United News of Bangladesh

Residents, government crews and a powerful rail snowplow nicknamed “Darth Vader” worked to clear heavy snow across much of the northeastern United States after a severe and, in some places, record-breaking storm that caused thousands of flight cancellations and school closures. Forecasters said the storm, considered the strongest in about a decade, dumped more than 2 feet of snow in parts of the region on Monday. By Tuesday, roads were gradually reopening, some public transport services resumed and electricity was restored for many of the hundreds of thousands affected in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware and Rhode Island. Another storm could hit later this week, though it is expected to be weaker. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced schools would reopen for in-person classes Tuesday after Monday’s closure, despite large piles of snow still blocking sidewalks. Some officials and teachers’ leaders warned that attendance could be low due to travel difficulties. Meanwhile, Philadelphia continued online classes for two days, and several districts on Long Island and nearby suburbs canceled school again on Tuesday. Danish forces evacuate ill US submariner off Greenland The National Weather Service said even a few more inches of snow could slow cleanup in the hardest-hit areas. More than 2,000 flights were canceled nationwide on Tuesday, mainly affecting airports in New York, New Jersey and Boston, according to FlightAware. Rhode Island’s T.F. Green International Airport temporarily shut down after receiving nearly 38 inches of snow, breaking a record from 1978. Central Park recorded 19 inches, while Warwick, Rhode Island, saw more than 3 feet. Strong winds also lashed coastal areas. Several cities and states declared emergencies as recovery efforts continued.

US President Donald Trump has warned that countries attempting to back away from recent trade commitments could face steeper tariffs, following a Supreme Court ruling that blocked most of the broad import levies he imposed last year. Trump’s warning came as governments around the world reassessed the status of tariffs and trade agreements after the Supreme Court of the United States last week struck down the bulk of the duties introduced under a 1977 emergency law. The ruling said the statute did not give the president authority to impose the sweeping measures. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump cautioned countries against using the court decision to retreat from deals negotiated in response to last year’s tariffs. He said any nation that “plays games” with the ruling would be met with tariffs higher than those recently agreed. The decision has injected fresh uncertainty into global trade. The European Union said on Monday it would suspend ratification of a trade deal agreed with Washington last summer, while India said it would delay talks aimed at finalising a recent agreement. The ruling has not altered the White House’s broader trade stance, officials said. Trump has already announced a new global tariff of 15 percent, introduced using a different legal authority, which is due to take effect this week. Some products are exempt, and the measure is set to expire after 150 days unless Congress approves an extension. Countries that negotiated reduced tariffs in exchange for investment pledges or market access concessions are now seeking clarity on whether those arrangements still stand. The UK said it was pressing US officials for confirmation that its agreement, which set tariffs at 10 percent, would remain in force. UK Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle said the latest US announcement had created uncertainty and that London was considering all options to protect businesses and consumers. Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee, said approval of the EU-US deal had been paused while lawmakers sought clarity, describing the situation as more uncertain than ever. Trump has moved to rely on other legal tools to maintain his tariff agenda, including invoking Section 122, which allows temporary tariffs without congressional approval, and ordering investigations under Section 301 into alleged unfair trade practices. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the administration had found ways to continue its policy despite the court setback, adding that while the legal mechanisms may change, the underlying approach would not. Financial markets reacted nervously to the uncertainty, with US stocks falling on Monday. Meanwhile, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats would oppose any attempt to extend the new tariffs, arguing they would deepen economic harm. Trump, however, has insisted he does not need congressional approval to impose tariffs, signalling that trade tensions are likely to persist in the coming months.   With inputs from BBC

An armed man was shot dead after breaching the secure perimeter of Donald Trump’s Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago, the United States Secret Service said. The incident occurred around 1:30am local time on Sunday while the president was in Washington, DC. Authorities said the suspect was carrying a shotgun and a fuel can and was confronted by Secret Service agents and a Palm Beach County sheriff’s deputy. The agency said the man unlawfully entered the restricted area near the property’s north gate and ignored commands to drop the items. When he raised the weapon, officers fired to neutralise the threat. No law enforcement officers were injured. US media identified the suspect as Austin T Martin of North Carolina, citing CBS. Local authorities said his family had reported him missing earlier on Sunday, and that information was later shared with federal agencies. Investigators are examining whether the suspect purchased the firearm during his drive to Florida. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is assisting with the probe. Officials said it remains unclear whether the weapon was loaded. Secret Service Director Sean Curran travelled to Florida following the incident for post-incident reviews, the agency said, noting that security operations and communications are being reassessed. Mar-a-Lago is protected by multiple security layers, including local sheriff patrols and an inner Secret Service cordon, with visitors and vehicles subject to screening. The shooting comes amid heightened concern over political violence in the United States, after previous assassination attempts and threats against the president in recent years.   With inputs from BBC

The Pentagon and the Energy Department have airlifted a small nuclear reactor from California to Utah for the first time, showcasing the United States’ ability to quickly deploy portable nuclear power for military and civilian use. The nearly 700-mile flight on a C-17 military aircraft on Feb. 15 carried a 5-megawatt microreactor without nuclear fuel. Officials say the move highlights the Trump administration’s push to expand nuclear energy to meet rising electricity demand from artificial intelligence and data centers, as well as to strengthen energy security at military bases. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Defense Undersecretary Michael Duffey described the airlift as a breakthrough that could help speed up licensing and deployment of next-generation microreactors. President Donald Trump has strongly backed nuclear power as a reliable, carbon-free energy source, even as his administration prioritizes fossil fuels and takes a cautious stance on renewables. The portable reactor, about the size of a minivan, is designed to generate up to 5 megawatts of electricity, enough to power roughly 5,000 homes. Officials said at least three such reactors are expected to reach operational capability later this year. Microreactors are intended to provide flexible power in remote areas, including military installations that may need to operate independently from the civilian grid. The reactor flown to Utah will undergo testing at the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab, with fuel expected to be supplied from a federal site in Nevada. However, some experts have raised safety and cost concerns, questioning whether the technology is economically viable or secure once fueled and transported. Critics also say long-term plans for handling nuclear waste remain unresolved. Despite the concerns, US officials say the project marks a major step toward faster, more mobile nuclear power deployment.

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a major portion of tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, triggering positive reactions from analysts, economists and international media, while leaving questions over the future course of US trade policy. In a 6–3 ruling, the court said the executive branch overstepped its legal authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The judges found that the law does not allow the president to impose sweeping, across-the-board tariffs without clear approval from Congress. Political analyst Sandile Swana of South Africa said the decision reaffirmed that taxation powers belong to Congress, not the executive. He added that the tariffs mainly hurt US businesses and consumers rather than foreign exporters. Croatian economist Ljubo Jurcic described the ruling as a serious blow to what he called a misguided economic approach. He said the tariff policy damaged the US economy and warned that companies affected could now seek refunds worth billions of dollars. Jurcic also argued that unilateral trade measures failed to deliver real benefits while increasing costs for Americans. European markets reacted positively. France’s leading business daily Les Echos reported a rally across regional markets, noting that the CAC 40 briefly crossed the 8,500-point mark for the first time. Greece’s financial outlet OT also cited gains, driven by investor hopes of easing trade tensions. Portuguese analyst Rui Cardoso called the verdict a “complete defeat” for Trump, saying countries that had accepted what he described as unfair trade deals with Washington might now push for renegotiation. He also criticised the European Union for taking an overly soft position, arguing recent developments showed it had conceded more than necessary. Trump imposes new 10% tariff after court blocks global import taxes In Africa, economists said the ruling could bring limited relief to exporters, though the impact would differ by sector and country. Andre Thomashausen, professor emeritus of international law at the University of South Africa, said the decision could open the door for refund claims and help restore fairer competition. South African economist Chris Harmse said industries such as automobiles and agriculture could benefit if tariff barriers are lifted. Rwandan economist Teddy Kaberuka said the tariffs had unsettled the global economy by fuelling a trade war and straining relations with key partners, also weighing on financial markets. He warned that continued uncertainty could slow growth, especially in Africa, where economies remain highly vulnerable. Analysts cautioned that risks have not disappeared. Edward Fishman, a former US State Department and Treasury official, said the ruling may limit the use of tariffs as a quick geoeconomic weapon, though they could still be applied through other legal mechanisms during trade talks. Observers agree that while the court has curbed the recent tariff drive, the long-term direction of US trade policy remains uncertain, keeping global markets and trading partners on edge.

President Donald Trump reacted angrily Friday after the Supreme Court struck down his signature global tariffs, a move that included dissent from two of the three justices he appointed. Trump, who has long expected personal loyalty from his appointees, criticized the court sharply, saying he was “ashamed” of the justices who opposed him and questioning their courage. Speaking in the White House briefing room, he singled out Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, calling their votes “an embarrassment to their families.” Vice President JD Vance also condemned the ruling on X, describing it as “lawlessness from the Court,” though he avoided personal attacks. Legal challenges to the tariffs had come from groups across the political spectrum, including the libertarian Liberty Justice Center and business-friendly organizations like the Chamber of Commerce. The decision highlights the ongoing tension between Trump’s aggressive use of presidential powers—covering trade, immigration, and other policy areas—and the Supreme Court’s role as a check on executive authority. Trump’s fraught relationship with the court is not new. During his first term, he won a major ruling protecting him from prosecution over efforts to overturn the 2020 election and secured repeated emergency appeals to enforce parts of his immigration agenda. But the court has also rebuked him publicly, particularly Chief Justice John Roberts, though Trump did not name him in Friday’s remarks. Presidential criticism of Supreme Court decisions has historical precedent. Thomas Jefferson opposed the landmark Marbury v. Madison ruling, Franklin Roosevelt tried and failed to expand the court over New Deal frustrations, and Barack Obama openly criticized the Citizens United decision in 2010. Experts note, however, that Trump’s personal attacks on justices—especially those he appointed—cross a line. “It’s fine to criticize a ruling, but demagogic to claim justices lack courage,” said Ed Whelan, former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia. Past presidents have privately regretted appointing certain justices, including Dwight D. Eisenhower after Brown v. Board of Education, but none aired such criticisms publicly during live broadcasts. Trump and members of the court are expected to be in the same room Tuesday for his State of the Union address, a setting likely to be tense given the recent clash.

US President Donald Trump has announced a new 10% global tariff, hours after the US Supreme Court struck down most of his previous import taxes, ruling that he exceeded his constitutional authority. Trump strongly criticised the court’s decision, calling it “terrible” and attacking the justices who opposed his trade policy. He unveiled the new tariff plan at the White House shortly after the court, in a 6–3 ruling, blocked the global duties imposed last year. The verdict marked a major win for US states and businesses that challenged the tariffs, potentially opening the door to billions of dollars in refunds. It also created fresh uncertainty for global trade. Trump, however, warned that any refunds would likely be delayed by lengthy legal battles and said the issue could remain in court for years. The president said his administration would use alternative legal authorities to continue imposing tariffs, arguing that such measures boost domestic investment and manufacturing. The legal dispute centred on sweeping import taxes announced last year on goods from nearly every country. The tariffs initially targeted Mexico, Canada and China before expanding to dozens of trading partners during what Trump called “Liberation Day” last April. The White House relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to justify the move, saying it allowed the president to regulate trade during a national emergency. Critics argued the law does not authorise tariffs and accused the administration of bypassing Congress’s taxing powers. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts said Congress had only delegated tariff authority in clear and limited terms, adding that it would have explicitly granted such power if intended. The ruling was supported by the court’s three liberal justices and two Trump-appointed conservatives, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch. Three other conservative justices dissented. US Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s global tariffs Trump later expressed anger at the Republican-appointed justices who ruled against him, accusing them of disloyalty. Financial markets reacted positively, with Wall Street stocks rising as businesses welcomed the decision. Despite the ruling, Trump on Friday signed a proclamation imposing a new 10% tariff under Section 122, a rarely used law that allows temporary tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days, after which congressional approval is required. The new tariff will take effect on 24 February. The order includes broad exemptions covering some minerals, natural resources, fertilisers, agricultural products, pharmaceuticals, electronics and certain vehicles. Canada and Mexico will remain largely exempt under the USMCA trade agreement. Countries that previously signed trade deals with the US, including the UK, India and the European Union, will now face the flat 10 percent tariff, according to a White House official, who said those nations are still expected to honour earlier concessions. Trade analysts said the decision has further complicated the global trade environment. International reaction remained cautious, with the European Commission saying it was studying the ruling carefully. #From BBC

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday struck down President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, delivering a significant setback to a central pillar of his economic agenda. In a 6-3 ruling, the court said Trump’s use of an emergency powers law to impose wide-ranging import duties, including so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly all countries, was unconstitutional because the authority to levy taxes rests with Congress, not the president. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the framers did not assign any part of the taxing power to the executive branch. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented, arguing the tariffs were legally permissible, though their policy merits could be debated. Reacting to the decision, Trump called it “deeply disappointing” and criticised the justices who voted against the tariffs. The ruling marks the first major element of his broad economic agenda to be squarely rejected by the high court. The court did not clarify whether businesses that paid billions of dollars in tariffs would receive refunds, noting the process could be complicated. Federal data show the Treasury collected over $133 billion from the import taxes by December, with long-term impacts projected to reach trillions. However, the decision does not prevent the administration from pursuing tariffs under other statutory authorities, though those come with stricter limits. Legal challengers, including small businesses and several states, hailed the verdict as a reaffirmation that Congress, not the president, controls taxation. Trade partners also sought clarity on Washington’s next steps following the ruling.

Six women who died in the deadliest avalanche in the United States in decades were part of a tight-knit group of close friends and seasoned backcountry skiers, their families said on Thursday. The women were among eight friends on a guided ski trip in the rugged Sierra Nevada mountains. Two members of the group survived the avalanche and were rescued along with four others, including one guide. Three guides are among those dead or presumed dead. In a statement released through a spokesperson, the families said they were overwhelmed by grief and focused on supporting their children while honoring the lives of the women, all of whom shared a deep love for the outdoors. The victims were identified as Carrie Atkin, Liz Clabaugh, Danielle Keatley, Kate Morse, Caroline Sekar and Kate Vitt. They lived in the Bay Area, Idaho and near Lake Tahoe. The families requested privacy and said many questions remain unanswered. According to the statement, the trip had been carefully planned in advance, and the women were equipped with proper avalanche safety gear. The families said the group was highly experienced, well trained and respectful of mountain conditions, and that they relied on professional guides during the trip. Authorities are now examining what the guides and the tour company knew about avalanche warnings and the risks posed by a powerful winter storm that hit the region during the outing. Trump warns of ‘bad things’ if Iran fails to reach deal as US carrier moves closer Recovery efforts remain on hold due to dangerous conditions, said Ashley Quadros, a spokesperson for the Nevada County Sheriff’s Office. Crews are unable to safely reach the site, and the search for a ninth person continues. The Sierra Avalanche Center warned that additional snowfall and strong winds could further destabilize the snowpack around Lake Tahoe. Wind gusts along ridgetops may reach up to 60 miles per hour, with a high risk of large avalanches expected through at least Friday morning. Public access to parts of Tahoe National Forest, including the Castle Peak area, has been closed until March 15 as conditions remain hazardous. The names of the other victims have not yet been released.

Conservation groups and an Iñupiat organization on Tuesday filed lawsuits challenging the Trump administration’s renewed push to expand oil and gas drilling in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska and an upcoming lease sale, saying the plan wrongly opens up ecologically sensitive lands that have long been protected. At least two lawsuits contesting the March 18 lease sale were lodged. One case, filed in federal court in Alaska, was brought by Earthjustice on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth. Another was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., by The Wilderness Society and Grandmothers Growing Goodness, which aims to highlight the effects of oil and gas development on Iñupiat communities. The proposed sale would be the first in the reserve since 2019 and the first under a law passed by Congress last year that calls for at least five lease sales over 10 years. The reserve spans a vast area on Alaska’s North Slope, about the size of Indiana, and is home to wildlife such as caribou, bears, wolves and millions of migratory birds. The lawsuits name the U.S. Department of Interior, the Bureau of Land Management and senior officials as defendants. The Earthjustice case also includes the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. An email seeking comment was sent Tuesday to an Interior Department spokesperson. The dispute reflects a long-running debate over how much of the reserve should be open to development. A Trump-era plan would allow leasing on roughly 80% of the reserve. Supporters say the area was set aside for energy production, while critics argue the law requires balancing drilling with protection of sensitive habitats. Views among Alaska Native groups are also divided, with some backing development and others warning it could harm local communities. The lawsuits say next month’s sale includes land near Teshekpuk Lake and the Colville River, previously recognized for their wildlife and subsistence importance. They claim notices for the sale give no clear reason for including these tracts and fail to acknowledge earlier findings that the areas should remain off-limits. The Earthjustice complaint says a management plan behind the sale “unlawfully removes lands from the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area and eliminates the Colville River Special Area.” It adds, “Congress has not authorized the Secretary to remove lands from or eliminate special areas, especially where those lands still contain the significant resource values that supported their designation.” The suits ask courts to cancel any leases issued in the sale and block future sales based on what plaintiffs call flawed environmental reviews and planning decisions.