Taiwan Opposition Criticizes Plan to Block Chinese App Rednote Over Security Concerns 
Taiwan Signals Openness to Renew Ties with Honduras as Election Unfolds 
Honduras Election Turmoil Deepens as Nasralla Alleges Fraud in Tight Presidential Race 
Pentagon Probe Finds Hegseth’s Use of Signal Risked Exposing Sensitive Yemen Strike Details 
IMF Deputy Dan Katz Visits China as Key Economic Review Nears 
Australia and Japan Strengthen Defence Cooperation Amid Rising Regional Tensions 
Honduras Election Turmoil Intensifies as Nasralla Blames Trump for Shift in Results 
U.S. Expected to Expand Travel Ban to More Than 30 Countries 
UN General Assembly Demands Russia Return Ukrainian Children Amid Ongoing Conflict 
California Launches Portal for Reporting Alleged Misconduct by Federal Immigration Agents 
Maduro Confirms “Respectful” Call With Trump, Signals Openness to Diplomatic Dialogue 
Drones Spotted Near Zelenskiy’s Flight Path in Ireland Trigger Security Alert 
U.S.-Russia Talks Leave Ukraine Peace Efforts Uncertain 
Trump and Lula Discuss Trade, Sanctions, and Security in “Productive” Phone Call 
Trump’s Name Appears on U.S. Institute of Peace Ahead of Rwanda–Congo Deal Signing 
China’s Expanding Maritime Military Presence Alarms Taiwan and Japan 
Israel Receives Body of Deceased Hostage as Rafah Crossing Reopening Hinges on Final Returns 
The United States Supreme Court heard arguments to a challenge to a law pertaining to the adoption or foster care placements of Native American children. Following three hours of arguments from both sides, the justices appeared divided.
The Supreme Court Justices on Wednesday appeared divided over the legal challenge to the legality of the requirements giving priority to the adoption and foster care placements of Native Americans and tribal members. A group of non-Native Americans and the Republican officials of Texas challenged the requirements when the lower courts declared parts of the law unconstitutional. The Biden administration and several Native American tribes are defending the law.
The Conservative-majority justices did not appear willing to entirely strike down the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. However, their questions underlined divisions on whether Congress overstepped its authority in passing the legislation. The justices also appeared to be divided over whether the provisions in the law racially discriminate against non-Native Americans, as the plaintiffs have argued.
The 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act would give “preference” to members of a child’s extended family, other tribe members, or “other Indian families” when it comes to adoptions. The law aimed to reinforce tribal connections by setting federal standards for removal or placement in foster care or adoption.
Some of the court’s Conservative justices have expressed concerns about the third preference of “other Indian families.” However, the three Liberal justices and Conservative justice Neil Gorsuch were in favor of the law, saying that Congress saw the legislation as necessary to protect sovereign tribes from extinction.
The day before, the justices signaled that they are unlikely to rule against preventing people who depend on federal assistance programs such as Medicaid from suing when the states violate their rights even as the high court considers barring cases surrounding nursing home care. The justices heard an appeal from the Health and Hospital Corp of Marion County from Indiana.
The plaintiff appealed the ruling of a lower court in favor of the family of Gorgi Talevski, a nursing home resident who is diagnosed with dementia, to pursue a lawsuit against the facility, citing that Talevski’s rights were violated.
