#freedom

3 stories

Economy

14updates

energytrumppeople

Donald Trump could be the man to save Cuba

US-Iran news LIVE: As US President Donald Trump tries to finalise a peace deal with Iran, his ties with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are reportedly turning sour. Trump hits out at Netanyahu, stating that “without me, there would be no Israel.” He even called the Israeli PM “crazy.”The tension came as the US President criticised the recent Israeli strikes in Lebanon, which once again threatened to jeopardise negotiations between Washington and Tehran. Trump has been pushing for a peace deal as he faces growing political blowback at home.Iran exports first crude oil in two monthsOn Tuesday, Iran was able to export its first crude oil shipments in two months after the two sides reached an agreement to end the US naval blockade, according to maritime intelligence company TankerTrackers. The US naval blockade was imposed on 13 April, days after Tehran closed the Strait of Hormuz once again following tensions with Washington. Earlier on Monday, Trump announced that the Strait of Hormuz had been reopened under the terms of the agreement, but later revised the timeline, saying the strait would reopen after a formal signing ceremony in Geneva on Friday.Australia lowers Middle East travel warningsFollowing the announcement of a US-Iran peace deal, Australia lowered its travel warnings for the Middle East countries, including Bahrain, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Foreign Minister Penny Wong said the advisory moved to "reconsider your need to travel" from "do not travel," but added that Australians should continue to delay non-essential travel to the Gulf states.Iran seeks Israel's withdrawal from LebanonIran's top diplomat on Tuesday reiterated that the tentative deal to end the war with the United States would require Israel to withdraw from Lebanon, a condition that Israel has already rejected and could impact the agreement, leading to the resumption of all-out war.The deal, which is between Washington and Tehran, has not been made public yet, and officials from both sides have offered contradictory statements of what is in it. While Israel is not a party to the agreement, it is part of the war after joining the US in launching strikes on Iran on 28 February. Israel has also fought the Iran-backed Hezbollah militant group in Lebanon and seized large swaths of that country.Oil falls to three-month low as US-Iran peace deal to boost supplyOil reported its longest run of declines this year as the US-Iran peace deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz raised expectations for a revival in supply, with leading Wall Street banks reducing their price forecasts and key market gauges tumbling.Global benchmark Brent fell for a fourth session, settling under $79 per barrel, the lowest level since early March. The US and Iran are preparing to formally sign an interim peace deal on Friday that would allow tankers trapped since the start of the conflict to exit the key waterway.US-Iran peace agreement yet to be made publicOn Tuesday, details for the US and Iran's interim agreement to end the war in the Middle East started emerging, with Trump saying that Washington will rule out a nuclear weapon for Tehran and a US official stating that it allows Iran to sell oil upon signing.The memorandum of understanding signed this week, though yet to be made public, extends a tenuous ceasefire announced in April by another 60 days to allow the warring countries to negotiate a permanent truce.

LiveMintJun 17

Read

Economy

25updates

trumptightensdonald

Donald Trump warns Iran to ‘better get smart soon’, says he is ‘no more Mr. Nice Guy’

US President Donald Trump's administration on Friday announced a new policy requiring most foreign nationals applying for green cards to complete the process from outside the country instead of adjusting status within the US.US President Donald Trump's administration announced new rules for immigrants seeking green cards(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)Continuing its crackdown on immigrants in the US, President Donald Trump's administration on Friday (local time) announced a new policy for foreigners applying for permanent residency in the country.According to a Bloomberg report, those seeking permanent residency in Washington will be required to return to their home countries to seek green cards.Trump administration ramps up crackdown on immigrantsIn a statement, Zach Kahler, a spokesman for US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), said, "From now on, an alien who is in the US temporarily and wants a green card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances." Kahler added, "This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended instead of incentivizing loopholes."CBS News, citing officials, said they plan to end the option for many immigrants seeking a green card to complete the process without leaving the country. Under the new approach, most of these immigrants would instead have to return to their home countries and apply for an immigrant visa abroad at a US consulate.What does the document say?The memo, which was issued by USCIS on Friday, aims to strictly limit when the agency can allow immigrants to receive a green card via the "adjustment of status" process. According to reports, this route allows eligible immigrants already in the US to apply for permanent residency without having to leave the country and apply at a US consulate abroad.In a memo outlining the change, USCIS employees who decide applications for permanent residency were told that some exceptions could be made. The memo directed them to “consider and weigh all the relevant evidence in the record, taking into account the totality of the circumstances to determine whether the alien is suitable for permanent residence.”Additionally, it also directs federal agency officers to view adjustment of status as an "extraordinary" form of relief and an act of "administrative grace," citing federal law to argue that most green card applicants should complete the process overseas. Further, officers have now been told to see adjustment of status as a rare and special benefit, not a normal option. Officers are now instructed to view choosing adjustment of status over applying at a US consulate abroad as a negative factor in a person’s case.While the policy does not clearly state all the exceptions, the memo says that some groups, such as those on "dual intent" visas like H-1Bs for high-skilled workers, as well as refugees and asylees, will likely be allowed to apply for a green card in the country via adjustment of status.Trump's policy change could impact thousandsAccording to immigration law experts, the announcement of a new policy could impact hundreds of thousands of people a year and potentially reduce legal immigration further amid a sweeping government crackdown.The Trump administration has introduced a series of restrictions affecting everyone from asylum seekers to students and highly skilled workers.The new rules broadly affect foreigners who entered the US on temporary non-immigrant visas, such as students, H-1B or L visa workers, and visitors. Washington grants about one million green cards annually, but nearly half are for foreign relatives sponsored by US citizens, and those cases are typically already handled outside the country.Trump administration's stance on immigrantsThe developments come at a time when citizens of at least 39 countries, mostly in Africa and Asia, are barred or restricted from entering Washington under a proclamation signed by the US President on national security grounds, commo

LiveMintMay 22

Read

general

5updates

supremecourtlive

Freedom of conscience not given in 1950: Supreme Court top 5 remarks on Day 10 of Sabarimala hearing

3 min readNew DelhiUpdated: May 14, 2026 05:08 AM IST Mehta said he was only arguing that if a practice is directly challenged, the court will ask those challenging it to go to the legislature, but if a law is challenged, the court must examine it. The Constitution “did not create a secular court as the reformatory overlord of the religious traditions of 1.4 billion citizens” and entrusted the mechanism of religious reform to the legislature “to be exercised at the pace at which a democratic society arrives at consensus”, the Centre told the Supreme Court on Wednesday, pitching for denomination status for devotees of the Sabarimala temple deity Lord Ayyappa. “If courts may reform religion in the absence of legislation, whenever they determine that a practice offends the Constitution, there is, in practice, no limit on the judicial reformation of religious traditions. Every denomination’s internal discipline, every temple’s mode of worship, every faith’s institutional arrangements become permanently available for constitutional challenge. This consequence is not hypothetical; it has occurred in the Sabarimala case,” the Centre stated.These submissions are part of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s rejoinder to the arguments made by parties defending the SC intervention in allowing women to enter the Sabarimala temple. Mehta, appearing for the Centre before a nine-judge bench hearing the Sabarimala reference, said the Constitution had instead “created fundamental rights on religious freedoms, with a specific and democratic mechanism of reform” vested in the legislature. Courts could intervene when something was contrary to public order, health, or morality, he said, “but not as a part of reform”. The bench presided by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and also comprising Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, A G Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi, is considering questions arising from petitions seeking review of the SC’s September 28, 2018, judgment striking down age restrictions on entry of women to the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. Mehta argued that Article 25(2)(b), which provides for legislation for social welfare and reform, consciously entrusted reform to the legislature, to ensure that “such reform and welfare emanate from a constitutional body reflecting the will of the people”. Reform and welfare measures, he said, “must emanate from within the people to be acceptable and long-lasting”. During the hearing, Justice Amanullah sought to disagree with the argument and said: “Saying leave it to the legislature may not be tentatively acceptable as it would mean … majoritarianism.”Story continues below this ad Mehta said he was only arguing that if a practice is directly challenged, the court will ask those challenging it to go to the legislature, but if a law is challenged, the court must examine it. CJI Kant also intervened and said that “the question of religious practice has nothing to do with the majoritarian principle or minority principle. Minorities can have their own religious practice, and the majority can have their own. All are protected under Article 25 … We are only examining the extent of that”. Justice Bagchi also raised questions on the Centre’s stand. “It’s not majoritarianism that the court is bothered about. The court is bothered about majoritarianism trumping constitutionalism. And that is the Lakshman rekha. We are committed to a democracy, which is definitely a test of numbers, but we are also a constitutional democracy. So even if a majority feels that a particular thing is to be done, the courts have that role to test that decision from constitutional principles,” he said. Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in

Indian ExpressMay 14

Read

You’ve read everything. Check back for new stories.