Texas Weekly Online

Inside Trump’s first-year power plays and the court fights testing them

Inside Trump’s first-year power plays and the court fights testing them

President Donald Trump spent the first year of his second White House term signing a torrent of executive orders aimed at delivering on several major policy priorities, including slashing federal agency budgets and staffing, implementing a hard-line immigration crackdown and invoking emergency authority to impose steep tariffs on nearly every U.S. trading partner. The pace of Trump’s executive actions has far outstripped that of his predecessors, allowing the administration to move quickly on campaign promises. But the blitz has also triggered a wave of lawsuits seeking to block or pause many of the orders, setting up a high-stakes confrontation over the limits of presidential power under Article II and when courts can — or should — intervene. Lawsuits have challenged Trump’s most sweeping and consequential executive orders, ranging from a ban on birthright citizenship and transgender service members in the military to the legality of sweeping, DOGE-led government cuts and the president’s ability to “federalize” and deploy thousands of National Guard troops. FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BAN FOR ALL INFANTS, TESTING LOWER COURT POWERS Many of those questions remain unresolved. Only a few legal fights tied to Trump’s second-term agenda have reached final resolution, a point legal experts say is critical as the administration presses forward with its broader agenda. Trump allies have argued the president is merely exercising his powers as commander in chief.  Critics counter that the flurry of early executive actions warrants an additional level of legal scrutiny, and judges have raced to review a crushing wave of cases and lawsuits filed in response. In June 2025, the Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration 6-3 in Trump v. CASA, a closely watched case centered on the power of district courts to issue so-called universal or nationwide injunctions blocking a president’s executive orders.  Though the case ostensibly focused on birthright citizenship, arguments narrowly focused on the authority of lower courts’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions and did not wade into the legality of Trump’s order, which served as the legal pretext for the case. The decision had sweeping national implications, ultimately affecting the more than 310 federal lawsuits that had been filed at the time challenging Trump’s orders signed in his second presidential term. Justices on the high court ultimately sided with U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer, who had argued to the court that universal injunctions exceeded lower courts’ Article III powers under the Constitution, telling justices that the injunctions “transgress the traditional bounds of equitable authority,” and “create a host of practical problems.” The Supreme Court largely agreed. Justices ruled that plaintiffs seeking nationwide relief must file their lawsuits as class action challenges. This prompted a flurry of action from plaintiffs in the weeks and months that followed as they raced to amend and refile relevant complaints to lower courts. The Supreme Court also signaled openness to expanding presidential authority over independent agencies. Earlier in 2025, the justices granted Trump’s request to pause lower-court orders reinstating two Democratic appointees — National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris, two Democrat appointees who were abruptly terminated by the Trump administration. It also suggested the Supreme Court is poised to pare back a 90-year-old precedent in Humphrey’s Executor, a 1935 ruling that prohibits certain heads of multi-member, congressionally created federal regulatory agencies from being fired without cause. It is not the only issue in which the justices appeared inclined to side with Trump administration officials and either overturn or pare back Humphrey’s protections. In December, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Trump v. Slaughter, a similar case centered on Trump’s attempt to fire a member of the Federal Trade Commission without cause. Justices seemed likely to allow the firing to proceed and to weaken Humphrey’s protections for similarly situated federal employees, though the extent that justices will move to dilute an already watered-down court ruling remains unclear. The high court will also review another case centered on Trump’s ability to remove Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook early in 2026. SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS REINS IN SOTOMAYOR AFTER REPEATED INTERRUPTIONS While it’s rarely helpful to speculate on how the Supreme Court might rule on a certain case, court watchers and legal experts overwhelmingly reached a similar consensus after listening to oral arguments in Learning Resources v. Trump, the case centered on Trump’s use of an emergency wartime law to enact his sweeping tariff plan.  At issue in the case is Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to enact his steep 10% tariffs on most imports. The IEEPA law gives the president broad economic powers in the event of a national emergency tied to foreign threats. But it’s unclear if such conditions exist, as voiced by liberal and conservative justices in their review of the case earlier in 2025. Several justices also noted that the statute does not explicitly reference tariffs or taxes, a point that loomed large during oral arguments. A ruling against the administration would deliver a major blow to Trump’s signature economic policy.  Court watchers and legal experts said after arguments that a Trump administration win could be more difficult than expected, though each cautioned it is hard to draw conclusions from roughly two hours of oral arguments, a fraction of the total time justices spend reviewing a case. Jonathan Turley, a law professor and Fox News contributor, said in a blog post that the justices “were skeptical and uncomfortable with the claim of authority, and the odds still favored the challengers.” “However, there is a real chance of a fractured decision that could still produce an effective win for the administration,” Turley added. Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the CATO Institute, told Fox News Digital in an emailed statement that members of the court seemed uncomfortable with expanding presidential power over tariffs. “Most justices appeared attentive to the risks of deferring to a president’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute and the executive branch ‘discovering’ new powers

Enzo Maresca leaves Chelsea after just 18 months as manager

Enzo Maresca leaves Chelsea after just 18 months as manager

Maresca exits the club midway through a turbulent season with the team winning just one Premier League game in December. By News Agencies Published On 1 Jan 20261 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Chelsea have parted ways with ‌Enzo Maresca, a dramatic fall from grace for the Italian who was named ‍Manager of the Month ‍for November before the club won just one of their last seven league games, causing them to fall out of the Premier League title race. “Chelsea Football Club and head coach Enzo Maresca have parted company,” the club said in a statement on Thursday. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list Maresca, who joined Chelsea in 2024 after steering Leicester City to Premier League promotion, leaves 18 months to the day since he was ⁠tasked with reviving the club’s fortunes after two years of failing to qualify for the Champions League. He eventually ​guided the London side to UEFA Champions League qualification with a fourth-placed finish, the Conference ‍League trophy and the Club World Cup title in his first season with a young but expensively built squad. Poor run of form However, a poor run of form in December and an uncharacteristic outburst from the Italian prompted the club hierarchy to take ‍action and part ⁠ways with the 45-year-old manager. “With key objectives still to play for across four competitions including qualification for Champions League football, Enzo and the club believe a change gives the team the best chance of getting the season back on track,” the Chelsea statement said. Chelsea were as high as third in November and were among the title contenders, high on confidence after they had also crushed Barcelona 3-0 in ​the Champions League at Stamford Bridge. But they have since slipped to fifth in ‌the league to sit 15 points behind leaders Arsenal at the halfway stage of the season. Chelsea star Cole Palmer shakes hands with Maresca, left, after being substituted during what turned out to be the Italian’s last match in charge of the club against Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, London, UK, on December 30, 2025 [Andrew Boyers/Action Images via Reuters] ‘Worst 48 hours’ Last month, Maresca voiced frustration over issues behind the scenes, saying he felt he had a lack of support from the club, describing a period ‌after a 2-0 win over Everton as “the worst 48 hours” of his tenure. Advertisement The Italian did not clarify what he meant by the comment, but the damage ‌seemed to have been done as Chelsea’s league form nosedived. Although Chelsea ⁠beat Cardiff City to reach the League Cup semifinals, they picked up only two points in their last three Premier League games. Off the pitch, there was also the unwelcome distraction of rubbishing links to the Manchester City job as Maresca pointed out that he was committed ‌to Chelsea, where he had a contract until 2029. But Tuesday’s 2-2 home draw with Bournemouth – where fans chanted, “You don’t know what you’re doing” when he substituted playmaker Cole Palmer while they also booed at the final whistle – proved to be his final match in charge. The club did not say who would take charge before Sunday’s match against second-placed Manchester City. Adblock test (Why?)

Somali president: Israel deal with Somaliland tied to hosting Palestinians

Somali president: Israel deal with Somaliland tied to hosting Palestinians

NewsFeed In an exclusive interview, Somalia’s president Hassan Sheikh Mohamud told Al Jazeera that the breakaway region of Somaliland has agreed to accept displaced Palestinians being relocated there in exchange for recognition. Somaliland officials have rejected the allegations. Published On 1 Jan 20261 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Adblock test (Why?)

Gabon government sacks Aubameyang, suspends national team at AFCON 2025

Gabon government sacks Aubameyang, suspends national team at AFCON 2025

Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang and one other played banned after Gabon eliminated from Africa Cup of Nations group stage. By News Agencies Published On 1 Jan 20261 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Gabon’s government has suspended the national team, sacking  the coach and kicking star forward Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang off the squad in the wake of three defeats at the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) finals. Gabon’s acting Sports Minister Simplice-Desire Mamboula on Wednesday announced the suspension ⁠of the national team on television after they finished last in their group and ​were eliminated from the tournament in Morocco. Recommended Stories list of 2 itemsend of list “Given the Panthers’ disgraceful ‍performance at the Africa Cup of Nations, the government has decided to dissolve the coaching staff, suspend the national team until further notice, and exclude players Bruno ‍Ecuele Manga ⁠and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang,” Mamboula said after a 3-2 loss to the Ivory Coast in Marrakesh. Gabon, coached by former defender Thierry Mouyouma, had already been eliminated after losing their opening pair of Group F fixtures to Cameroon and Mozambique, but in their final outing were 2-0 up over the defending ​champions before conceding three goals and going down ‌to a second-string Ivorian lineup. Neither Aubameyang nor veteran defender Ecuele Manga played on Wednesday, with Aubameyang having returned to his French club Olympique de Marseille for treatment on ‌a thigh injury. The former African Footballer of the Year responded on social media, saying on X: “I ‌think the team’s problems are much deeper than ⁠the individual I am.” Aubameyang, at 36, had likely played his last game for Gabon in their defeat by Mozambique, as was also likely the case with the 37-year-old former ‌Cardiff City defender Ecuele Manga. Advertisement Disbanding the national team used to be a common reaction in Africa to disappointing results, but since world football’s governing ‍body FIFA has taken a hard stance against government interference in the running of football associations, it has been a rare occurrence. Adblock test (Why?)