Tag Archives: United States

U.S. first quarter economic growth revised up on jump in consumer spending

FILE PHOTO: A customer exits after shopping at a Macy's store in the Brooklyn borough of New York, U.S., on May 11, 2017. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File Photo

By Lindsay Dunsmuir

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. economy slowed less than feared in the first quarter due largely to a jump in consumer spending, providing a slightly more encouraging outlook for growth this year.

Gross domestic product increased at a 1.4 percent annual rate instead of the 1.2 percent reported last month, the Commerce Department said in its final assessment for the period on Thursday.

The reading was the worst since the second quarter of 2016 but above analysts’ expectations, easing fears the economy had been hobbled at the start of this year. The government had pegged first-quarter growth at a paltry 0.7 percent in its first estimate in April.

“The upward revision occurred even with a downward revision to the inventory data, which has favorable implications for the adding up of second-quarter growth,” said Daniel Silver, an economist at J.P. Morgan.

Economists polled by Reuters had expected GDP growth to be unrevised at 1.2 percent in the first quarter. The economy tends to underperform in that period relative to the rest of the year due to perennial issues with the calculation of the data. The government has said it is working to resolve those issues.

The U.S. dollar <.DXY> briefly edged up after the release of the data before retracing earlier losses against a basket of currencies. Prices of U.S. Treasuries were trading lower and stocks on Wall Street were down sharply.

First-quarter economic growth was boosted by an upward revision to consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity. Consumer spending rose at a 1.1 percent pace, the weakest reading since the second quarter of 2013 but almost double the 0.6 percent reported last month.

Despite the upward revision to GDP, the Trump administration’s stated target of swiftly boosting annual U.S. economic growth to 3 percent remains a challenge.

A sustained average growth rate of 3 percent has not been achieved in the United States since the 1990s. The U.S. economy has grown an average 2 percent since 2000 and it expanded only 1.6 percent in 2016, which was the weakest growth in five years.

President Donald Trump’s economic program of tax cuts, regulatory rollbacks and infrastructure spending has yet to get off the ground five months into his presidency.

Details of the White House’s tax plan remain sparse as Trump advisers attempt to win over fiscally conservative Republicans in Congress who want any changes to ultimately be revenue-neutral.

Initial signs that economic growth re-accelerated sharply in the second quarter have also faltered in the face of recent disappointing data on retail sales, manufacturing production and inflation. Housing data has also been mixed.

The Atlanta Federal Reserve is currently forecasting annualized growth of 2.9 percent in the second quarter.

LABOR MARKET STILL STRONG

Other data on Thursday showed the job market was still flashing a green light.

The Labor Department reported that the number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits last week rose slightly, but the underlying trend remained consistent with a tight labor market. The unemployment rate fell to a 16-year low in May.

U.S. exporters also flexed more muscle in the first quarter. Exports for the period were revised to show a 7.0 percent rate of growth from the previously reported 5.8 percent. Exports in the fourth quarter fell at a rate of 4.5 percent.

Business spending on equipment was revised to show it increasing at a rate of 7.8 percent in the January-March period rather than the 7.2 percent previously estimated.

Businesses accumulated inventories at a rate of $2.6 billion in the first quarter, rather than the $4.3 billion reported last month. Inventory investment rose at a rate of $49.6 billion in the fourth quarter of last year.

Inventories subtracted 1.11 percentage point from GDP growth in the first quarter instead of the 1.07 percentage point previously reported.

The government also reported that corporate profits after tax with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments fell at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the first quarter after rising at a 2.3 percent pace in the prior three months.

(Reporting by Lindsay Dunsmuir; Editing by Paul Simao)

U.S. travel ban set to take effect after top court’s green light

An international passenger arrives at Washington Dulles International Airport after the U.S. Supreme Court granted parts of the Trump administration's emergency request to put its travel ban into effect later in the week pending further judicial review, in Dulles, Virginia, U.S., June 26, 2017. REUTERS/James Lawler Duggan

By Arshad Mohammed and Mica Rosenberg

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on people from six predominantly Muslim countries and all refugees entering the United States is finally scheduled to take effect later on Thursday, but in a scaled-back form that still allows in some travelers.

The rollout of the controversial measure follows a Supreme Court decision this week that allowed the executive order to take effect but significantly narrowed its scope, exempting travelers and refugees with a “bona fide relationship” with a person or entity in the United States.

It is set to go into effect at 8 p.m. EDT (0000 GMT Friday).

Late Wednesday, the State Department said visa applicants from Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen must have a close U.S. family relationship or formal ties to a U.S. entity to be admitted to the United States in keeping with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Trump first announced a temporary travel ban in January, calling it a counterterrorism measure to allow time to develop better security vetting. The order caused chaos at airports as officials scrambled to enforce it and was blocked by federal courts, with opponents arguing the measure discriminated against Muslims and that there was no security rationale for it.

A revised version of the ban, issued in March, was also halted by courts.

In its decision on Monday, the Supreme Court allowed the ban, which bars people from the designated six countries for 90 days and refugees for 120 days, to go partially into effect until the top court can take up the case during its next term starting in October.

The State Department guidance on the ban, distributed to all U.S. diplomatic posts and seen by Reuters, defined a close familial relationship as being a parent, spouse, child, adult son or daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law or sibling, including step-siblings and other step-family relations.

“Grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-laws and sisters-in-law, fiancés, and any other ‘extended’ family members,” are not considered close family, according to the cable.

The guidelines also said that workers with an offer of employment from a company in the United States or a lecturer addressing U.S. audiences would be exempt from the ban, but someone who simply made a hotel reservation would not be considered as having a bona fide relationship.

Asked about the guidance, the State Department declined to comment on internal communications.

The Department of Homeland Security is expected to release additional information on Thursday. A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment.

Immigration lawyers and refugee advocates expressed surprise late on Wednesday that fiancés, grandparents and grandchildren would not qualify as close family.

“This unduly limited definition of family excludes many of the very people that Americans are looking forward to welcoming as visitors,” said Eleanor Acer of the group Human Rights First, adding that the guidelines appeared to go against the exceptions outlined by the Supreme Court.

“Barring grandparents,” she said, “is not the way to keep this country safe.”

Refugee resettlement organizations have said they believe their organizations should qualify as having a “bona fide relationship” with the clients they serve, but the State Department cable did not give guidance on that question.

Rana, an Iranian consultant who has been in the United States since 2003 and is married to a U.S. citizen, said no Thursday that she feared the travel ban will only increase the confusion in an already onerous visa system for visitors from her country.

“The way the president is talking, it makes it sound like the doors were open and people were just coming and going. It was always hard, it was never easy,” she said, asking that her last name not be used.

In 2014, Rana’s 65-year-old mother missed her wedding because of a seven-month security clearance process. Her brother, who had a scholarship to a U.S. university in 2008, was never allowed in. The brother now lives with his wife in Canada, and they are thinking of trying to get permission for their mother to visit him there instead of trying again for a U.S. visa.

“This is just adding to chaos,” Rana said. “It is putting a lot of power of interpretation into the hands of the individual visa officers.”

The ban’s looming enforcement also stirred anger and confusion in parts of the Middle East on Wednesday, with would-be visitors worried about their travel plans and their futures.

Airlines in the region said they had not received a directive from the United States, and there were few people at the U.S. Consulate in Dubai, where there is normally a line out the door of people waiting to process visa applications.

On Thursday, Emirates Airline, the Middle East’s largest airline, said its flights to the United States were operating normally. Abu Dhabi-based Etihad Airways said it is allowing nationals from the six countries to board U.S.-bound flights if they have valid travel documents.

Amnesty International said it would be sending researchers to airports in New York City, Washington and Los Angeles to monitor the implementation of the ban.

But Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law professor at Cornell Law School said that since the order only applies to those who have not yet been issued visas, any legal fights will likely not occur right away and could become moot once the ban expires.

“We may see a lot of attorneys standing around at airports tonight with nothing much to do,” Yale-Loehr said.

(Additional reporting by Yeganeh Torbati and Gabriella Borter in New York; Additional writing by Susan Heavey; Editing by Frances Kerry and Jonathan Oatis)

Senate Republicans struggle to salvage healthcare effort

A demonstrator heads home after protesting the Republican healthcare bill outside Republican Congressman Darrell Issa's office in Vista, California, June 27, 2017. REUTERS/Mike Blake

By Susan Cornwell and Yasmeen Abutaleb

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The top U.S. Senate Republican struggled on Wednesday to salvage major healthcare legislation sought by President Donald Trump, meeting privately with a parade of skeptical senators as critics within the party urged substantial changes.

Republican leaders hope to agree on changes to the legislation by Friday so lawmakers can take it up after next week’s Independence Day recess.. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday abandoned plans to seek passage of it this week because Republicans did not have 50 votes to pass the bill.

For seven years, Republicans have led a quest to undo the 2010 law known as Obamacare, Democratic former President Barack Obama’s signature legislative achievement. Trump made dismantling it a top campaign promise during last year’s presidential campaign but policy differences within the party have raised doubts Republicans can achieve a repeal.

Democrats have unified against the bill and Republicans control the Senate by a slim 52-48 margin, which means McConnell can afford to lose only two Republicans. So far at least 10 – including moderates and hard-line conservatives – have expressed opposition to the current bill, although some indicated they would vote for it with certain changes.

McConnell, with his reputation as a strategist on the line, met with a procession of Republican senators in his office on Wednesday. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican, said party leaders will talk to every Republican senator who has concerns about the bill or is undecided.

The House of Representatives passed its healthcare bill last month, only after striking a balance between the center of the party and the right wing. Now McConnell must find a similar sweet spot.

During a lunch meeting on Wednesday Republicans made presentations on potential fixes. Senator Rand Paul called for jettisoning more parts of Obamacare to get conservatives on board.

TAX ISSUE

Senator Mike Rounds suggested keeping a 3.8 percent Obamacare tax on high earners’ investment income, which the current bill would eliminate. Rounds said the tax could pay for more Americans to receive the tax credits that help pay for health insurance.

Senator Bob Corker, who also supports keeping the tax, said one of the issues he was focused on was helping lower-income Americans pay for health plans.

“My sense is there’s a good chance that issue and other issues people are trying to get addressed can be addressed,” Corker told reporters.

Trump said the bill was moving along well and predicted a “great, great surprise” but did not elaborate.

Maine Senator Susan Collins, a moderate, said it would be “very difficult” to reach agreement by Friday. Collins and other centrists were put off by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s projection on Monday that 22 million people would lose medical insurance under the existing bill.

Finishing the legislation’s revisions by Friday would be “optimal,” Cornyn said, so the CBO can analyze the new version..

Even then, Democrats could mount a forceful resistance. They have repeatedly said they will not discuss a repeal but have expressed openness to negotiating improvements.

The Senate’s top Democrat, Chuck Schumer, proposed Trump call all 100 senators to Blair House across the street from the White House to craft a bipartisan bill fixing Obamacare but Trump said did not think Schumer’s offer was serious.

McConnell said Democrats had refused “to work with us in a serious way to comprehensively address Obamacare’s failures in the seven years since they passed it.”

The legislation has triggered protests at the Capitol and police said they arrested 40 people, including cancer survivors, on Wednesday for blocking Senate offices.

Obama’s 2010 Affordable Care Act, which passed without Republican support, expanded health insurance coverage to some 20 million people but Republicans call it a costly government intrusion.

The Senate bill rolls back Obamacare’s expansion of the Medicaid government insurance for the poor and cuts planned Medicaid spending starting in 2025. It also repeals most of Obamacare’s taxes, ends a penalty for not obtaining insurance and overhauls subsidies that help people buy insurance with tax credits.

For graphic on who’s covered under Medicaid, click: http://tmsnrt.rs/2u06kvB

(This story fixes attribution of quote in 10th paragraph to Senator Corker from Senator Rounds.)

(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, Richard Cowan, Susan Cornwell, Steve Holland, Jeff Mason, Mohammad Zargham, Tim Ahmann and Jeff Mason; Writing by Lisa Lambert, Will Dunham and Frances Kerry; Editing by Bill Trott)

U.S.-backed SDF sees big risk of clash with Turkey in northwest Syria

By Tom Perry

BEIRUT (Reuters) – The U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces warned on Thursday of the prospect of fierce confrontation with the Turkish army in northwestern Syria if it attacks SDF areas, and said this would undermine the assault on Islamic State at Raqqa.

Naser Haj Mansour, a senior SDF official, told Reuters the SDF had taken a decision to confront Turkish forces “if they try to go beyond the known lines” in the areas near Aleppo where the sides exchanged fire on Wednesday.

“Certainly there is a big possibility of open and fierce confrontations in this area, particularly given that the SDF is equipped and prepared,” he said. “If it (the Turkish army)attacks we will defend, and if it attacks there will be clashes.”

Turkey has recently deployed reinforcements into the area, according to Turkey-backed rebel groups, prompting SDF concern that Ankara is planning to attack nearby areas that are under SDF control.

The SDF is an alliance of Kurdish and Arab groups spearheaded by the YPG militia which Turkey views as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has waged a three-decade insurgency in Turkey.

The Turkish military said on Wednesday it had fired artillery at YPG positions south of the town of Azaz in what it said was a response to the YPG’s targeting of Turkey-backed rebels. Mansour said the SDF had responded to Turkish shelling.

On Thursday, Turkey’s deputy prime minister, Numan Kurtulmus, said it would retaliate against any cross-border gunfire from the YPG and not remain silent in the face of anti-Turkey activities by terrorist groups abroad.

Kurtulmus also reiterated Ankara’s opposition to the U.S. arming of YPG combatants and said U.S. officials would understand this was the “wrong path”.

Mansour said an attack on SDF-controlled areas would “do great harm” to the U.S.-backed Raqqa assault by drawing some SDF fighters away from front lines.

The SDF launched a long-anticipated assault on Raqqa city earlier this month. Mansour said SDF forces would soon completely besiege the city by closing the last remaining way out from the south. “There is a plan to impose a complete siege, but if this will take a day or two days, I can’t say,” he said.

Raqqa is bordered to the south by the River Euphrates.

He said that Islamic State fighters were focusing their efforts on defending certain key positions in the city, “meaning they are conducting fierce battles in some strategic positions”.

“This may be due to a shortage of numbers and ammunition,” he said. He also said the Islamic State was deploying fewer car bombs than in previous battles and this also indicated a shortage of supplies.

(Reporting by Tom Perry and Daren Butler; Editing by Mark Heinrich and Richard Balmforth)

U.S. plans to sell Black Hawk helicopters to Thailand

American Black Hawk helicopters are parked in a row during a dress rehearsal of the arrival ceremony which will be held to welcome U.S. President Donald Trump upon his arrival, at Ben Gurion International Airport in Lod, Israel May 21, 2017. REUTERS/Amir Cohen

BANGKOK (Reuters) – The United States plans to sell four Black Hawk helicopters to Thailand after initially suspending their sale following a 2014 military coup.

“The United States government has approved our purchase order for the four helicopters,” army chief General Chalermchai Sitthisart told reporters on Thursday, adding that the army already had 12 Black Hawk helicopters.

“The matter will now be forwarded to Congress for approval,” he said.

The U.S. embassy in Bangkok confirmed the plan to sell the four helicopters, adding that Thailand and the United States had a “long-standing security relationship”.

Thailand’s military, which has a long history of intervention in politics, ousted a democratically elected government in May 2014 saying it had to step in to end a period of political turmoil.

Several Western countries including the United States criticized the takeover.

In response, the United States downgraded military and diplomatic ties with Thailand, its oldest ally in Asia, suspending arms sales and scaling back military exercises and training.

Thailand, in turn, increasingly looked to other countries, in particular China, for its defense purchases. In April it approved a plan to purchase Chinese submarines worth $393 million.

That same month, Thailand’s cabinet approved the purchase of 10 Chinese tanks worth $58 million to replace an old U.S. model.

But relations between the United States and Thailand appear to have improved under U.S. President Donald Trump.

Trump last month spoke with the junta chief, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, by telephone and invited him to visit the White House.

Following the call, Prayuth said ties with the United States were “closer than ever”.

A U.S. embassy spokeswoman, Melissa Sweeney, told Reuters by email that over the past decade the United States had sold Thailand military equipment worth more than $960 million, including Black Hawk helicopters, air-to-air missile systems and multiple naval missile and torpedo systems.

Since the coup, the approximate value of U.S. foreign military sales to Thailand was $380 million, she said.

“Equipping has always been and remains integral to that relationship,” she said.

Army chief Chalermchai did not say how much the Black Hawk helicopters would cost but that the military’s 2017 to 2019 budget would cover the cost.

The junta has tentatively set a general election for 2018.

(Reporting by Amy Sawitta Lefevre and Panu Wongcha-um; Editing by Amy Sawitta Lefevre and Robert Birsel)

U.S. unveils enhanced airline security plan to avoid laptop ban

FILE PHOTO -- Passengers use their laptops on a flight out of John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport in New York, U.S., May 26, 2017. Picture taken May 26, 2017. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo

By David Shepardson and Alana Wise

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) – The United States on Wednesday unveiled enhanced security measures for flights to the country designed to prevent expanding an in-cabin ban on laptops, but an airline trade group said the changes might cause more disruptions.

The measures, which European and U.S. officials said would begin taking effect within three weeks, could require additional time to screen passengers and personal electronic devices for possible explosives.

The measures would affect 325,000 airline passengers on about 2,000 commercial flights arriving daily in the United States, on 180 airlines from 280 airports in 105 countries.

The United States in March banned laptops on flights to the United States originating at 10 airports in eight countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey, to address fears that bombs could be concealed in electronic devices taken aboard aircraft.

Britain quickly followed suit with a similar set of restrictions.

The decision not to impose new laptop restrictions eases U.S. and European airlines’ concern that expanding the ban to Europe or other locations could cause major logistical problems and deter travel.

“Inaction is not an option,” U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told a news briefing, adding that he believed airlines would comply with the new screening. But he said the measures were not the last step to tighten security. U.S. carriers said they would follow the new security directive, but industry trade group Airlines for America (A4A), criticized Homeland Security for not working more closely with them on the new policies.

“The development of the security directive should have been subject to a greater degree of collaboration and coordination to avoid the significant operational disruptions and unnecessarily frustrating consequences for the traveling public that appear likely to happen,” A4A Chief Executive Nicholas E. Calio said in a statement.

Kelly had been saying since April he thought an expansion of the laptop ban was “likely.” He said in late May the government could potentially expand the ban worldwide.

Homeland Security officials told reporters they expected more than 99 percent of airlines would comply, a move that would effectively end the controversial electronics ban.

Airlines that fail to satisfy new security requirements could still face in-cabin electronics restrictions, Kelly said. “We expect all airlines will work with us to keep their aircraft, their crew and their passengers safe,” he said.

European and U.S. officials told Reuters that airlines have 21 days to put in place increased explosive trace detection screening and have 120 days to comply with other security measures, including enhanced screening of airline passengers.

U.S. authorities want increased security protocols around aircraft and in passenger areas, expanded canine screening and additional places where travelers can be cleared by U.S. officials before they depart.

Since laptops are widely used in flight by business class passengers – who pay double or more than the average ticket price – the airline industry had feared expanding the ban could cut into revenue.

Airline officials told Reuters they were concerned about adding enhanced security measures to all airports worldwide that have direct flights to the United States rather than focus them on airports where threats are highest. European airline groups said in a document reviewed by Reuters that if the threats are confirmed, the restrictions should be deployed to cover all EU departing flights, not just U.S.-bound flights.

Homeland security officials said Wednesday that those 10 airports can get off the list if they meet the new security requirements, but did not say how long it will take.

U.S. airline stocks rose on Wednesday, with United Continental Holdings <UAL.N> closing up 1 percent, Delta Air Lines Inc <DAL.N> up 2 percent and American Airlines Group <AAL.O> up 1.6 percent.

Kelly said last week he planned a “step by step” security enhancement plan that included short, medium-term and longer-term improvements that would take at least a year to implement fully.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; Additional reporting by Alana Wise in New York and Julia Fioretti in Brussels; Editing by Chris Sanders and Richard Chang)

Facing revolt on healthcare bill, U.S. Senate Republicans delay vote

Protesters demonstrate the Republican healthcare bill outside Republican Congressman Darrell Issa's office in Vista, California, June 27, 2017. REUTERS/Mike Blake

By Susan Cornwell and Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Senate Republican leaders postponed a vote on a healthcare overhaul on Tuesday after resistance from members of their own party, and President Donald Trump summoned Republican senators to the White House to urge them to break the impasse.

The delay put the future of a longtime top Republican priority in doubt amid concerns about the Senate bill from both moderate and conservative Republicans. With Democrats united in their opposition, Republicans can afford to lose only two votes among their own ranks in the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had been pushing for a vote ahead of the July 4 recess that starts at the end of the week. The legislation would repeal major elements of Obamacare and shrink the Medicaid government healthcare program for the poor.

“We’re going to press on,” McConnell said after announcing the delay, adding that leaders would keep working to make senators “comfortable” with the bill. “We’re optimistic we’re going to get to a result that is better than the status quo.”

At the White House meeting with most of the 52 Republican senators, Trump said it was vital to reach agreement on the Senate healthcare measure because Obamacare was “melting down.”

“So we’re going to talk and we’re going to see what we can do. We’re getting very close,” Trump told the senators. But he added, “If we don’t get it done, it’s just going to be something that we’re not going to like, and that’s okay.”

McConnell, whose party has a razor-thin majority in the 100-member Senate, told reporters that Republican leaders would work through the week to win over the 50 senators needed to pass the bill, with a vote planned after the recess. Vice President Mike Pence could provide the crucial vote needed to break a tie.

“I think we can get 50 votes to yes by the end of the week,” Republican Senator Roger Wicker said after the White House meeting.

REPUBLICAN OPPOSITION GROWS

The House of Representatives last month passed its own version of a healthcare bill, but the Senate bill has been criticized from both the left and the right. Moderate Republicans worried millions of people would lose their insurance. Conservatives said the bill does not do enough to erase Obamacare.

The bill’s prospects were not helped by a Congressional Budget Office analysis on Monday saying it would cause 22 million Americans to lose insurance over the next decade, although it would reduce the federal deficit by $321 billion over that period.

The report prompted Senator Susan Collins, a Republican moderate, to say she could not support the bill as it stands. At least four conservative Republican senators said they were still opposed after the CBO analysis.

Three more Republicans, Rob Portman of Ohio, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, said after the delay was announced that they oppose the current draft.

Portman and Capito cited the bill’s Medicaid cutbacks and how that would hurt efforts to combat the opioid epidemic that has taken a heavy toll in their states. The Medicaid program was expanded under former President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law.

“I think giving time to digest is a good thing,” Republican Senator Bob Corker said after the delay was announced.

“UNCERTAINTY” ON WALL STREET

U.S. stock prices fell, as the decision to postpone the vote added to investor worries about Trump’s ability to deliver on his promises of tax reform and deregulation, as well as changes to the health sector. Those expected changes have driven a rally in U.S. stocks this year.

The benchmark S&P 500 index closed down 0.8 percent, and the Dow Jones industrial average finished down 0.46 percent.

“The market likes certainty and now there’s uncertainty. What is this going to look like when this gets out of the next iteration?” said Peter Costa, president of trading firm Empire Executions Inc.

Passing the measure would be a win for Trump as he seeks to shift attention after weeks of questions over Russia’s role in last year’s U.S. presidential election.

McConnell has promised since 2010 that Republicans, who view Obamacare as a costly government intrusion, would destroy the law “root and branch” if they controlled Congress and the White House. Republicans worry a failure to deliver will cost them votes in next year’s congressional elections.

If the Senate passes a healthcare bill, it will either have to be approved by the House or the two chambers would reconcile the differences in a conference committee. Otherwise, the House could pass a new version and send it back to the Senate.

Lawmakers are expected to leave town by Friday for their July 4 holiday break, which runs all next week. The Senate returns to work on July 10, the House on July 11. Lawmakers then have three weeks in session before their month-long August recess.

(This story corrects Dow Jones industrial average’s percent loss in 16th paragraph.)

(Additional reporting by Yasmeen Abulateb, Amanda Becker, Eric Walsh, Susan Heavey and Tim Ahmann; Writing by John Whitesides and Frances Kerry; Editing by Leslie Adler)

Iran says will act on U.S. court ruling on Trump’s travel ban

FILE PHOTO: A young boy stands behind an Iranian flag at Tehran's Mehrabad International Airport, Iran, May, 5, 2010. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl/File Photo

BEIRUT (Reuters) – Iran said on Wednesday it would take “reciprocal action” in response to the U.S. Supreme Court allowing a partial implementation of President Donald Trump’s travel ban on six Muslim-majority countries.

Lower U.S. courts had completely blocked Trump’s executive order issued on March 6, which includes a blanket 90-day ban on people from countries including Iran and Libya and a 120-day ban on all refugees. But the Supreme Court on Monday ruled there could be partial restrictions placed on refugees.

The decision is “an indication of the decision of the leaders of that country to discriminate against Muslims,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi was cited as saying by the official Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

“The Islamic Republic of Iran, after carefully examining the recent decision of the Supreme Court of America, will take proportional and reciprocal action,” Qassemi said. He did not elaborate.

U.S. citizens must apply for tourist visas before traveling to Iran, as opposed to others including Germans who are able to obtain these on arrival.

During his presidential campaign in 2016, Trump campaigned for “a total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States, arguing the measure is needed for national security.

The court also gave examples of who may qualify for exemptions, including those with close family ties in the United States, obtaining a place at a U.S. university, or offers of employment.

Qassemi also said the United States was targeting the wrong countries for a visa ban.

“It’s regrettable that the American government, because of their economic and commercial short-sightedness, have closed their eyes to the main perpetrators of terrorism in America,” he said.

Iran blames Saudi Arabia, a long standing U.S. ally, for Islamic militancy. Saudi citizens are not affected by the travel ban.

(Reporting By Babak Dehghanpisheh; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky)

Suspect in Michigan airport stabbing to make court appearance

By Steve Friess

FLINT, Mich. (Reuters) – A man charged with stabbing an airport police officer in an attack federal investigators are probing as an act of terrorism is expected to appear in a Michigan federal court on Wednesday.

Amor Ftouhi, 49, of Quebec, Canada, was charged in federal court with violence at an international airport for stabbing officer Jeff Neville at the Bishop International Airport in Flint on June 21. Neville underwent surgery and has left the hospital, local media reported.

Ftouhi, originally from Tunisia and who holds dual Tunisian-Canadian citizenship, is expected to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis at the federal courthouse in Flint on Wednesday morning.

Ftouhi legally entered the United States from Lake Champlain, New York, on June 16 before making his way to Flint, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said. Officials said Ftouhi targeted a city with an international airport, but declined to say why Flint was chosen.

Ftouhi, who was not on the radar of U.S. or Canadian authorities before the attack, was in Michigan as early as June 18, the FBI said. U.S. and Canadian investigators are probing his travel before the attack.

According to the criminal complaint, Ftouhi yelled in Arabic “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) before stabbing Neville.

He also said something to the effect of “You have killed people in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and we are all going to die,” the complaint said.

Ftouhi attempted to buy a gun before the attack, but was unable to do so, the FBI said.

FBI officials declined to provide details on where Ftouhi attempted to buy the gun or what type of gun he tried to purchase. The 12-inch, serrated knife Ftouhi used in the attack was bought in the United States.

(Additional reporting and writing by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago; Editing by Andrew Hay)

Supreme Court breathes new life into Trump’s travel ban

The building of the U.S. Supreme Court is seen after it granted parts of the Trump administration's emergency request to put his travel ban into effect immediately while the legal battle continues, in Washington, U.S., June 26, 2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

By Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed a victory to President Donald Trump by reviving parts of a travel ban on people from six Muslim-majority countries that he said is needed for national security but that opponents decry as discriminatory.

The justices narrowed the scope of lower court rulings that had completely blocked key parts of a March 6 executive order that Trump had said was needed to prevent terrorism attacks, allowing his temporary ban to go into effect for people with no strong ties to the United States. [http://tmsnrt.rs/2seb3bb]

The court issued its order on the last day of its current term and agreed to hear oral arguments during its next term starting in October so it can decide finally whether the ban is lawful in a major test of presidential powers.

In a statement, Trump called the high court’s action “a clear victory for our national security,” saying the justices allowed the travel suspension to become largely effective.

“As president, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm. I want people who can love the United States and all of its citizens, and who will be hardworking and productive,” Trump added.

Trump’s March 6 order called for a blanket 90-day ban on people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and a 120-day ban on all refugees while the government implemented stronger vetting procedures. The court allowed a limited version of the refugee ban, which had also been blocked by courts, to go into effect.

Trump issued the order amid rising international concern about attacks carried out by Islamist militants like those in Paris, London, Brussels, Berlin and other cities. But challengers said no one from the affected countries had carried out attacks in the United States.

Federal courts said the travel ban violated federal immigration law and was discriminatory against Muslims in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Critics called it a discriminatory “Muslim ban.”

Ahmed al-Nasi, an official in Yemen’s Ministry of Expatriate Affairs, voiced disappointment.

“We believe it will not help in confronting terrorism and extremism, but rather will increase the feeling among the nationals of these countries that they are all being targeted, especially given that Yemen is an active partner of the United States in the war on terrorism and that there are joint operations against terrorist elements in Yemen,” he said.

Groups that challenged the ban, including the American Civil Liberties Union, said that most people from the affected countries seeking entry to the United States would have the required connections. But they voiced concern the administration would interpret the ban as broadly as it could.

“It’s going to be very important for us over this intervening period to make sure the government abides by the terms of the order and does not try to use it as a back door into implementing the full-scale Muslim ban that it’s been seeking to implement,” said Omar Jadwat, an ACLU lawyer.

During the 2016 presidential race, Trump campaigned for “a total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States. The travel ban was a signature policy of Trump’s first few months as president.

‘BONA FIDE RELATIONSHIP’

In an unusual unsigned decision, the Supreme Court on Monday said the travel ban will go into effect “with respect to foreign nationals who lack any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”

A lack of a clearly defined relationship would bar from entry people from the six countries and refugees with no such ties.

Hawaii Attorney General Douglas Chin, who successfully challenged the ban in lower courts, said that students from affected countries due to attend the University of Hawaii would still be able to do so.

Both bans were to partly go into effect 72 hours after the court’s decision. The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department pledged to implement the decision in an orderly fashion.

“We will keep those traveling to the United States and partners in the travel industry informed as we implement the order in a professional, organized, and timely way,” a State Department spokeswoman said.

Trump signed the order as a replacement for a Jan. 27 one issued a week after he became president that also was blocked by federal courts, but not before it caused chaos at airports and provoked numerous protests.

Even before the Supreme Court action the ban applied only to new visa applicants, not people who already have visas or are U.S. permanent residents, known as green card holders. The executive order also made waivers available for a foreign national seeking to enter the United States to resume work or study, visit a spouse, child or parent who is a U.S. citizen, or for “significant business or professional obligations.” Refugees “in transit” and already approved would have been able to travel to the United States under the executive order.

A CONSERVATIVE COURT

The case was Trump’s first major challenge at the Supreme Court, where he restored a 5-4 conservative majority with the appointment of Neil Gorsuch, who joined the bench in April. There are five Republican appointees on the court and four Democratic appointees. The four liberal justices were silent.

Gorsuch was one of the three conservative justices who would have granted Trump’s request to put the order completely into effect. Fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion in which he warned that requiring officials to differentiate between foreigners who have a connection to the United States and those who do not will prove unworkable.

“Today’s compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding – on peril of contempt – whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country,” Thomas wrote.

The state of Hawaii and a group of plaintiffs in Maryland represented by the American Civil Liberties Union argued that the order violated federal immigration law and the Constitution’s First Amendment prohibition on the government favoring or disfavoring any particular religion. Regional federal appeals courts in Virginia and California both upheld district judge injunctions blocking the order.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley. Additional reporting by Andrew Chung and Yeganeh Torbati in Washington and Mohammed Ghobari in Sanaa, Yemen; Editing by Will Dunham and Howard Goller)