The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday over whether a federal emergency powers law authorizes President Trump's most sweeping tariffs.

In one of the most significant legal cases for President Donald Trump's administration, the Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared skeptical of the president’s claim of unbounded tariff authority -- though some of the justices signaled a potential willingness to give the president some flexibility on foreign trade.

Today, the United Kingdom’s High Court of Justice issued a highly awaited ruling in a case which was expected to have major implications in determining liability for generative artificial intelligence (AI) developers under UK intellectual property law.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing Trump, was first up to the lectern, telling the court that Trump imposed the tariffs to deal with two dire emergencies: a persistent trade imbalance and the flood of fentanyl entering the United States.

Lower courts have ruled that the president does not have the authority to impose sweeping taxes on imported goods, but the nation's highest court will have the final say.

Chief Justice of India BR Gavai said the new Bombay High Court building should embody justice, not luxury. He urged simplicity in design, calling courts “temples of justice, not 7-star hotels.”

A federal appellate panel highlighted the high court decision in litigation over Trump’s attempt to reverse his New York state hush money conviction.

All three of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices who sought reelection Tuesday will get another term, ensuring Democratic jurists keep their majority on the presidential battleground state’s highest court.