标签： Oceania

A high-stakes conflict between outgoing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and former president Donald Trump escalated dramatically on Wednesday, after Powell announced he would retain his seat on the central bank’s board of governors following the end of his term as chair — drawing a fresh verbal assault from Trump.

Powell confirmed that while his four-year term leading the Fed concludes on May 15, he will exercise his statutory right to remain on the board of governors for a yet-undetermined period. The move comes as Powell has openly voiced concerns about protecting the Fed’s long-standing institutional independence from unprecedented political pressure from the Trump administration.

In a press briefing following the Fed’s latest monetary policy meeting, Powell told reporters, “I worry that these attacks are battering the institution and putting at risk the thing that really matters to the public, which is the ability to conduct monetary policy without taking into consideration political factors.”

Powell has drawn Trump’s anger for months over his refusal to hastily cut interest rates as the president demanded, and Trump has repeatedly pushed for Powell to step down entirely from the central bank. Shortly after Powell’s announcement Wednesday, Trump lashed out in a post on his personal social media platform: “Jerome ‘Too Late’ Powell wants to stay at the Fed because he can’t get a job anywhere else — Nobody wants him.”

While it is unusual for a former Fed chair to remain on the board after leaving the top post, it is not without precedent. Powell, whose current term as a board governor runs through 2028, has pledged to maintain a low profile under Trump’s nominee for incoming chair, Kevin Warsh. Still, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent condemned the decision in an interview with Fox Business, calling it a “violation” of long-standing Fed norms and “an insult” to Warsh.

The clash unfolds against a backdrop of multiple escalating legal and political attacks on Fed leadership from the Trump administration, which returned to power last year. Trump has repeatedly criticized Powell for moving too slowly on aggressive interest rate cuts — a policy that would stimulate near-term economic growth but carries significant risk of reigniting inflation. The administration has also attempted to oust sitting Fed governor Lisa Cook over unproven mortgage fraud allegations, a case that is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Additionally, the Department of Justice launched a criminal investigation into Powell and the Fed over reported cost overruns on a facility renovation project, a step Powell has characterized as a deliberate tactic to undermine the central bank’s independence. While DOJ has paused the probe for the time being, Powell said he is encouraged by recent developments but will continue monitoring the case. He reiterated Wednesday that he will not leave the Fed until the investigation is “well and truly over,” reaffirming the critical need for an independent central bank free from political interference. He also extended congratulations to Warsh for clearing a key procedural hurdle in what has been a contentious confirmation process.

Powell’s announcement came shortly after the Fed concluded a deeply divided monetary policy meeting, where voting members opted to hold interest rates steady for the third consecutive meeting. The decision came amid widespread economic uncertainty tied to ongoing conflict in the Middle East, which has driven up global energy prices. The Fed kept its benchmark interest rate range unchanged at 3.50 percent to 3.75 percent, noting “inflation is elevated, in part reflecting the recent increase in global energy prices.”

The meeting produced the highest number of dissenting votes since 1992, highlighting deep internal divisions among Fed policymakers. Four of the 12 voting members opposed the final outcome: Governor Stephen Miran pushed for an immediate quarter-point rate cut, while three regional Fed presidents — Beth Hammack, Neel Kashkari and Lorie Logan — supported the pause in rate movement but rejected the statement’s signaling of future inclination toward rate cuts. ING analysts James Knightley and Padhraic Garvey noted that the split points to a contentious debate over future rate policy at Warsh’s first meeting as chair, scheduled for June.

The Fed has been gradually moving toward rate reductions since late last year, but the outbreak of conflict between the U.S.-Israel coalition and Iran has sent energy prices soaring and disrupted global supply chains, leading analysts to warn that persistent inflation could even force policymakers to reverse course and consider rate hikes in coming months.

Earlier on Wednesday, the Senate Banking Committee voted to advance Warsh’s nomination to the full Senate for confirmation, bringing him one step closer to taking over the top Fed post. But Democratic critics have warned that the nomination is part of a broader power grab by Trump to control independent monetary policy. Senator Elizabeth Warren charged that confirming Warsh would advance Trump’s “attempt to seize control of the Fed,” while Senator Raphael Warnock argued the nomination has been tainted by “persistent threats” from the White House.

Even some Republicans initially pushed back on the nomination: Senator Thom Tillis initially pledged to block Warsh’s confirmation, but reversed his position after the Justice Department paused its probe into Powell. When asked whether he believed Warsh would push back against political pressure from the White House, Powell told reporters: “He testified very strongly to that effect in his hearing, and I’ll take him at his word.”

Court documents made public this week have laid bare chilling new details of an alleged assassination plot targeting former U.S. President Donald Trump, revealing that the suspect snapped a selfie in his hotel room just minutes before launching an armed attack at a high-profile Washington media gala. Prosecutors outlined the sequence of events in a federal court filing submitted Wednesday, laying out the premeditated steps 31-year-old Cole Allen, a highly educated California teacher, took in his bid to attack Trump and senior members of his administration.

According to the filing, Allen’s attempted attack unfolded shortly after 8:30 p.m. this past Saturday. After traveling from California to the nation’s capital via a scenic cross-country train route through Chicago, Allen checked into the Washington Hilton, where the annual media gala was set to take place in the hotel’s basement ballroom. Court records show that before leaving his room, Allen spent his final pre-attack minutes reviewing online updates of Trump’s public schedule, assembling a weapons arsenal that included a pump-action shotgun, a handgun, multiple knives, and ammunition, and posing for a mirror selfie captured on his cellphone. The surviving photograph shows Allen dressed in all black with a red tie, visibly carrying a knife, a shoulder holster for his handgun, and an ammunition bag.

Before departing his room, Allen had pre-scheduled an email to be sent to his friends and family that contained a manifesto justifying his planned attack, which prosecutors described as an act of “unfathomable malice.” In the message, Allen laid out a ranked target list of Trump administration officials in attendance, prioritizing them from highest to lowest rank, and clarified that he hoped to avoid harming Secret Service agents, other law enforcement officers, or innocent hotel guests. Court documents also show Allen documented his surprise at the hotel’s lax security during his stay, writing on his personal phone that he had walked into the building with multiple weapons without any staff raising a single red flag. During his train journey, he even took time to note his appreciation for the changing American landscape, writing that the woodlands of Pennsylvania looked like “vast fairy lands filled with tiny trickling creeks.”

Once he reached the hotel entrance near the ballroom, Allen discarded his outer long coat, drew his shotgun, and sprinted through a set of building metal detectors. Prosecutors confirm Allen fired the shotgun toward the stairs leading down to the ballroom, where Trump and other senior officials were already gathered. A responding Secret Service agent returned fire, shooting five times but missing Allen entirely. The suspect fell to the ground during the chaotic aftermath, suffered only a minor knee injury, and was quickly tackled and detained by security personnel. No bystanders or attendees were killed in the incident.

The new details emerged as part of a prosecution request to a Washington federal court to deny bail for Allen, arguing he should remain in custody ahead of his trial. Prosecutors noted that Allen’s political motivation for the attack would persist as long as he maintains ideological disagreement with the U.S. government, making him a continued danger to the community if released.

This incident marks the third alleged assassination attempt targeting Trump in less than two years. Following the attempt, the White House has blamed Democratic political leaders and national media outlets for inciting political extremism against the former president. At the same time, the 79-year-old Trump has drawn widespread criticism for breaking decades of Washington political norms with his consistent violent rhetoric directed at political opponents, journalists, foreign leaders, and immigrants.

In a ideologically divided 6-3 decision released Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment that imposes sharp new limits on the consideration of race when drawing congressional electoral districts, a ruling that carries the potential to reshape legislative maps across the country and alter partisan odds ahead of November’s midterm elections.

The case originated from Louisiana’s post-2020 census redistricting process. After courts ruled the state’s original map illegally diluted Black voting power, state legislators drew a revised plan that created a second majority-Black congressional district, a change intended to align with requirements of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. A group of white voters challenged the revised map, arguing it prioritized racial classification to an unconstitutional degree, setting up a high-stakes clash between voting rights protections and constitutional equal protection guarantees.

Writing for the court’s conservative majority, Justice Samuel Alito ruled that the Louisiana map crossed into unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Alito emphasized that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does not require states to draw electoral districts primarily along racial lines, noting that “compliance with the law could not justify” the state’s race-centered approach in this instance. “Because the Voting Rights Act did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district, no compelling interest justified the state’s use of race in creating SB8,” Alito wrote. “That map is an unconstitutional gerrymander, and its use would violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.”

The ruling leaves the core text of the Voting Rights Act intact but narrows the scope of how the law can be applied to enforce minority representation. For civil rights advocates, the decision represents another major blow to the landmark civil rights legislation, which has already been significantly weakened by a series of Supreme Court rulings over the past decade, most notably a 2013 decision that struck down a key provision mandating federal pre-approval for election law changes in states with histories of systemic discrimination.

In a fiery dissent read from the Supreme Court bench — a rare step reserved for cases of exceptional national importance — Justice Elena Kagan warned of the decision’s far-reaching consequences. Kagan argued the ruling creates a pathway for states to systematically dilute minority voting power without facing legal pushback, a outcome that undermines decades of progress toward fair representation.

Legal analysts broadly agree the ruling will raise the legal bar for justifying race-conscious redistricting intended to remedy minority vote dilution, making it far harder to create or preserve majority-minority districts nationwide. These districts, which have been a core tool for advancing minority representation for more than 50 years, have consistently tended to elect Democratic candidates, meaning the ruling is expected to give Republicans a tangible advantage in competitive House races this November.

The decision marks a major shift in the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the balance between anti-discrimination protections and constitutional equal protection rules, aligned with the conservative majority’s long-stated commitment to what Justice Clarence Thomas — the court’s only Black justice — has framed as a “color-blind” interpretation of the Constitution. While the immediate impact of the ruling on November’s congressional control remains unclear, it has escalated the already fierce national battle over redistricting that has pitted political parties against one another in state legislatures and courts across the U.S.

In his first official visit to Brussels since securing a historic election victory that ended 16 years of nationalist rule under Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s incoming prime minister Peter Magyar sat down with top European Union leadership Wednesday on a mission to reset Budapest’s fractured relationship with the bloc and unlock billions in frozen funding. The trip, which included a high-stakes meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, comes as Magyar moves quickly to deliver on his campaign promise of a new pro-EU course, even before he formally takes office next month.

Magyar struck an upbeat tone ahead of the negotiations, telling followers in an online video that he entered the talks “very optimistic and hopeful.” His top near-term priority is reaching a formal agreement by the end of May to unfreeze roughly €10 billion in Covid-19 recovery funds held by the EU over long-standing rule-of-law concerns that mounted during Orbán’s Kremlin-aligned tenure. Magyar added that preliminary talks between his transition team and senior EU officials — which have already spanned two negotiation rounds — have proceeded smoothly, with both sides approaching discussions in a constructive spirit. “Political decisions” are now all that is required to move the process forward, he noted.

Beyond the Covid recovery funds, Magyar is also pushing to unlock an additional €8 billion in frozen cohesion funding, bringing the total amount of suspended Hungarian aid seeking release to around €18 billion ($21 billion). Time is not on his side: the incoming Hungarian government faces a hard deadline of the end of August to implement required rule-of-law and governance reforms to secure the €10 billion in Covid recovery funds, or the allocation will be permanently forfeited.

EU leaders have greeted Magyar’s election victory and rapid push for engagement with cautious optimism. The incoming prime minister’s super-majority control of the Hungarian parliament gives him the political capital needed to push through required reforms quickly — a luxury Orbán’s government never prioritized during years of standoffs with Brussels. European officials have been struck by the level of preparation and commitment from a transition team that has not yet formally taken power. “We’ve never seen such a level of commitment from a government that isn’t even in office yet,” Daniel Freund, a member of the European Parliament and longtime critic of Orbán, told Agence France-Presse. “It’s practically as if Hungary is rejoining the European Union.”

As a potential early confidence boost for Magyar, Brussels is considering moving forward with approving €16 billion in preferential defense loans that were put on hold amid the standoff with Orbán in the lead-up to Hungary’s election. Still, some EU diplomats stress that concrete policy changes will be the only measure of genuine realignment in Budapest. “So far, wait and see,” one anonymous senior EU diplomat told reporters. “But that might change, considering all the good things he says and does.”

Beyond domestic funding and rule-of-law reforms, EU leaders are also pushing for a major shift in Hungary’s policy toward Ukraine, where Orbán repeatedly blocked EU military aid for Kyiv, new sanctions on Russia, and progress on Ukraine’s EU accession bid during Moscow’s full-scale invasion. Magyar has already signaled a break from Orbán’s approach, announcing Tuesday that he plans to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in June to “open a new chapter” in bilateral relations.

Even before Magyar takes office, Orbán’s election defeat has already cleared long-standing logjams in EU policy toward Ukraine. Last week, the 27-member bloc approved a massive €50 billion macro-financial loan for Kyiv and a new package of sanctions on Russia — both measures that Orbán had blocked for months. EU member states now expect Magyar to lift Orbán’s remaining vetoes: unblocking billions in stalled EU military assistance for Ukraine, and removing Hungary’s objection to moving Ukraine to the next phase of its EU accession negotiations. While major EU powers have little appetite to rush Kyiv toward full membership in the near term, officials broadly agree that Ukraine is entitled to continue moving forward in the accession process.