By FARNOUSH AMIRI and SEUNG MIN KIM

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump warned on Friday that limited strikes against Iran are possible even as the country’s top diplomat said Tehran expects to have a proposed deal ready in the next few days following nuclear talks with the United States.

Related Articles

US House campaigns are underway. Yet a redistricting battle triggered by Trump rages in some states

The Supreme Court struck down some of Trump’s most sweeping tariffs. Which levies are impacted?

Why Texas’ redistricting plan isn’t a sure bet

Virginia Democrats pass map that could flip 4 US House seats, if courts and voters approve

Trump has stocked his administration with people who have backed his false 2020 election claims

In response to a reporter’s question on whether the U.S. could take limited military action as the countries negotiate, Trump said, “I guess I can say I am considering that.” Earlier, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a TV interview that his country was planning to finalize a draft deal in “the next two to three days” to then send to Washington.

“I don’t think it takes long, perhaps, in a matter of a week or so, we can start real, serious negotiations on the text and come to a conclusion,” Araghchi said on MSNOW’s “Morning Joe” show.

The tensions between the longtime adversaries have ramped up as the Trump administration pushes for concessions from Iran and has built up the largest U.S. military presence in the Middle East in decades, with more warships and aircraft on the way. Both countries have signaled that they are prepared for war if talks on Tehran’s nuclear program fizzle out.

“We are prepared for war, and we are prepared for peace,” Araghchi said Friday.

Trump said a day earlier that he believes 10 to 15 days is “enough time” for Iran to reach a deal following recent rounds of indirect negotiations, including this week in Geneva, that made little visible progress. But the talks have been deadlocked for years, and Iran has refused to discuss wider U.S. and Israeli demands that it scale back its missile program and sever ties to armed groups.

Araghchi also said Friday that his American counterparts have not asked for zero enrichment of uranium as part of the latest round of talks, which is in contradiction to what U.S. officials have said.

“What we are now talking about is how to make sure that Iran’s nuclear program, including enrichment, is peaceful and will remain peaceful forever,” he said.

He added that in return Iran will implement some confidence-building measures in exchange for relief on economic sanctions.

In response to Araghchi’s claim, a White House official said Trump has been clear that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons or the capacity to build them and that it cannot enrich uranium. The official wasn’t authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Tehran has long insisted that any negotiations should only focus on its nuclear program and that it hasn’t been enriching uranium since U.S. and Israeli strikes last June on Iranian nuclear sites. Trump said at the time that the strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear sites, but the exact damage is unknown as Tehran has barred international inspectors.

Iran has also insisted that its nuclear program is peaceful. The U.S. and others suspect it is aimed at eventually developing weapons.

Amiri reported from New York. Associated Press writers Michelle L. Price in Washington and Jon Gambrell in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this report.

The Gophers men’s basketball program has likely suffered its third season-ending injury to a starting player this season. Forward Jaylen Crocker-Johnson (foot) is out “indefinitely,” head coach Niko Medved said Friday.

The 6-foot-8 junior missed the last two games against Washington and Oregon. He is averaging 13.4 points and 6.8 rebounds in 24 games this year. Minnesota has been without starting point guard Chansey Willis Jr. and center Robert Vaihola since November and used a rotation of six players.

The Gophers (12-14, 5-10 Big Ten) have five regular season games left this season, starting at 11 a.m. Saturday against  Rutgers (11-15, 4-11) at Williams Arena.

Related Articles

Gophers, Badgers and Cyclones in hot pursuit of Maple Grove’s Babou Ann

How Niko Medved put Gophers in position for road win at Oregon

Gophers squander winnable home game against Maryland

Men’s basketball: Gophers and patients form bond in new program

Michigan State’s Jeremy Fears got ‘carried away’ in loss to Gophers

By DAVID A. LIEB

Candidates are campaigning and voting is underway in some primaries. Yet a national battle to redraw U.S. House districts for partisan advantage is still raging in some states ahead of the November midterm elections.

Related Articles

Trump warns he’s considering limited strikes as Iranian diplomat says proposed deal is imminent

The Supreme Court struck down some of Trump’s most sweeping tariffs. Which levies are impacted?

Why Texas’ redistricting plan isn’t a sure bet

Virginia Democrats pass map that could flip 4 US House seats, if courts and voters approve

Trump has stocked his administration with people who have backed his false 2020 election claims

Final boundaries for congressional voting districts remain uncertain in Missouri, New York, Utah and Virginia. Governors in Florida and Maryland are pushing lawmakers to reshape House districts. And that all comes on top of redistricting changes already enacted in California, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas.

Voting districts typically are redrawn once a decade, after each census. But President Donald Trump triggered an unusual round of mid-decade redistricting when he urged Texas Republicans last summer to redraw House districts to give the GOP an edge in the midterm elections. California Democrats reciprocated, and a tit-for-tat redistricting clash soon spread.

So far, Republicans believe they could win nine additional seats in states where they have redrawn congressional districts, while Democrats think they could gain six seats elsewhere because of redistricting. But that presumes past voting patterns hold true in November. And that’s uncertain, especially since the party in power typically loses seats in the midterms and Trump faces negative approval ratings in polls.

Democrats need to gain just a few seats in November to wrest control of the House from Republicans, which could allow them to obstruct Trump’s agenda.

Redistricting battlegrounds:

Virginia

Current map: six Democrats, five Republicans

Proposed map: A proposed a new House map could help Democrats win up to four additional seats. To facilitate that, the General Assembly referred a constitutional amendment to the April ballot that would allow mid-decade redistricting.

Challenges: A state judge temporarily blocked the April referendum after ruling that the amendment is invalid because lawmakers violated their own rules while passing it. Democrats are appealing.

Maryland

Current map: seven Democrats, one Republican

Proposed map: The Democratic-led state House passed a redistricting plan backed by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore that could help Democrats win an additional seat.

Challenges: The Democratic state Senate president has said his chamber won’t move forward with redistricting because of concerns it could backfire on Democrats.

Missouri

Current map: two Democrats, six Republicans

New map: Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signed a revised House map into law last fall that could help Republicans win an additional seat.

Challenges: Opponents submitted petition signatures in December to try to force a statewide referendum on the map. The Republican secretary of state has until August to determine whether the petition meets legal muster and has enough signatures. Meanwhile, several lawsuits are challenging the legality of the new districts.

Utah

Current map: no Democrats, four Republicans

New map: A judge in November imposed revised House districts that could help Democrats win a seat. The court ruled that lawmakers had circumvented anti-gerrymandering standards passed by voters when adopting the prior map.

Challenges: Republicans are challenging the judicial map selection in the state Supreme Court and in federal court.

New York

Current map: 19 Democrats, seven Republicans

Proposed map: A judge in January ordered a state commission to draw new boundaries for the only congressional district in New York City represented by a Republican, ruling it unconstitutionally dilutes the votes of Black and Hispanic residents.

Challenges: Republicans lost an appeal in state court but have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case.

FILE – Opponents of mid-decade efforts to redraw congressional voting districts gather to protest in the Florida Capitol in Tallahassee, Fla., Dec. 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Kate Payne, File)

Florida

Current map: eight Democrats, 20 Republicans

Proposed map: Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis says he will call a special legislative session in April on congressional redistricting.

Challenges: A lawsuit asserts that DeSantis cannot legally call the special session. The state constitution says districts cannot be drawn with intent to favor or disfavor a political party or incumbent.

Redistricting triumphs:

Texas

Current map: 13 Democrats, 25 Republicans

New map: Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a revised House map into law last August that could help Republicans win five additional seats.

Challenges: The U.S. Supreme Court in December cleared the way for the new districts to be used in this year’s elections. It put on hold a lower-court ruling that blocked the new map because it was “racially gerrymandered.”

California

Current map: 43 Democrats, nine Republicans

New map: Voters in November approved revised House districts drawn by the Democratic-led Legislature that could help Democrats win five additional seats.

Challenges: The U.S. Supreme Court in February allowed the new districts to be used in this year’s elections. It denied an appeal from Republicans and the Department of Justice, which claimed the districts impermissibly favor Hispanic voters.

North Carolina

Current map: four Democrats, 10 Republicans

New map: The Republican-led General Assembly gave final approval in October to revised districts that could help Republicans win an additional seat.

Challenges: A federal court panel in November denied a request to block the revised districts from being used in the midterm elections.

FILE – This photo taken from video shows organizers rallying outside of the Ohio Statehouse to protest gerrymandering and advocate for lawmakers to draw fair maps on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2025, in Columbus, Ohio. (AP Photo/Patrick Aftoora-Orsagos, File)

Ohio

Current map: five Democrats, 10 Republicans

New map: A bipartisan panel composed primarily of Republicans voted in October to approve revised House districts that improve Republicans’ chances of winning two additional seats.

Challenges: None. The state constitution required new districts before the 2026 election. Because Republicans had approved the prior maps without sufficient Democratic support, they were required to expire after the 2024 election.

Redistricting possibilities:

Louisiana

Current map: two Democrats, four Republicans

Proposal: Republican Gov. Jeff Landry signed legislation in October to delay the state’s primary election from April 18 until May 16. That could give lawmakers extra time to redraw House districts if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the current districts.

Challenges: The Supreme Court heard arguments in October, but has not ruled yet.

South Carolina

Current map: one Democrat, six Republicans

Proposed map: A legislative committee is considering a congressional redistricting plan that could help Republicans win an additional seat.

Challenges: Republican legislative leaders are concerned the plan could backfire, and time is running short before this year’s election.

Colorado

Current map: four Democrats, four Republicans

Proposed map: A proposed ballot initiative would authorize mid-decade redistricting and impose a new House map that could help Democrats win three additional seats.

Challenges: Organizers must gather enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. If approved by voters, the new districts couldn’t be used until the 2028 elections.

Washington

Current map: eight Democrats, two Republicans

Proposed map: Democratic lawmakers have proposed a constitutional amendment that would allow mid-decade redistricting.

Challenges: Democrats don’t hold the two-thirds majority needed in both legislative chambers to refer a proposed amendment to the ballot, meaning it is unlikely to be approved before the November election.

Wisconsin

Current map: two Democrats, six Republicans

Proposed map: Two lawsuits assert that congressional districts must be redrawn because they unconstitutionally favor Republicans.

Challenges: One case is not scheduled for trial until 2027, and it’s unclear whether the other case can be resolved before the midterm election.

By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS, Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — The nation’s highest court struck down some of President Donald Trump’s most sweeping tariffs on Friday, in a 6-3 decision ruling that he overstepped his authority when using an emergency powers law to justify new taxes on goods from nearly every country in the world.

Trump has launched a barrage of new tariffs over the last year. Despite Friday’s ruling, many sectoral levies remain in place — and the president still has plenty of other options to keep taxing imports aggressively. But the Supreme Court decision upends a core set of tariffs that Trump imposed using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

IEEPA authorizes the president to broadly regulate commerce after declaring a national emergency. Over the years, presidents have turned to this law dozens of times, often to impose sanctions on other countries. But Trump was the first to use it to implement tariffs.

Here’s a look at what tariffs Trump imposed using IEEPA — and other levies that still stand today.

Related Articles

Trump warns he’s considering limited strikes as Iranian diplomat says proposed deal is imminent

US House campaigns are underway. Yet a redistricting battle triggered by Trump rages in some states

Why Texas’ redistricting plan isn’t a sure bet

Virginia Democrats pass map that could flip 4 US House seats, if courts and voters approve

Trump has stocked his administration with people who have backed his false 2020 election claims

‘Liberation Day’ tariffs

Trump used IEEPA to slap import taxes on nearly every country in the world last spring. On April 2, which Trump called Liberation Day, he imposed “reciprocal” tariffs of up to 50% on goods from dozens of countries — and a baseline 10% tariff on just about everyone else.

The 10% tax kicked in early April. But the bulk of Liberation Day’s higher levies got delayed by several months, and many rates were revised over time (in some cases after new “framework” agreements). Most went into effect on Aug. 7.

The national emergency underlying these tariffs, Trump argued at the time, was the long-running gap between what the U.S. sells and what it buys from the rest of the world. Still, goods from countries with which the U.S. runs a trade surplus also faced taxes.

Major trading partners impacted by Liberation Day tariffs include South Korea, Japan and the European Union — which combined export a range of products to the U.S., like electronics, cars and car parts and pharmaceuticals. Following trade talks, Trump’s rates on most goods stood at 15% for the EU, Japan and South Korea ahead of Friday. But just last month, Trump threatened to hike levies on certain South Korean products to 25% — and countries worldwide still face sector-specific, non-IEEPA tariffs.

‘Trafficking tariffs’ on Canada, China and Mexico

At the start of his second term, Trump used IEEPA to impose new tariffs on America’s three biggest trading partners: Mexico, Canada and China.

To justify these tariffs, Trump declared a national emergency ostensibly over undocumented immigration and the trafficking of drugs like fentanyl and the chemicals made to use it. The levies were first announced at the start of February 2025, but went into effect over time — and were at times delayed, reduced or heightened through further retaliation.

Ahead of Friday’s decision, “trafficking tariffs” on Canadian and Mexican imports were 35% and 25%, respectively, for goods that don’t comply with the 2020 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. China, meanwhile, faced a 10% fentanyl-related tariff. That’s down from 20% imposed by Trump earlier last year. Chinese goods also once saw sky-high levies after Liberation Day, but rates have since come down during trade talks.

Top U.S. imports from China include mobile phones and other electronics, as well as clothing, toys and household appliances. Meanwhile, Canada and Mexico are both major sources of cars and auto parts. Canada is also the U.S.’s largest supplier of crude oil. And Mexico is a key exporter of fresh produce, beverages and more.

Tariffs on Brazil over Bolsonaro trial

Trump also used IEEPA to slap steep import taxes on Brazilian imports over the summer, citing the country’s policies and criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro.

Brazil already faced Trump’s 10% baseline Liberation Day rate. The Bolsonaro-related duties added another 40%, bringing total levies to 50% on many products ahead of Friday.

The U.S. has actually run a consistent trade surplus with Brazil over the years. But top exports from the country include manufactured products, crude oil and agricultural products like soybeans and sugar.

Tariffs on India linked to Russian oil

India has faced additional IEEPA tariffs, too. After Liberation Day, Trump slapped a 25% levy on Indian imports — and later added another 25% for the country’s purchases of Russian oil, while also citing the emergency powers law, bringing the total to 50%.

But earlier this month, the U.S. and India reached a trade framework deal. Trump said Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed to stop buying Russian oil, and that he planned to lower U.S. tariffs on its ally to 18%. Meanwhile, India said it would “eliminate or reduce tariffs” on all U.S. industrial goods and a range of agricultural products.

Indian’s top exports to the U.S. include pharmaceuticals, precious stones, clothing and textiles.

What are other non-IEEPA tariffs that countries still face today?

Despite the Supreme Court knocking down sweeping import taxes Trump imposed with IEEPA, most countries still face steep tariffs from the U.S. on specific sectors.

Citing national security threats, Trump has used another law — Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act — to slap levies on steel, aluminum, cars, copper and lumber worldwide. He began to roll out even more Section 232 tariffs in September, on kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities and upholstered furniture.

Amid pressure to lower rising prices, Trump has rolled back some of his tariffs recently. Beyond trade frameworks, that’s included adding exemptions to specific levies and scrapping import taxes for goods like coffee, tropical fruit and beef.

Still, Trump has previously threatened more sectoral levies are on the way, and that could all the more likely be his administration’s path forward following Friday’s decision.

AP Writers Paul Wiseman and Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this report.