Last July, President Donald Trump imposed 50 percent tariffs on various Canadian goods, a list he subsequently expanded to include additional imports, some of which he banned outright. His legal justification was Section 338 of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which Congress approved in 1930. Section 338 authorized tariffs in response to discriminatory trade practices. But in the 96 years since it was enacted, no president had ever used it to impose tariffs.

Why is that? According to a lawsuit that the Liberty Justice Center (LJC) filed on Tuesday in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the answer is clear: Section 338 was superseded by subsequent legislation that likewise targeted discriminatory trade barriers, beginning with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 and culminating in Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Section 301, the current remedy, includes requirements that Trump apparently sought to dodge by invoking Section 338 instead.

That maneuver is illegal, the LJC argues. "Congress already gave the executive branch a tool for responding to unfair foreign trade practices: Section 301, which requires an investigation, public comment and other safeguards," says Jeffrey M. Schwab, the LJC's director of litigation. "The administration cannot skip those protections by reaching for a 1930 statute that no president had ever used to impose a tariff."

Why not? "Where provisions in two acts are in irreconcilable conflict, the later act, to the extent of the conflict, constitutes an implied repeal of the earlier one," the lawsuit says. "Where a later act covers the whole subject of an earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute, it operates similarly as a repeal. And a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute controls the construction of an earlier one even absent express amendment."

Even if Section 338 somehow survived congressional approval of contrary laws, the LJC adds, Trump's tariffs exceed the authority it grants. And if Trump's interpretation of Section 338 were correct, the lawsuit says, the provision would violate the nondelegation doctrine, which bars Congress from delegating its tariff power to the president without providing "an intelligible principle" to guide and constrain his exercise of it.

Trump's Section 338 tariffs, in short, are "the Administration's latest attempt to exercise, through a statute never designed for the purpose, the tariff power that the Constitution assigns to Congress." That pattern should be familiar by now.

Shortly after taking office in 2025, Trump claimed to have discovered a previously unnoticed delegation of extensive tariff authority in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that does not mention import taxes and had never been used to impose them. That claim was rejected by every court that considered it, and last February the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs at all.

Trump responded to that decision by immediately announcing similarly broad tariffs under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which addresses "fundamental international payments problems" caused by "serious United States balance-of-payments deficits." In May, the CIT ruled that the new tariffs were illegal because Trump had failed to "identify balance-of-payments deficits within the meaning of Section 122."

Trump then switched to Plan C, invoking Section 301 of the Trade Act, which authorizes tariffs in response to a foreign "act, policy, or practice" that is "unreasonable or discriminatory" and "burdens or restricts" U.S. commerce. He claimed that provision justified tariffs on 86 trading partners, accounting for nearly all U.S. imports, because they had failed to "impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor." The CIT is currently weighing challenges to those tariffs, including an LJC lawsuit.

Trump's Section 338 tariffs have now added to the CIT's caseload. The LJC represents Gellert Global Group, an importer that was hit hard by those taxes after Trump added cheese to the list of disfavored Canadian goods. The lawsuit asks the CIT to certify a class of importers, numbering in "the hundreds, if not the thousands," that likewise have been clobbered by Trump's 50 percent tariffs.

Since Trump obviously is aware of Section 301, why did he resort to a never-used, seemingly obsolete provision to justify the tariffs on imports from Canada? As the LJC notes, Section 301 requires an investigation by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, "consultation with the foreign country concerned, notice, public comment, a hearing, and determinations within statutory deadlines." It also requires "that action be equivalent in value to the burden imposed, that duties be preferred over other import restrictions, and that actions terminate after four years absent a request for continuation and review."

Can Trump avoid those constraints by invoking Section 338 instead? The LJC thinks not: "Congress did not intend to leave in place a parallel authority that would allow the President to impose the same remedies, for the same conduct, free of every one of those safeguards."

Section 338 has been "impliedly repealed," the LJC argues. "At a minimum, Section 301 controls where, as here, the President seeks to respond to foreign practices within Section 301's scope, and the President may not impose duties in response to such practices while disregarding the procedures and limits Section 301 imposes. Because the President did not proceed under Section 301, the Section 338 Tariffs are unlawful whether or not Section 338 survives."

Even if you ignore subsequent legislation, the LJC argues, the Canadian policies that Trump cited when he announced the tariffs do not qualify as "discrimination" under Section 338. "Canada's motor vehicle surtax and its provinces' alcohol purchasing decisions are responses to tariffs that the United States imposed on Canada, not discrimination by Canada against the United States," it says. Trump also complained that Canada treats European cheese imports more favorably than U.S. cheese imports. But "when Congress enacted Section 338, a preference granted under a reciprocal agreement was not 'discrimination.'"

Section 338 "addresses discrimination: measures that single out United States commerce for worse treatment than the commerce of the world at large," the lawsuit says. "It is not a general authorization to impose tariffs whenever the President disagrees with a trading partner's policies, or whenever a trading partner responds to tariffs the United States has imposed on it."

Trump also was unfazed by Section 338's requirement that the president set duties to "offset" the costs imposed by discriminatory practices, which implies proportionality. Rather than attempt that, the LJC notes, Trump imposed "the statutory maximum rate of 50 percent without tying it to any measured burden."

As interpreted by Trump, the lawsuit warns, Section 338 authorizes the president to "impose tariffs of up to 50 percent on any products of any country that extends better treatment to any other country in any respect—including through any of the hundreds of preferential trade agreements to which the United States is not a party—or that responds to tariffs the United States has imposed on it." Yet Section 338 "contains no clear statement authorizing that power," contrary to the "major questions" doctrine, which applies to assertions of executive authority with "vast economic and political significance."

If Section 338 conferred the sort of unfettered authority that Trump is claiming, the LJC says, it "would supply no intelligible principle constraining the exercise of Congress's power to lay duties." His reading "would convert a narrow, fact-dependent provision into an effectively unrestricted delegation of Congress's tariff power," which would be "an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power."

This case "is not about the president," says LJC CEO Sara Albrecht. "It is about the presidency. No president should have the power to pull a dormant statute off the shelf and use it to impose sweeping tariffs or import bans without the limits Congress required."

The post Trump's 50% Tariffs on Canadian Goods Illegally Rely on a Superseded Statute, a Lawsuit Argues appeared first on Reason Magazine.

• Christina Applegate recently learned that she was misdiagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS).
• Applegate was first diagnosed in 2021 after multiple tests and worsening symptoms.
• About 15% of MS patients are believed to be misdiagnosed, given how complex the disorder is.

After being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) in 2021, living with severe symptoms, and becoming one of the most famous celebrities with the disorder, Christina Applegate learned some shocking news: She doesn't actually have MS.

In an October 20, two-part episode of her podcast "MeSsy" with Jamie Lynn Sigler (another actor diagnosed with MS), Applegate shared that she took over half a year off from recording the podcast to process the news of her MS misdiagnosis.

According to Applegate, her doctor framed the revelation as a positive update. "She came into my room and said, 'Congratulations, you don't have MS,'" Applegate said in the podcast.

But to Applegate, no longer having an explanation for the pain, balance issues, tremors, incontinence, and fatigue she'd been living with for years felt more like being "back at square one."

"You don't get misdiagnosed and then all of a sudden, I'm better," she said. "If anything, I've gotten worse, in some ways."

Applegate's story is far from a medical anomaly. MS researchers estimate that about 15% of worldwide MS patients are actually misdiagnosed, based on a 2024 meta-analysis of multiple studies.

The risks to patients are two-fold, Dr. Marwa Kaisey, an associate professor of neurology at Cedars-Sinai, who also appeared on the podcast, told Business Insider. "One is thinking you have MS — a lot of the medications we use to treat MS have side effects and risks like infections," she said. "The other category is, if you don't know what you have, then you're not getting treated for your actual diagnosis."

Kaisey and another researcher shared why MS is so challenging to diagnose — and why more people might end up with Applegate's experience in the future.

The race to diagnose a hard-to-diagnose disorder

There is no single blood test that can diagnose MS.

Instead, doctors often piece together an MS diagnosis using a neurological exam (testing balance and reflexes), MRI scans, a lumbar puncture (or spinal tap), and possible blood tests to rule out other conditions such as Lyme disease.

Sometimes, doctors overrely on a single diagnostic, such as an MRI finding, without performing enough other tests, Dr. Andrew J. Solomon, a professor of neurological sciences at the University of Vermont who co-authored the meta-analysis, told Business Insider.

In 2019, Solomon co-authored an MS misdiagnosis study that found that patients who were initially diagnosed with MS were later told they actually had other conditions, such as migraine, radiologically isolated syndrome, spondylopathy, and neuropathy, which can share overlapping symptoms with MS and similar brain scan results.

In the podcast, Applegate revealed that she had a nerve test to rule out peripheral neuropathy, as well as MRIs and a lumbar puncture. While her spinal fluid test showed a low level of immune proteins that can support an MS diagnosis, she had nearly 40 brain lesions and worsening symptoms, leading doctors to diagnose her with MS.

Solomon said MS should be diagnosed by "confirming each element of our diagnostic criteria and ruling out other things," rather than assuming it must be MS if the MRIs and symptoms fit.

The problem is, both physicians and patients are eager to diagnose MS as early as possible, he said. Correctly spotting MS early can lead to better treatment results and a higher likelihood of disability prevention, according to research.

Plus, for patients dealing with a plethora of debilitating symptoms, "a period of diagnostic uncertainty is uncomfortable," he said, even though the best course of action is to wait and perform more tests.

A new testing protocol revealed Applegate's misdiagnosis

In the podcast, Applegate shared that her brain lesions were missing "strings" associated with MS.

It's a finding associated with a new, more accurate diagnostic tool for Kaisey, who also co-authored the 2019 study with Solomon, explained on the podcast.

The central vein sign (CVS), is an MRI biomarker that can help differentiate MS brain lesions from ones associated with other disorders. It refers to a small vein that appears as a dot or thin line through the center of a brain lesion.

CVS was only recently adopted as part of the recommended MS diagnostic criteria, in 2025 — four years after Applegate was first diagnosed with MS. Kaisey told Business Insider that part of her work is expanding education around newer diagnostic tools, noting that not all physicians are using CVS yet.

Solomon hopes more doctors will include CVS in their diagnostic protocols, especially for existing MS patients or those who switch providers without being evaluated by their current doctors. "If something doesn't fit, there's an opportunity there to reevaluate if the diagnosis is right," he said.

Many misdiagnosed MS patients feel exactly like Applegate does

When it comes to learning about an MS misdiagnosis, Solomon said experiences like Applegate's aren't that uncommon.

"I've heard many stories where some doctor was very enthusiastic about telling a patient they actually didn't have MS," he said. "But many of these patients are suffering, and they still have symptoms. So it's not always necessarily a happy thing."

For Applegate, her initial MS diagnosis provided clarity and direction. "That was my answer to everything that was going on," Applegate said. Some might relate to Applegate's "square one" feeling, particularly if their doctor was an MS specialist and won't see them anymore, Solomon said. Without a formal diagnosis, they might also worry about insurance coverage for treatments that have provided some relief.

There is also the emotional part of having an MS diagnosis. "I leaned into other friends, I leaned into the community," Applegate said. "I had a reason as to why my day sucked every day, and now I don't have a reason."

Knowing she doesn't have MS also made her feel like she "let everybody down" after becoming one of the "poster children for MS," she said. It made her wonder if she was somehow imagining symptoms or at fault for her pain.

Given how common MS misdiagnosis is, Solomon believes it's a good thing that Applegate is sharing her story.

"It's kind of wonderful that Ms. Applegate is public with this because if the number is really 15%, you can do the math," he said. "There are a lot of people out there who might ask their doctors about the accuracy of their diagnosis and find out that, in fact, they had something else."

Phil Foden finishes a superb Manchester City movement against AEK Athens in the Champions League.

Phil Foden finishes a superb Manchester City movement against AEK Athens in the Champions League.

People of Israel party head vows to go all the way, receives endorsement from father of slain hostage Shani Louk minutes after IDF says Gaza strike killed her last kidnapper

A top Democratic super PAC is launching a $1.2 million ad campaign in the Mississippi Senate race, adding the deep-red state to its list of targets as the party seeks to flip the Senate in November. Senate Majority PAC (SMP) announced Tuesday that it will spend the money on television and digital ads through Election…

Her talent roster includes D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Adam Pally, Ed Weeks, Zarna Garg, Brandon Kyle Goodman and Fiona Dourif.

The director wasn't shy about discarding some of Tarantino's work on Netflix's 'Once Upon a Time in Hollywood' sequel.

Bajo un pavo real que encumbra la sala Manuel de Falla del Palacio de Longoria de Madrid, sede de la SGAE, han hecho su primera aparición pública después de 10 años las hermanas Llanos, fundadoras de Dover. Había un piano de cola al fondo que no ha llegado a sonar. La voz de Cristina (Madrid, 50 años, cantante y guitarrista) tampoco sonaba en público desde aquel último concierto que dio Dover en Getafe (Madrid) en 2015. Con el pelo pelirrojo y corto y siempre sonriente, Cristina se sentó al lado de su hermana Amparo (Madrid, 61 años, guitarrista), su fiel escudera desde de que nació. “No habría podido cantar nunca en un grupo sin mi hermana, su guitarra me llevaba a mí, era la tabla de salvación”, explicó Cristina, que viajó hasta sus primeros recuerdos: “Yo llegué al mundo y tú ya estabas allí. Ya había una conexión. Me bañabas. Eres muy especial, muy inteligente, Amparo es mi puerta grande del Titanic en la que solo quepo yo”.

Seguir leyendo

O Ministério da Saúde começa a ofertar, a partir desta semana, nove novos medicamentos de alta tecnologia para tratamento de câncer no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). A inclusão é a maior já feita para o cuidado com o câncer e atenderá 100% da demanda por esses produtos. 

Os novos nove medicamentos são indicados para 13 diferentes tratamentos de câncer e devem beneficiar mais de 116 mil pessoas.  

Notícias relacionadas:

• Governo monitora saúde de amazonenses em locais afetados por queimadas.
• Entenda o linfoma não Hodgkin, câncer que causou morte de Netinho.
• Outubro Rosa: tratamento termina, mas medo do câncer pode permanecer.

A disponibilização tem início em 20 centros de tratamento, em todas as regiões do Brasil. A expectativa é expandir para todos os demais centros até o fim do ano. 

O impacto anual só na aquisição desses produtos será de R$ 155,4 milhões por ano. 

A previsão é chegar a 23 novos fármacos oncológicos até o fim do ano, ampliando em 35% as alternativas na rede pública de saúde. 

Segundo o ministério, para viabilizar a oferta dos 23 novos medicamentos, a pasta assumiu a compra e negociação direta de dez fármacos, articulou a realização de uma ata para aquisição com menor preço pelos estados de outros nove e, para os outros quatro, ampliou os repasses para garantir o custeio nos serviços oncológicos do SUS. 

O impacto será de R$ 4 bilhões por ano. 

O ministro da Saúde, Alexandre Padilha, disse, em cerimônia no Hospital Beneficência Portuguesa, na capital paulista, que a ampliação e qualificação da rede de câncer em todo o país estão sendo feitas com o que há de mais moderno e avançado e representa uma transformação que coloca os pacientes no centro do cuidado, garantindo mais acesso a exames, diagnósticos precisos e tratamentos adequados, no tempo certo.  

“Também estamos fortalecendo as condições de trabalho dos profissionais de saúde, com serviços mais estruturados e uma rede pública cada vez mais preparada para atender às necessidades da população”, disse durante cerimônia. 

De acordo com o Ministério da Saúde, os nove tratamentos atuam de formas diferentes, de acordo com o tipo de tumor, o estágio da doença e o perfil de cada paciente. Entre os principais benefícios estão o aumento da sobrevida e melhor qualidade de vida. 

Há ainda indicações para depois da cirurgia, quando não há mais sinal visível de tumor, com o objetivo de evitar que a doença volte. 

As unidades de saúde que participam dessa etapa de implementação estão localizadas em 16 estados: São Paulo, Paraná, Bahia, Ceará, Pernambuco, Piauí, Pará, Amazonas, Rio de Janeiro, Paraíba, Minas Gerais, Goiás, Rondônia, Rio Grande do Sul, Tocantins e Sergipe, e no Distrito Federal.  

Saiba quais são os novos medicamentos: 

•  trastuzumabe - câncer de estômago ou junção esofagogástrica; 
•  abemaciclibe - câncer de mama precoce (RH+, Her2-, linfonodo +); 
•  acetato de lanreotida - tumores neuroendócrinos; 
•  pazopanibe - câncer de rim de células claras metastático; 
•  rituximabe - leucemia linfocítica crônica (1ª linha), linfoma folicular, linfoma difuso; 
•  abiraterona - câncer de próstata resistente à hormonioterapia não metastático e metastático e sensível à hormonioterapia e metastático;  
•  gefitinibe - câncer de pulmão não pequenas células em primeira linha; 
•  TSH recombinante (alfatirotropina) - câncer diferenciado de tireoide com indicação de iodo radioativo; 
•  sunitinibe - câncer de rim de células claras metastático e GIST avançado ou metastático após falha ao imatinibe. 

Outras inovações  

O ministro anunciou que SUS também fará o rastreamento de câncer de intestino, considerado essencial para o diagnóstico precoce da doença. Serão distribuídos 400 mil testes imunoquímicos fecais (FIT) para o rastreamento do câncer colorretal para todos os estados. 

O exame será utilizado para identificar, entre homens e mulheres assintomáticos, com 50 a 75 anos, quem precisará realizar colonoscopia para confirmação do diagnóstico. A precisão é de 92%. 

“Nós estamos construindo o maior programa público de rastreamento do câncer de colo retal do mundo. Não existe país do mundo que vai fazer o que nós estamos fazendo”, destacou o ministro Alexandre Padilha. 

Também está em implementação no SUS o rastreamento do câncer do colo do útero por meio do teste DNA-HPV. Como complemento, o ministério financiará a citologia reflexa em meio líquido, que utiliza a mesma coleta para avaliar amostras com sinais de alerta. O investimento anual será de R$ 2,7 milhões para mais de 131 mil testes. 

O Ministério da Saúde também passa a custear as cirurgias videotorácicas oncológicas, que contemplam principalmente o câncer de pulmão. A técnica utiliza pequenas incisões, câmera e instrumentos específicos e é minimamente invasiva. As melhorias para os pacientes incluem a redução do tempo de internação e as complicações pós-operatórias. 

O ministro da Saúde, Alexandre Padilha, assinou o compromisso para o próximo triênio do Proadi-SUS, que destinará R$ 4 bilhões em investimentos nos próximos três anos. 

O montante equivale a um terço de tudo o que foi investido nos últimos 17 anos do programa (R$ 11 bilhões). 

Padilha ressaltou que os hospitais parceiros do Proadi, como o Albert Einstein, Sírio-Libanês, Oswaldo Cruz, Beneficência Portuguesa, Moinhos de Vento, A.C. Camargo e Hcor, desempenham um papel fundamental na saúde pública.  

“Tanto na transferência de tecnologia, capacitação profissional e melhoria da gestão do SUS. Muitos desses hospitais filantrópicos, inclusive, operam hoje com mais leitos dedicados ao SUS do que aos seus próprios serviços particulares”, disse. 

Padilha anunciou ainda a implantação dos Hospital Inteligente em parceria com o Instituto Tecnológico de Medicina Inteligente do Brasil (ITMI), responsável pela gestão. 

O primeiro hospital 100% inteligente do SUS será implementado no complexo do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP).  

“O projeto prevê UTIs com equipamentos ultra-conectados e inteligência artificial, que permitem o monitoramento remoto em tempo real, com o profissional podendo acessar o que acontece dentro da UTI de qualquer canto do hospital, da casa dele, ou em outro serviço”, explicou Padilha. 

“Além da modernização de laboratórios de anatomia patológica, serão reduzidos o tempo de entrega de laudos de biópsias de uma semana para apenas 48 horas por meio de telediagnóstico”, acrescentou. 

O Tribunal de Contas da União (TCU) aprovou, nesta terça-feira (20), as contas do Banco Central (BC) referentes ao exercício de 2025 e concedeu quitação plena aos nove responsáveis pela gestão analisada, entre eles o presidente da autarquia, Gabriel Galípolo. A decisão foi tomada pela Segunda Câmara da Corte, sob relatoria do ministro Jorge Oliveira, uma semana depois de o julgamento ter sido suspenso por causa de possíveis desdobramentos da investigação sobre o Banco Master.

Com a nova deliberação, o TCU considerou regulares as contas anuais do Banco Central e encerrou esse processo. A decisão, no entanto, não representa o fim da apuração sobre a atuação da autoridade monetária na liquidação extrajudicial do Banco Master, que continua sendo examinada em procedimento separado no tribunal.

Recuo

Notícias relacionadas:

• Caso Master: TCDF bloqueia até R$ 2,7 bi de ex-dirigentes do BRB.
• Dino manda Polícia Federal investigar atuação da CVM no caso Master.
• Galípolo descreve ação do Master que chamou atenção do Banco Central.

Na semana anterior, a Segunda Câmara havia suspendido o julgamento das contas do Banco Central a pedido do Ministério Público junto ao Tribunal de Contas da União (MPTCU). A justificativa era que os fatos investigados no caso Master poderiam ter consequências para a avaliação da gestão da instituição.

Na ocasião, os ministros decidiram aguardar o trânsito em julgado da deliberação sobre a atuação do Banco Central no caso. Isso significa esperar que a decisão do processo relacionado à liquidação do Master se torne definitiva, sem possibilidade de novos recursos na via correspondente.

Nesta terça-feira, porém, o relator Jorge Oliveira retomou a análise das contas e reconheceu que a prestação de contas de 2025 deveria ser examinada com base nos elementos específicos daquele processo.

Segundo a avaliação registrada no julgamento, os documentos reunidos não demonstravam irregularidades capazes de comprometer a regularidade das contas. O entendimento também estava alinhado à análise da área técnica do TCU, que já havia recomendado a aprovação.

O que foi aprovado

A decisão trata da prestação de contas anual do Banco Central, procedimento pelo qual o TCU verifica se a gestão de um órgão público respeitou as normas legais e administrativas aplicáveis.

Nesse tipo de análise, o tribunal examina, entre outros aspectos, a legalidade dos atos de gestão, a administração dos recursos públicos e o cumprimento das responsabilidades institucionais.

A Unidade de Auditoria Especializada em Bancos Públicos e Reguladores Financeiros (AudBancos), responsável pela análise técnica do caso, havia considerado regulares as contas dos nove responsáveis e recomendado a concessão de quitação plena.

A quitação significa que, no âmbito desse processo de prestação de contas, o tribunal reconhece como regular a gestão examinada e dá por cumpridas as obrigações dos responsáveis relativas ao período analisado.

Com a aprovação, o processo de contas de 2025 foi encerrado. A decisão não equivale, porém, a uma declaração geral de que todos os atos do Banco Central relacionados ao Banco Master foram regulares.

Caso Master segue aberto

A investigação sobre a atuação do Banco Central na liquidação extrajudicial do Banco Master tramita em outro processo no TCU, sob relatoria do ministro Jhonatan de Jesus. Até esta terça-feira, não havia data definida para o julgamento pelo plenário da Corte.

O procedimento examina a atuação da autoridade monetária na fiscalização e na supervisão do Banco Master, incluindo as medidas que levaram à liquidação extrajudicial da instituição, decretada em novembro de 2025.

A apuração também envolve questionamentos sobre os procedimentos adotados pelo Banco Central no acompanhamento das atividades do banco. A conclusão desse processo dependerá da análise específica dos fatos e dos documentos reunidos.

Portanto, a aprovação das contas anuais não antecipa o resultado da investigação. O TCU poderá avaliar a atuação do Banco Central no caso Master de acordo com as provas e os argumentos apresentados no processo próprio.

Entenda a liquidação

A liquidação extrajudicial é um regime aplicado pelo Banco Central a instituições financeiras em determinadas situações previstas em lei, com o objetivo de encerrar suas atividades de forma organizada e proteger os interesses envolvidos, como os de credores e depositantes, conforme as regras aplicáveis.

No caso do Banco Master, a decisão de liquidar a instituição passou a ser objeto de questionamentos no TCU, que busca verificar se a autoridade monetária observou os procedimentos legais e exerceu adequadamente suas atribuições de fiscalização e supervisão.

A análise do tribunal não se confunde com a decisão administrativa do Banco Central. Cabe ao TCU fiscalizar a legalidade dos atos e procedimentos examinados, sem substituir automaticamente a autoridade monetária em suas competências regulatórias.

Impasse entre órgãos

O caso ganhou repercussão no início de 2026, quando o ministro Jhonatan de Jesus determinou uma inspeção para examinar os procedimentos que levaram à liquidação do banco. Ele apontou a necessidade de obter esclarecimentos e documentos sobre a atuação do Banco Central.

A autoridade monetária questionou a determinação, argumentando que a inspeção deveria ser autorizada por decisão colegiada do TCU. Posteriormente, a medida foi suspensa para que a controvérsia fosse submetida ao plenário.

Em janeiro, após uma reunião com Gabriel Galípolo, o presidente do TCU, Vital do Rêgo, afirmou que um entendimento entre as instituições havia afastado a necessidade de uma medida cautelar para suspender a liquidação do Banco Master.

A investigação, contudo, permaneceu em andamento. A aprovação das contas de 2025, decidida nesta terça-feira, resolve apenas a análise anual da gestão do Banco Central e não encerra os questionamentos específicos sobre o caso Master.

Today, the Liberty Justice Center (LJC) filed Gellert Global Group Corp. v. Trump, the first lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's massive Section 338 tariffs against a variety of Canadian imports. The case was filed in the US Court of International Trade (which has jurisdiction over tariff-related cases); Gellert Global Group is an importer of Canadian cheese subject to the tariffs. LJC is the same public interest group that I worked with on the case challenging Trump's earlier IEEPA tariffs, which ultimate resulted in their invalidation by the Supreme Court. I am not directly involved in the present case. But I support it and believe it deserves to prevail.

LJC has also filed cases challenging Trump's massive Section 122 and Section 301 tariffs. They have become America's premier public interest law group standing up for free trade and enforcing constitutional constraints on executive power over trade restrictions.

Section 338 was part of the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariff act of 1930, which gravely exacerbated the Great Depression. It has never been used before, likely because it was superseded by later laws.

I have previously written about why Trump's Section 338 tariffs are harmful and illegal. See my recent Montreal Economic Institute paper on this topic, and earlier pieces here, here, and here. To briefly summarize, the tariffs on Canada are illegal because 1) Section 338 has been superseded by later legislation, 2) even if Section 338 is still operative, Trump's tariffs do not meet its requirements because the Canadian actions they supposedly respond to do not "discriminate" against US goods, as the law requires, 3) Trump's tariffs do not "offset" the Canadian actions (as Section 338 also requires), but go far beyond that, 4) the administration's interpretation of Section 338 runs afoul of the "major questions" doctrine, and 5) if Section 338 is operative and does authorize the Trump actions, it would violate the constitutional nondelegation doctrine (which restricts delegation of legislative power to the executive).

The LJC complaint advances all five of these arguments. To prevail, they need win on only one. They also add a few more technical points that I will not try to cover here. LJC further seeks a class action certification for a class of all those importers subject to the Section 338 tariffs. If this succeeds, it would block all enforcement of Section 338 tariffs, not just those paid by Gellert.

This lawsuit does not directly challenge Trump's extension of the Section 338 action to categorically ban some Canadian imports, in addition to imposing tariffs. As far as I can tell, Gellert does not import goods subject to the ban (as opposed to the tariffs). However, as I explained here and here, the legality of the bans is dependent on that of the initial tariffs. In a recent Lawfare article, I outline the reasons why executive-imposed import bans are subject to most of the same legal constraints as executive-imposed tariffs.

Like the IEEPA, Section 122, and Section 301 tariffs, Trump's use of Section 338 is an attempt to convert a limited delegation of authority into a blank check enabling the president to impose tariffs whenever he wants. Courts should reject all of these power grabs.

I commend LJC for bringing this important case. And I hope and expect it may not be the last lawsuit challenging the Section 338 measures. Future cases might well challenge the import bans directly, as well as the tariffs.

The post Liberty Justice Center Files First Lawsuit Challenging Trump's Section 338 Tariffs Against Canadian Imports appeared first on Reason Magazine.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) on Monday criticized the GOP’s messaging ahead of the midterms. “I say this sadly as a lifelong Republican: My party is so dedicated to being inarticulate,” Gingrich told radio hosts Rita Cosby and John Catsimatidis on WABC’s “Cats & Cosby,” adding that there’s “lots of things we’re doing that…

Also on the 2026 list: An AI engine that flags urgent cases from medical images, and a tool that gets artists royalties when AI uses their work

• AWS expected to get $5 billion of Nvidia GB300 racks, followed by $3 billion more each month.
• Some of these GPU systems are being stored elsewhere due to lack of data center power.
• Amazon CEO Andy Jassy sees AI as a major opportunity, but getting capacity online is a challenge.

Amazon is racing to secure AI hardware earlier than before, even as data center power shortages leave some GPU systems waiting in warehouses.

Under a new Early Rack Receipt process, AWS expected to receive roughly $5 billion in Nvidia's GB300 server racks at US facilities before final deployment, according to August internal emails reviewed by Business Insider. The company projected roughly $3 billion more in GB300 racks each month "for the foreseeable future," one of the emails said.

Some AWS sites had room for more racks but not enough available power to turn them on, people familiar with the effort said, leaving finished equipment to be staged at intermediary warehouses until the facilities were ready.

At least one AWS team did not have "a clear forecasted path" for getting the incoming racks into data centers at the time, according to one of the emails.

Dark GPUs

A lack of new electricity capacity is one of several bottlenecks slowing the buildout of some AI data centers. This has led to a phenomenon known as dark GPUs, where AI chips and servers are purchased but can sit idle due to power supply issues or other challenges. (Dark GPUs can also refer to system design flaws that mean this gear isn't fully used after being plugged in).

This is partly why financial pressure is mounting on big data center projects. Money must be spent upfront to secure supplies of Nvidia GPUs and other valuable AI components. But if some data centers aren't ready to run, those early investments can tie up huge amounts of cash. Debt financing can fill in the gaps, but the market has become less willing to lend against some of these projects lately.

Trade-off

Amazon's early-rack program is one piece of the cloud leader's broader AI buildout, which is putting new pressure on its cash flow, as Business Insider exclusively reported this week. Amazon expects roughly $220 billion in capital expenditures this year — more than any Big Tech peer. Its free-cash-flow turned negative last quarter for the first time since 2023, and could stay negative for a while.

For AWS, the trade-off is securing scarce GPU racks before competitors do, even if some data centers are not yet ready to turn them on. But taking ownership earlier can tie up billions in equipment before it starts generating cloud revenue.

Previously, AWS took ownership of a finished rack only upon delivery to a data center, according to internal documents. Under the new approach, it can pay for and record certain racks earlier in the supply chain.

An Amazon spokesperson said the company routinely stages finished hardware near deployment sites so it can install it once capacity becomes available, calling the practice "best business practice." The spokesperson added that Amazon has long-established systems for tracking infrastructure assets and disputed that the broader company lacked a path for getting racks into data centers.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy previously said the company has a "clear line of sight" to strong returns from its AI investments, calling the technology a "once in a lifetime opportunity."

"We've been through this cycle with the first big AWS growth wave, and liked the results," Jassy wrote in Amazon's annual shareholder letter. "We expect to feel similarly about this next wave."

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at ekim@businessinsider.com or Signal, Telegram, or WhatsApp at 650-942-3061. Use a personal email address, a nonwork WiFi network, and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

The Defence Forces said it is not expecting an exodus from the force once the peacekeeping mission in Southern Lebanon comes to an end later this year.

• The Wall Street Journal has been planning a big streaming TV push with an ambitious slate of shows.
• It's explored shows around editor in chief Emma Tucker and creators like Feed Me's Emily Sundberg.
• Sundberg dropped out of talks a few weeks ago, Business Insider has learned.

The Wall Street Journal has been ramping up its push into video and had plans for an ambitious slate of streaming TV shows.

Internal documents viewed by Business Insider described an initial six-series offering that would include a flagship live morning program and an interview show hosted by the Journal's editor in chief, Emma Tucker. The docs are from the summer, and a person familiar with the Journal's strategy said that its plans, including dates and partners, are in flux.

The docs said the Journal had been "in negotiations" with creators such as Feed Me Substacker Emily Sundberg, as well as with the restaurant discovery platform The Infatuation. Sundberg dropped out of the talks a few weeks ago, Business Insider has learned.

The plans called for the shows to launch on the Journal's own channels, YouTube, and social media.

Journal parent company Dow Jones is also hiring a head of programming and content, who would be tasked with building "something ambitious in video." The live job description says the role will pay up to $330,000 in base salary, and involve developing talent that includes employees and external creators, translating the company's journalism into streaming formats, and creating live and on-demand shows.

The Journal and Dow Jones's effort shows how news outlets traditionally known for the written word — including The New York Times — are racing to beef up their video offerings in a media landscape that's seeing both the rise of social video and the decline of cable TV news. It also demonstrates that Tucker is taking a flexible approach to the market by looking to both build shows around in-house talent, including herself, and partner with creators and other media companies.

"Expanding our video presence across Dow Jones and The Wall Street Journal is a major strategic priority, as we have widely communicated," a Dow Jones spokesperson said. "We are actively hiring leadership to shape and execute our go-to-market strategy for video across Dow Jones, and we look forward to sharing our updated plans when ready."

The Journal name-checked familiar figures

The internal docs viewed by Business Insider described the live morning show as a 60-minute-long anchor of the initial slate. The docs said the Journal enlisted some familiar names in morning news and video to help execute the show. They said the Journal has been working with the production company EverWonder, which was cofounded by the former Time Studios executive Ian Orefice with backing from Jeff Zucker's RedBird IMI.

Another show in the proposed slate in the docs was "The Exchange with Emma Tucker," which was billed as a "prestige interview franchise" that would put viewers "in the room with the people running the global economy." The documents name-checked top CEOs, including Microsoft's Satya Nadella, JPMorgan Chase's Jamie Dimon, and BlackRock's Larry Fink, as potential guests.

The person familiar with the Journal's strategy said the documents represented one of a number of different avenues the outlet was exploring and didn't reflect the current status and form of its efforts. The person said the company is in active conversations with a number of external people for potential partnerships.

The documents said the Journal had been "in negotiations" with Sundberg — which have since ended — for a show called "Feed Me, On Camera" that would introduce her "highly engaged, younger creator audience to WSJ while bringing WSJ's scale, authority, and affluent professional audience to her world." The docs envisioned each episode beginning with a "tip, obsession, or question from the Feed Me universe," and following Sundberg to its conclusion while integrating business context and reporting from the Journal.

Other shows the docs said the Journal had explored included one called "Market Price with The Infatuation" that would tackle the "business behind taste, literally." It would combine the cultural authority and young audience of The Infatuation, now owned by JPMorgan Chase, with the Journal's business reporting chops.

Another was "Inside Sports" ("title to change"), a "next generation reboot of 'Real Sports' for the sports-as-an-asset class era," potentially helmed by Emmy-winning TV journalist Armen Keteyian.

The documents said the Journal had been "in negotiations" with The Infatuation and "in discussions" with Keteyian. Business Insider could not confirm the status of those discussions.

The last series listed in the docs was an AI show that aimed to get a big-name host.

The Journal compared its plans to 'The Daily'

In the docs, the Journal expressed big ambitions for a live morning news show, and said there had been "nothing new" in the category for a professional audience "in a decade." The last entry on a timeline included in the planning docs was The New York Times' "The Daily" in 2017, which has become a reliable top show on the podcast charts and one of the paper's most successful launches.

"We see an opportunity to reinvent the category," the documents said. The Journal also has its own daily news podcast, called "The Journal."

Like the Times, the Journal is in a rare position in a challenged media environment to make a transformative investment. The Journal, part of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., is profitable, helped by an early move to paywall its journalism.

The documents said that in its video push, the Journal aimed to produce 20 hours of video a week, expand to a free, ad-supported streaming (FAST) channel, and add subscription options and other formats as demand warranted. Between WSJ TV, existing video shows, licensed shows, and co-productions with creators, the Journal aspired to be an "always-on streaming channel." The person familiar with the Journal's strategy said those goals didn't represent its current plans.

Tucker took the helm at the Journal in 2023, moving from the Murdoch-owned UK Sunday Times with a plan to increase engagement with the Journal's digital products. Digital subscriptions rose 8% to 4.5 million in the three months ended June 30 versus the year-ago period. She has called for more lively writing and enterprise reporting. The Journal had already begun to reorient its video strategy under its former head of video Maral Usefi. Under Usefi, the video team had grown by a third, to 65 people, as of April. She was succeeded by Samantha Henig, who was hired in July to lead a new multimedia team.

The docs said that with the Journal's new effort, it aimed to combine its authority and scale with the personality of creator-led media and modern distribution. In terms of audience, it intended to reach a younger viewership than the traditional business TV audience and more decision-makers than creator-led media.

It projected reaching about 75 million viewers through Dow Jones' social reach, upward of 5.6 million monthly watch hours by its 2028 fiscal year, and ad rates that were three to five times what business content on YouTube commands. The person familiar with the Journal's strategy didn't say if those figures represented its current ambitions.

The Journal made a big push into original video more than a decade ago, including the launch of video app WSJ Live in 2011 and expanding to episodic video doc series. Publishers overall have newly reprioritized video amid the rise of short-form content, YouTube's increasing popularity on TV screens, and the success of new live shows like TBPN.

While embracing creator talent — and getting its own staff involved in video content — could help the Journal reach a younger audience, it comes with risks. Journalists who become on-camera talent can often command higher paydays, or defect to start their own ventures, like The New York Times' "Hard Fork" hosts Kevin Roose and Casey Newton did recently. Creators often have their own audiences, which give them leverage over a news organization that staff reporters might not have.

Flagship video shows are also expensive to produce, which makes high ad rates crucial to the Journal's success with this slate. The internal docs explored pitching a variety of ways for advertisers to get involved, including as launch partners, with category-exclusive partnerships, and as "moment partners" tied to major news events like elections, earnings, and WSJ specials.

Iger released his first book, 'The Ride of a Lifetime' in 2019. 'One Last Time' will be released in March 2027, tackling Bib Chapek's ouster, Jimmy Kimmel's suspension, and more.

En abril de 1989, Barcelona reunió a algunos de los mejores ajedrecistas del mundo en un torneo marcado por la emoción hasta la última partida. El yugoslavo Ljubomir Ljubójević había dominado buena parte de la competición, pero el entonces campeón mundial, Gari Kaspárov, protagonizó una remontada que dejó a ambos empatados a puntos. Han pasado 37 años desde aquella histórica competición y Barcelona se prepara para volver a reunir a la élite del ajedrez mundial. Esta vez con la gran estrella del momento, Magnus Carlsen, como protagonista.

Seguir leyendo

© Enric Fontcuberta (EFE)

A new survey of more than 900 seafarers has exposed a persistent gap between safety procedures and the realities of working aboard ships, prompting renewed calls for action to prevent...