Connect with us

Economics

Donald Trump’s potential SCOTUS picks

Published

on

WHEN HE RAN for president in 2016, Donald Trump released two lists of potential justices to assure Republicans he would choose conservatives to fill Supreme Court vacancies. He issued a third list in 2017 and final roster in 2020—days before Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death allowed him to cement a 6-3 conservative majority on America’s highest court.

Mr Trump recently said his campaign has turned listless because he “no longer need[s]” to shore up his conservative bona fides. Indeed, thanks to Mr Trump the court has overturned Roe v Wade, bolstered gun rights, hobbled administrative agencies, battered the wall separating church from state and all but immunised presidents from criminal prosecution. With large majorities deploring the end of Roe and the court’s popularity in the dumps, announcing plans to push the court still further to the right may not be an enticement to swing voters. Still, if he is re-elected Mr Trump may get to appoint at least two more justices, because both Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito might decide to go on his watch to keep the court conservative. That would take him to a total of five justices, a feat only a handful of presidents have managed.

Who would they be? The Centre for Judicial Renewal, a wing of the American Family Association, a religious-right organisation, trumpets five candidates and warns Mr Trump off four judges he appointed to circuit courts because, among other things, one (Amul Tharpar) used a transgender litigant’s preferred pronouns and another (Neomi Rao) converted to Judaism. One of its “green rating” picks, chosen for his “biblical worldview” (one of its ten attributes of a “constitutional judge”) is James Ho, who was tapped by Mr Trump in 2017 for a seat on an appellate court—and who appeared on his 2020 Supreme Court list.

Judge Ho is the most combative jurist on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, America’s most conservative intermediate court. Even on a tribunal that forces right-wing causes backed by dubious legal principles onto the Supreme Court’s docket, Judge Ho distinguishes himself.

In June, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, Justice Brett Kavanaugh laid out an error in a ruling by Judge Ho and two colleagues that had rolled back access to mifepristone, an abortion medication. The pro-life doctors challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s regulations, Justice Kavanaugh explained, lacked the right to sue because the mifepristone rules had caused them no harm. No mention was made of Judge Ho’s peculiar argument that doctors who “delight in working with their unborn patients” can challenge rules governing abortion pills because they “experience an aesthetic injury” when fetuses are aborted.

The contention that doctors have standing to oppose a medication because it strips them of “a source of profound joy” is not Judge Ho’s only injection of far-fetched positions—and personal scruples—into his jurisprudence. Early in his tenure he wrote of the “moral tragedy of abortion” in a case involving a Texan law requiring the burial of fetal remains. As solicitor-general of Texas in 2009, he wrote a brief describing the right to bear arms as “the ultimate guarantor of all the other liberties enjoyed by Americans”. Two years ago, a covid public-health measure in Mississippi challenged by Golden Glow, a tanning salon, spurred Judge Ho to call for a return to Lochner v New York—the decision that struck down decades of worker protections until the Supreme Court abandoned it in 1937.

Judge Ho also regularly inserts himself into culture-war battles, boycotting graduates of Yale and Columbia for clerkships and lashing out at critics. This outspokenness beyond his chambers is in stark contrast to the more reserved man he could succeed under a second Trump presidency, Justice Thomas. At 76, he is the oldest, and longest-serving, sitting justice. But like Justice Thomas, Judge Ho, aged 51, purports to interpret the constitution in light of its original meaning. Both men seem to have idiosyncratic impressions of that meaning, often writing only for themselves to articulate a position none of their fellow jurists are willing to defend. The ties are intimate: Justice Thomas hired Mr Ho as a law clerk in 2005 and, 13 years later, administered his oath of office in the personal library of Harlan Crow, the right-wing billionaire from whom Justice Thomas has accepted luxury trips, raising  ethics concerns.

Judge Ho has a colleague on the Fifth Circuit who could also find himself elevated if the justice he clerked for in 2008—Samuel Alito—retires. Andrew Oldham, aged 46, may lack Judge Ho’s bombast, but his views on the law are just as radical. During his confirmation hearing in 2018, Judge Oldham declined to say whether Brown v Board of Education, a ruling that declared segregation in schools unconstitutional, was correctly decided. He has pursued a deregulatory agenda on the Fifth Circuit that has, at times, found friendly majorities at the Supreme Court. On October 25th, he wrote for Judge Ho and another short-list pick of the Centre for Judicial Renewal, Judge Kyle Duncan, that counting mail-in ballots postmarked by election day but received a few days later is illegal—despite the long-standing practice being adopted in nearly half of America’s states.

If Republicans take control of the White House and Senate in January, little will stand in the way of Mr Trump seating the likes of Judges Ho and Oldham. Their prospects may turn on the Senate margin; with at least a 52-48 gap, Mr Trump could afford to lose Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, two moderate Republicans, and still eke out enough yeas to entrench a MAGA Supreme Court for a generation.

Continue Reading

Economics

Job openings showed surprising increase to 7.4 million in April

Published

on

JOLTS beats estimates, posts best number since February

Employers increased job openings more than expected in April while hiring and layoffs also both rose, according to a report Tuesday that showed a relatively steady labor market.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey showed available jobs totaled nearly 7.4 million, an increase of 191,000 from March and higher than the 7.1 million consensus forecast by economists surveyed by FactSet. On an annual basis, the level was off 228,000, or about 3%.

The ratio of available jobs to unemployed workers was down close to 1.03 to 1 for the month, close to the March level.

Hiring also increased for the month, rising by 169,000 to 5.6 million, while layoffs fell by 196,000 to 1.79 million.

Quits, an indicator of worker confidence in their ability to find another job, edged lower, falling by 150,000 to 3.2 million.

“The labor market is returning to more normal levels despite the uncertainty within the macro outlook,” wrote Jeffrey Roach, chief economist at LPL Research. “Underlying patterns in hirings and firings suggest the labor market is holding steady.”

In other economic news Tuesday, the Commerce Department reported that new orders for manufactured goods fell more than expected in April. Orders fell 3.7% on the month, more than the 3.3% Dow Jones forecast and indicative of declining demand after swelling 3.4% in March as businesses sought to get ahead of President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

Economics

Euro zone inflation, May 2025

Published

on

Shoppers buy fresh vegetables, fruit, and herbs at an outdoor produce market under green-striped canopies in Regensburg, Upper Palatinate, Bavaria, Germany, on April 19, 2025.

Michael Nguyen/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Euro zone inflation fell below the European Central Bank’s 2% target in May, hitting a cooler-than-expected 1.9% as the services print eased sharply, flash data from statistics agency Eurostat showed Tuesday.

Economists polled by Reuters had expected the May reading to come in at 2%, compared to the previous month’s 2.2% figure.

The closely watched services inflation print cooled sharply, amounting to 3.2% last month, compared to the previous 4% reading. So-called core inflation, which excludes energy, food, tobacco and alcohol prices, also eased, falling from 2.7% in April to 2.3% in May.

“May’s steep decline in services inflation, to its lowest level in more than three years, confirms that the previous month’s jump was just an Easter-related blip and that the downward trend in services inflation remains on track,” Jack Allen-Reynolds, deputy chief euro zone economist at Capital Economics said in a note.

Inflation has been moving back towards the 2% mark throughout 2025 amid uncertainty for the euro zone economy.

The latest figures will be considered by the European Central Bank as it prepares to make its next interest rate decision later this week. Markets were last pricing in an around 95% chance of interest rates being cut by a further 25-basis-points on Thursday.

Back in April, the central bank took its key rate, the deposit facility rate, to 2.25% — nearly half of the high of 4% notched in the middle of 2023.

But the global economic outlook remains muddied. U.S. President Donald Trump’s protectionist tariff plans have been casting shadows over the global economic outlook, with his so-called “reciprocal” duties — which are also set to affect the European Union — widely seen as harmful to economic growth. Their immediate potential impact on inflation is less clear, with central bank policymakers and analysts noting that it could depend on any potential countermeasures.

Despite the transatlantic tumult, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in its latest Economic Outlook report out on Tuesday said it was expecting the euro area to expand by 1% in 2025, unchanged from its previous forecast. Euro area inflation is meanwhile projected to come in at 2.2% this year, also in line with the March report.

Euro country bond yields were last lower after the fresh inflation data, with the German 10-year bond yield falling by over two basis points to 2.499%, while the yield on the French 10-year bond was last down by more than one basis point to 3.169%.

The euro was meanwhile last around 0.3% lower against the dollar.

Continue Reading

Economics

U.S. growth forecast cut further by OECD as Trump tariffs sour outlook

Published

on

Old Navy and Gap retail stores are seen as people walk through Times Square in New York City on April 9, 2025.

Angela Weiss | Afp | Getty Images

Economic growth forecasts for the U.S. and globally were cut further by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development as President Donald Trump’s tariff turmoil weighs on expectations.

The U.S. growth outlook was downwardly revised to just 1.6% this year and 1.5% in 2026. In March, the OECD was still expecting a 2.2% expansion in 2025.

The fallout from Trump’s tariff policy, elevated economic policy uncertainty, a slowdown of net immigration and a smaller federal workforce were cited as reasons for the latest downgrade.

Global growth, meanwhile, is also expected to be lower than previously forecast, with the OECD saying that “the slowdown is concentrated in the United States, Canada and Mexico,” while other economies are projected to see smaller downward revisions.

“Global GDP growth is projected to slow from 3.3% in 2024 to 2.9% this year and in 2026 … on the technical assumption that tariff rates as of mid-May are sustained despite ongoing legal challenges,” the OECD said.

It had previously forecast global growth of 3.1% this year and 3% in 2026.

“The global outlook is becoming increasingly challenging,” the report said. “Substantial increases in barriers to trade, tighter financial conditions, weaker business and consumer confidence and heightened policy uncertainty will all have marked adverse effects on growth prospects if they persist.”

Frequent changes regarding tariffs have continued in recent weeks, leading to uncertainty in global markets and economies. Some of the most recent developments include Trump’s reciprocal, country-specific levies being struck down by the U.S. Court of International Trade, before then being reinstated by an appeals court, as well as Trump saying he would double steel duties to 50%.

The OECD adjusted its inflation forecast, saying “higher trade costs, especially in countries raising tariffs, will also push up inflation, although their impact will be offset partially by weaker commodity prices.”

The impact of tariffs on inflation has been hotly debated, with many central bank policymakers and global analysts suggesting it remains unclear how the levies will impact prices, and that much depends on factors like potential countermeasures.

The OECD’s inflation outlook shows a notable difference between the U.S. and some of the world’s other major economies. For instance, while G20 countries are now expected to record 3.6% inflation in 2025 — down from 3.8% in March’s estimate — the projection for the U.S. has risen to 3.2%, up from a previous 2.8%.

U.S. inflation could even be closing in on 4% toward the end of 2025, the OECD said.

Continue Reading

Trending