first quarter of 2

Administration began processing refunds in April after the Supreme Court ruled that President Trump didn't have the authority to impose tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act

Businesses big and small have started receiving tariff refunds after the US Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump lacked the constitutional authority to impose higher import taxes on goods from nearly every other country. The process could grind to a halt, however, after the Trump administration said Friday that it intended to appeal a federal judge's order to allow all companies that paid the invalidated duties to seek refunds, not just the ones that filed lawsuits. Until the Department of Justice informed the judge of its planned appeal, the refund system overseen by US Customs and Border Protection had been working fairly smoothly. Refunds reached the bank accounts of the first successful applicants on May 12, about three weeks after importers and their customs brokers could start submitting claims through an online system, according to CBP. Applications for refunds totalling USD 85 billion - more than half of the USD 166 billion the agency estimated the government owes

The scramble for refunds started immediately after the Supreme Court ruled that Trump unlawfully used IEEPA to impose tariffs on goods entering the country

In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump singled out Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett for voting against his administration's position on tariffs

When the Supreme Court killed his favorite tariffs in February, President Donald Trump promptly rolled out temporary import taxes to replace them. But those stopgap levies expire in less than three months. Now the administration is scrambling to put more durable tariffs in place to keep revenue flowing into the US Treasury and to shore up the president's protectionist wall around the American economy. Starting this week, the Office of the US Trade Representative will begin hearings in two investigations that are expected to lead to a new round of US tariffs - taxes paid by importers in the United States and usually passed on via higher prices to consumers who are already fed up with the high cost of living. Trump's newest tariff push is sure to face more challenges in court but is likely to prove sturdier than the one the Supreme Court tossed out. First up is a hearing Tuesday and Wednesday into whether 60 economies - from Nigeria to Norway and accounting for 99% of US imports - do

Indian exporters are linked to about $12 billion of the total refunds. Textiles and apparel account for roughly $4 billion of that amount

A team of Indian officials, currently in Washington for talks on the first phase of the bilateral trade agreement, will discuss aspects related to preferential market access for domestic goods in the US, Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal said on Monday. "We have almost finalised the free trade agreement, the first tranche of the bilateral trade agreement with them. "We are trying to work out what would be the mechanism by which India can get a preferential market access in the US market compared to our competitors," he told reporters here. The Indian team, he said, will discuss these aspects while they are in Washington. About a dozen officers from India are in Washington for three-day trade talks with the US authorities. As the tariff landscape has changed in the US, both sides may like to relook at the framework of the agreement, the text of which was released on February 7. Following the US Supreme Court's decision against the sweeping tariffs imposed by President Do

A refund system for businesses that paid tariffs which the US Supreme Court ruled President Donald Trump imposed without the constitutional authority to do so is scheduled to launch Monday. Importers and their brokers will be able to begin claiming refunds through an online portal beginning at 8 am, according to US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency administering the system. It is the first step in a complicated process that also might eventually lead to refunds for consumers who were billed for some or all of the tariffs on products shipped to them from outside the United States. Companies must submit declarations listing the goods on which they collectively put billions of dollars toward the import taxes the court subsequently struck down. If CBP approves a claim, it will take 60-90 days for a refund to be issued, the agency said. The government expects to process refunds in phases, however, focusing first on more recent tariff payments. Any number of technical facto

After the SC struck down many of his global tariffs, Trump imposed a temporary 10 per cent tariff that covers many imports. That levy is set to expire on July 24

Trump is seeking to restore his tariff wall using different authorities after the high court ruled that his use of emergency powers to impose those earlier duties was unconstitutional

Indian delegation to visit US capital to advance interim trade pact discussions as both sides seek clarity on tariffs and non-tariff barriers

A USD 656 million judgment against Palestinian authorities has been reinstated by appeals judges, following a US Supreme Court ruling in favour of Americans killed or wounded in attacks in Israel. The decision from the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals comes a decade after it first tossed out a verdict against the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the Palestinian Authority on the grounds that US courts couldn't consider lawsuits against foreign groups over overseas attacks that were not aimed at the United States. But the appeals court reinstated the judgment in light of a Supreme Court ruling last June upholding a 2019 law enacted by Congress to allow the victims' lawsuits to go forward against the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the Palestinian Authority. "We conclude that the original judgment for the plaintiffs should be reinstated. That conclusion is consistent with the plain import of the Supreme Court's decision," the judges said in a decision dated March 30. "Our ..