The Dictatorship
Trump’s attempt to fire a Federal Reserve governor tests a weird Supreme Court move
Back in May, when a divided Supreme Court gave President Donald Trump the power to fire members of certain labor boards without cause, the Republican-appointed majority went out of its way to signal its intention to protect the Federal Reserve board, even though the Fed itself wasn’t at issue in that case.
Now, Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook could test the high court’s strange signal.
In that May shadow docket case, Trump v. Wilcoxwhich involved members of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board, the majority addressed those board members’ argument that the logic behind stripping their protections would also imperil the Federal Reserve’s independence.
“We disagree,” the majority wrote, citing a previous precedent in noting that the Fed “is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States.”
Dissenting in the Wilcox case, Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the Democratic appointees that she appreciated the majority’s “intention to avoid imperiling the Fed” but that its decision still posed “a puzzle.” That’s because the Federal Reserve’s independence rests on the same foundation as agencies such as the NLRB and the MSPB — which, Kagan pointed out, means it rests on a nearly century-old precedent, Humphrey’s Executor. The Trump administration wants to overturn that 1935 decisionand the majority’s recent rulings on presidential power suggest that it’s on board with that effort.
“If the idea is to reassure the markets, a simpler — and more judicial — approach would have been to” rule against Trump “on the continued authority of Humphrey’s,” Kagan wrote in Wilcox.
But the majority opted against that approach and could soon be in the position of needing to reassure the markets once again.
However powerful Kagan’s criticism of the Wilcox majority was, the fact is that a majority of the court has signaled its willingness to protect the Federal Reserve more than other agencies. With Cook’s lawyer saying she’ll file a lawsuit over her purported removal, the question now is whether that same majority would rule against Trump to save her.
A potentially important factor as the litigation gets underway is that Trump claimed to be removing her “for cause,” citing a criminal referral initiated under his administration. Cook, who has not been charged with any crime, maintains that Trump lacks both a legal and factual basis to fire her.
While it will depend on how exactly Cook presses her legal claim and how the administration defends itself, the case’s resolution could turn on the narrower issue of the sufficiency of cause for removal, as opposed to the justices resolving the outer limits of presidential authority when it comes to the Federal Reserve. Given Kagan’s critique of the logic behind the majority’s Fed carveout in Wilcox (not that the majority has to care about that), the majority might appreciate such narrower grounds as a way of solving the “puzzle,” as Kagan put it, that the court created for itself.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration’s legal cases.
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined BLN, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
The Dictatorship
Trump’s strategy to calm markets during Iran war is falling flat
WASHINGTON (AP) — As the Iran war intensifies, President Donald Trump has prioritized efforts to calm the financial markets — trying to keep oil prices from exploding upward, stocks from cratering and interest rates from surging.
When the markets have flashed danger, Trump has been quick with a social media post or a remark to claim the war he launched last month could soon end. He’s publicly declared that the markets are doing better than he expected, even with the S&P 500 stock index declining over the past five weeks and the global oil benchmark up roughly 60%.
“I thought oil prices were going to go up higher than they are now,” Trump said at a Friday investor summit. “And I thought that we would see a bigger drop in stock. It hasn’t been that bad.”
With the Iran war, the White House has largely refrained from messaging more aggressively to voters about the economic consequences — choosing instead to try to contain any damage in the financial markets, which have swung wildly on the prospects of ceasefire or escalation in what has become a high-stakes guessing game about Trump’s next moves.
The Republican president showed the extremes of his messaging Monday before the U.S. stock market opened, writing in a social media post that great progress had been achieved on peace talks with Iran while also threatening civilian infrastructure such as desalination plants if a deal wasn’t reached “shortly.”
The White House sees the stock, energy and bond markets as a way to indirectly reach voters. Trump has staked his economic agenda on cheap prices at the pump, robust gains in 401(k) accounts and cheaper mortgage rates.
But that messaging appears to be wearing thin as the president’s various pronouncements have done little to change the reality that a large chunk of the world’s energy supplies is stranded by the conflict. Just 38% of U.S. adults approve of how he’s handling the economy and only 35% support him on Iran, according to a March survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
The president has tried to dictate to markets instead of talking directly to Americans
Gene Sperling, a top economic adviser in the Democratic Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations, said voters can make a direct connection between prices at the pump and Trump’s choice to attack Iran. He said “simplistic jawboning” to the markets is insufficient for a public that is stuck paying the price as gasoline soars past $4 a gallon nationwide.
“Most advisers would say the president has to speak directly to the American people and fully acknowledge the economic pain that his policy has so directly caused in a short amount of time and make the case for why the national security concerns justify it,” Sperling said. “Instead, you have a strategy of not recognizing or even dismissing people’s economic pain.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday called the oil price increases a “short-term fluctuation.”
Trump’s strategy of giving mixed messages has started to work against him, said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a professor at the Yale University School of Management and co-author of the new book “Trump’s Ten Commandments: Strategic Lessons from the Trump Leadership Toolbox.”
“The uncertainty is now soaring,” Sonnenfeld said. “As the messaging to calm markets with false reassurances is having diminishing credibility in financial markets, so, too, has Trump diminished public confidence.”
Trump’s desire for flexibility on the war limits his ability to offer clarity
Trump has embraced having flexibility in how he chooses to conduct the war, even though this has muddled his stated objectives.
During a Cabinet meeting Thursday, he said Iran was “begging” for a deal even as he threatened further military action — all the while maintaining that any economic damage to the U.S. would reverse itself.
On Friday after the markets closed, he extended his deadline for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuza key waterway for the flow of oil, saying he would hold off on bombing Iran’s energy plants in the meantime.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends” that Iran was letting some tankers through the Strait of Hormuz and that the “market is well supplied” because countries are releasing their strategic petroleum reserves and sanctions have been removed for Russian and Iranian oil already on tankers.
“We are seeing more and more ships go through on a daily basis as individual countries cut deals with the Iranian regime for the time being,” Bessent said. “But over time, the U.S. is going to retake control of the straits, and there will be freedom of navigation, whether it is through U.S. escorts or a multinational escort.”
Graham Steele, a Biden-era Treasury official, said Trump’s messaging techniques “can work temporarily, but they have diminishing returns, over time,” if they’re detached from actual policies and results.
“We saw a lot of the volatile market reactions initially, when he kept announcing these things and then walking them back,” Steele said. “The market reaction now is just a steady trend upward in prices,” he noted, adding that markets are “not responding to it in the same way anymore.”
Confidence in the economy and Trump is fading without clear results
The University of Michigan’s Index of Consumer Sentiment on Friday fell to a reading of 53.3 in March, its lowest level since December. Joanne Hsu, director of the surveys of consumers, pointed to the financial market volatility “in the wake of the Iran conflict” as reducing confidence in the economy for households with middle and higher incomes.
Hsu noted that the survey indicated that people do not expect the higher energy costs and stock market declines to persist, but that could change if the war “becomes protracted or if higher energy prices pass through to overall inflation.”
Gus Faucher, the chief economist at PNC Financial Services, stressed that low levels of consumer sentiment do not automatically signal a recession. But he said consumers would have to see lower gas prices, a steady stock market and decreased mortgage rates to feel better about the economy, which likely means a definitive resolution to the conflict rather than a series of pronouncements by Trump.
“The proof is in the pudding,” Faucher said. “People need to see some substantive improvements before they feel better about conditions.”
___
Follow the AP’s coverage of the Iran war at https://apnews.com/hub/iran.
The Dictatorship
What Trump’s threat against Iran’s desalination plants means for Mideast
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to target Iran’s energy infrastructure, including the country’s desalination plants. Such a move — and Iran’s possible targeting of the plants of its Gulf Arab neighbors — could have devastating impacts across the water-starved Middle East.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said if a deal to end the war isn’t reached “shortly” and the Strait of Hormuzwhere much oil passes via tankers, is not immediately reopened, “we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched.’”
The biggest danger, analysts warn, may not be what Trump could do to Iran, but how Tehran could retaliate. Iran relies on desalination for a small share of its water supply while Gulf Arab states depend on it for the vast majority.
Hundreds of desalination plants sit along the Persian Gulf coast, putting individual systems that supply water to millions within range of Iranian missile or drone strikes. Without them, major cities — such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates or Doha, Qatar’s capital — could not sustain their current populations.
“Desalination facilities are oftentimes necessary for the survival of the civilian population and intentional destruction of those types of facilities is a war crime,” said Niku Jafarnia, a researcher at Human Rights Watch.
While less reliant on desalination, Iran’s water situation is dire
See how desalination works. (AP Animation: Panagiotis Mouzakis)
After a fifth year of extreme drought, some Iranian media reports say reservoirs supplying Tehran, the country’s capital, are below 10% capacity. Satellite pictures analyzed by The Associated Press also show reservoirs noticeably depleted. The country still draws most of its water from rivers, reservoirs and depleted underground aquifers.
Israeli airstrikes on March 7 on oil depots surrounding Tehran produced heavy smoke and acid rain. Experts warned the fallout could contaminate soil and parts of the city’s water supply.
“Attacking water facilities, even one, could end up being harmful to the population in such a severe water scarcity context,” Jafarnia said.
Before the war that Israel and the United States launched on Feb. 28, Iran had been racing to expand desalination along its southern coast and pump some of the water inland, but infrastructure constraints, energy costs and international sanctions have sharply limited scalability.
Across the Gulf, many desalination plants are tied to power stations
The Mina Al-Ahmadi oil refinery operates in Kuwait, March 20, 2026. (AP Photo, File)
The Mina Al-Ahmadi oil refinery operates in Kuwait, March 20, 2026. (AP Photo, File)
In Kuwait, about 90% of drinking water comes from desalination, along with roughly 86% in Oman and about 70% in Saudi Arabia. The technology removes salt from seawater — most commonly by pushing it through ultrafine membranes in a process known as reverse osmosis — to produce the freshwater that sustains cities, hotels, industry and some agriculture across one of the world’s driest regions.
Even where the plants are connected to national grids with backup supply routes, disruptions can cascade across interconnected systems, said David Michel, senior fellow for water security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“It’s an asymmetrical tactic,” he said. “Iran doesn’t have the same capacity to strike back … But it does have this possibility to impose costs on the Gulf countries to push them to intervene or call for a cessation of hostilities.”
Desalination plants have multiple stages — intake systems, treatment facilities, energy supplies — and damage to any part of that chain can interrupt production, according to Ed Cullinane, Mideast editor at Global Water Intelligence, a publisher serving the water industry.
“None of these assets are any more protected than any of the municipal areas that are currently being hit by ballistic missiles or drones,” Cullinane said.
Two women from the Iranian Red Crescent Society stand as a thick plume of smoke from a U.S.-Israeli strike on an oil storage facility late Saturday rises into the sky in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
Two women from the Iranian Red Crescent Society stand as a thick plume of smoke from a U.S.-Israeli strike on an oil storage facility late Saturday rises into the sky in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
The Gulf produces about a third of the world’s crude exports and energy revenues underpin national economies. Fighting has already halted tanker traffic through key shipping routes and disrupted port activity, forcing some producers to curb exports as storage tanks fill.
“Everyone thinks of Saudi Arabia and their neighbors as petrostates. But I call them saltwater kingdoms. They’re human-made fossil-fueled water superpowers,” said Michael Christopher Low, director of the Middle East Center at the University of Utah. “It’s both a monumental achievement of the 20th century and a certain kind of vulnerability.”
Trump’s comments came as the conflict intensified, with Tehran striking a key water and electrical plant in Kuwait and an oil refinery in Israel coming under attack, while U.S. and Israeli forces launched a new wave of strikes on Iran.
US and Gulf governments have long recognized the risk
Smoke rises from an Israeli airstrike in Dahiyeh, Beirut’s southern suburbs, March 9, 2026. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File)
Smoke rises from an Israeli airstrike in Dahiyeh, Beirut’s southern suburbs, March 9, 2026. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File)
A 2010 CIA analysis warned that attacks on desalination facilities could trigger national crises in several Gulf states, and prolonged outages could last months if critical equipment were destroyed. More than 90% of the Gulf’s desalinated water comes from just 56 plants, the report stated, and “each of these critical plants is extremely vulnerable to sabotage or military action.”
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have invested in pipeline networks, storage reservoirs and other redundancies designed to cushion short-term disruptions. But smaller states such as Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait have fewer backup supplies.
Desalination has expanded in part because climate change is intensifying drought across the region. The plants themselves are highly energy-intensive and emit massive amounts of carbon, while their coastal locations make them vulnerable to extreme weather and rising seas.
Past Mideast conflicts have seen attacks on desalination plants
Workers walk in an area at a degassing station in Zubair oil field, whose operations have being reduced due to the Mideast war triggered by the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, near Basra, Iraq, March 28, 2026. (AP Photo/Leo Correa, File)
Workers walk in an area at a degassing station in Zubair oil field, whose operations have being reduced due to the Mideast war triggered by the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, near Basra, Iraq, March 28, 2026. (AP Photo/Leo Correa, File)
During Iraq’s 1990-1991 invasion of Kuwait, retreating Iraqi forces sabotaged power stations and desalination facilities, said Low, from the University of Utah, while millions of barrels of crude oil were deliberately released into the Persian Gulf, which threatened seawater intake pipes used by desalination plants across the region.
Workers rushed to deploy protective booms around the intake valves of major facilities but the destruction left Kuwait largely without fresh water and dependent on emergency water imports. Full recovery took years.
In recent years, Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels have targeted Saudi desalination facilities as tensions escalated.
International humanitarian law, including provisions of the Geneva Conventions, prohibit targeting civilian infrastructure indispensable to the survival of the population, including drinking water facilities.
___
Follow Annika Hammerschlag on Instagram @ahammergram.
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment
The Dictatorship
Comer’s excuses for DOJ fall flat as he concedes it ‘botched’ Epstein files
“Botched.” That was apparently House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer’s, R-Ky., assessment of the Justice Department’s handling, or mishandling, of the Epstein files under President Donald Trump. Comer made his critical comments to BLN on Monday night, awkwardly enough, during an attempt to defend the administration from criticism.
Comer also cast some blame on Jeffrey Epstein’s victims for delaying the release of files related to the late sex criminal, suggesting that class action lawsuits and victims’ demands for redactions have caused holdups, despite a federal law and congressional subpoena requiring the release of the vast majority of files related to Epstein.
This explanation doesn’t account for the department withholding documents detailing sexual assault allegations against Trump and other wealthy Epstein associates (all of whom have denied any wrongdoing). Comer’s excuse also doesn’t seem to explain a heavily redacted document that details a 2015 probe by the Drug Enforcement Administration into whether Epstein and others used drugs in connection with a prostitution ring. And of course, it doesn’t account for the inadequate redactions that exposed many victims’ names and personal details when some documents were initially released.
When BLN’s Jake Tapper noted the Trump administration has not released the files as mandated and has redacted names of individuals in Epstein’s inner circle, the chairman was seemingly forced to concede.
“Well, I think the Justice Department has botched this,” Comer said. “I don’t think anyone in America — Republican or, you know, avid Trump supporter — would defend the way that this has been rolled out.”
Some might say “botched” is too generous a characterization, given it suggests there was, at some point, a meaningful attempt to meet public expectations and comply with the law.
I can also think of more than a few Republicans who have defended and continue to defend the way the administration has handled the Epstein files, including TrumpAttorney General Pam Bondi and House Speaker Mike JohnsonR-La.
Comer himself has repeatedly thanked the administration for its “commitment to transparency.”
But Comer’s comment Monday was a prime example of the honesty that slips out of the chairman when he’s trying to defend Trump and his allies while discussing Epstein. Another example came in early March, when he said the DOJ in Trump’s first term moved to kill a 2019 state probe into Epstein’s New Mexico ranch.
“The federal government asked New Mexico to stop their investigation, I believe back in 2019, of that ranch,” Comer told Fox News. “So there’s just so many questions about how the government failed the victims and how government failed in trying to prosecute Epstein sooner. I mean, this whole thing doesn’t make sense.”
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics11 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’






