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.

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.

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.

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.

In Trump tariff arguments, Justice Neil Gorsuch probed whether the IEEPA could justify a 50% tariff on gas-powered vehicles. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said likely yes during oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Nov.