(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 ruling, extended its injunction that temporarily bars the Trump administration from removing Venezuelan immigrants from the United States under the Alien Enemies Act proclamation and remanded the case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to resolve the question of how much time should be afforded for detainees to contest their removals.
The majority said the government did not provide migrants targeted under the wartime authority with enough time or information to contest their cases.
“The detainees’ interests at stake are accordingly particularly weighty. Under these circumstances, notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster,” the majority wrote in the decision. “But it is not optimal for this Court, far removed from the circumstances on the ground, to determine in the first instance the precise process necessary to satisfy the Constitution in this case.”
The justices did not reach the question of the lawfulness of the removals under the Alien Enemies Act.
“We recognize the significance of the Government’s national security interests as well as the necessity that such interests be pursued in a manner consistent with the Constitution. In light of the foregoing, lower courts should address AEA cases expeditiously,” they wrote.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Earlier this week, the Trump administration asked the court to lift its injunction, arguing that the migrants it intended to deport under the act were dangerous.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — Donald Trump’s unilateral effort to reshape election processes is an attempt to “short-circuit Congress’s deliberative process by executive order,” a federal judge in Washington, D.C. wrote Thursday afternoon.
In a 120-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly blocked the Trump administration from requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and ordering that election officials “assess” the citizenship of anyone who receives public assistance before allowing them to register. She also barred the Election Assistance Commission from withholding federal funding from states that did not comply with the order.
“Our Constitution entrusts Congress and the States—not the President—with the authority to regulate federal elections,” she wrote. “No statutory delegation of authority to the Executive Branch permits the President to short-circuit Congress’s deliberative process by executive order.”
After Trump issued an executive order last month “preserving and protecting the integrity of American elections,” three separate lawsuits were filed in the D.C. federal court to challenge the policy, including lawsuits filed by the Democratic National Committee (with New York Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries), the League of United Latin American Citizens and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
“These consolidated cases are about the separation of powers,” Judge Kollar-Kotelly wrote.
She concluded that Trump’s unilateral effort to reshape elections exceeds his own authority, noting that the Department of Justice “offered almost no defense of the President’s order.”
If Trump wishes to reform election processes, she wrote, Congress would be the appropriate branch to do so, adding Congress is “currently debating legislation that would effect many of the changes the President purports to order.”
The U.S. and China issued a joint statement on Monday announcing an agreement to cut reciprocal tariffs for 90 days, with both sides “recognizing the importance of a sustainable, long-term, and mutually beneficial economic and trade relationship.”
U.S. and Chinese representatives convened for talks in Geneva, Switzerland, this weekend in a bid to establish the basis for negotiations in a broader potential trade deal. President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff measures announced in April touched off a spiralling trade war between the two economic giants, roiling markets and prompting fears of a recession in the U.S.
“We have reached an agreement on a 90-day pause and substantially move down the tariff levels,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said at a Monday press conference in Geneva. “Both sides, on the reciprocal tariffs, will move their tariffs down 115%,” Bessent said.
U.S Trade Representative Jamieson Greer added that the U.S and China will maintain 10% reciprocal tariffs as part of the agreement.
“Today, with this agreement, we come to agreement that though that our reciprocal tariff rate will go down to 10% on the United States side,” Greer said. “The Chinese on their side also go down 115% to 10% and they remove the countermeasures that they have in place.”
Greer confirmed that during the pause, the effective tariff on Chinese goods entering the U.S. will be 30%. He also said that China’s effective tariffs will be at 10% for the duration of the pause. The changes will come into force by Wednesday, the joint U.S.-China statement said.
“What matters for the agreement today is that we each agreed to come down on the reciprocal tariff and related retaliation to 10%,” Greer said.
Monday’s announcement followed two days of talks that both sides described as successful.
In a media briefing on Sunday, Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng said trade talks with the U.S. “achieved substantial progress and reached important consensus.”
Earlier Sunday, the White House said that it reached an agreement without providing any details.
While Greer called it a “deal,” Bessent said only that “substantial progress” had been made.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
ABC News’ Lauren Minore, Hannah Demissie and Alex Ederson contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Savior. Ungodly. Patriotic. Un-American. Great. Sad.
A hundred days into his presidency, all are words Americans used to describe President Donald Trump’s performance in office.
Responses run the full spectrum of possible assessments. On the positive side of the ledger in this ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll: “Excellent.” “Awesome.” “Outstanding.” “Strong.” “Best president ever.”
And among the more negative comments: “Disaster.” “Chaotic.” “Appalling.” “Horrible.” “Atrocious.” “Catastrophic.”
As reported Sunday, Trump has a 39% job approval rating in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates with fieldwork by Ipsos. That’s the lowest job approval rating at or near 100 days in office of any president dating back to 1945 (as far back as data are available).
Invited to use one word to express their personal reaction to Trump’s performance as president so far, some focused on their feelings: “Frightened.” “Excited.” “Horrified.” “Relieved.” “Worried.” “Angry.” “Confused.” “Happy.” “Devastated.”
Others couldn’t restrain themselves to a single word, with fuller comments further illustrating Americans’ sharply divided opinions:
“He’s doing a fantastic job of accomplishing all that we want him to and voted for him to do!”
“He’s a convicted criminal, he’s a horrible con man who thinks he’s a great businessman and he’s tanking the economy for some ‘give it to the libs’ reason. I did not vote for this.”
“Someone needs to step in and rein him in. He is overstepping his authority. What is really frightening is that the Republican leadership knows he is wrong and will not stop him. Fear of losing their own power.”
“He doesn’t hesitate to support our best interests. He stands strong, and doesn’t give in to those who try and take advantage.”
“He is not taking into consideration the seniors that are on Social Security only which don’t have the discretionary income to handle the drastic cost of groceries and other necessities.”
“He is a horrible human being who cares about no one but himself and is ruining our democracy and all this country stands for.”
“He is courageously taking fast action to do what is best for our country economically and with the infrastructure.”
“Total embarrassment. Too bad so many believed and for some reason still believe in him.”
“He is a bad seed.”
“Trump seems even more unhinged than last time, but what were we all expecting? I’m not surprised, but I am displeased.”
A few others reserved judgment, at least for the time being:
“Don’t know yet, need more time to see the actual results.”
“We will see how this turns out.”
Groups
Among people who disapprove of Trump’s job performance, some characterizations were notably negative: “disgusting,” “disappointing,” “chaotic,” “incompetent,” “disaster,” “horrific,” “terrible” and “horrible.”
Others: “idiotic,” “embarrassing,” “criminal,” “crazy,” “appalling,” “pathetic,” “outrage.” Still others described him as “dictator,” “fascist,” “authoritarian,” “unconstitutional.” And some commented on Trump as a threat: “destructive,” “dangerous,” “frightening,” “reckless.”
Among Trump approvers, on the other hand, common reactions included “excellent,” “great,” “good,” “strong,” “outstanding,” “awesome,” “fantastic” and “amazing.” Others were positive, but less effusive: “acceptable,” “alright,” “decent,” “fair,” “fine,” “OK.” Some approvers were decidedly unenthusiastic: “so-so,” “mediocre,” “meh.”
Some commented on the speed or extent of his actions: “fast,” “hasty,” “quick,” “hectic,” “rollercoaster,” “sprinting,” “too much.” Several said they were “surprised”; others, “hopeful.” Some commented on Trump’s style: “bold,” “aggressive,” “determined.”
In any case, one said: “Better than Biden, so far.”
Methodology
This ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll was conducted online via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® April 18-22, 2025, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 2,464 adults. Partisan divisions are 30%-30%-29%, Democrats-Republicans-independents.
Results have a margin of sampling error of 2 percentage points, including the design effect. Error margins are larger for subgroups. Sampling error is not the only source of differences in polls.
The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates, with sampling and data collection by Ipsos. See details on ABC News’ survey methodology here.
