By JANIE HAR and OLGA R. RODRIGUEZ

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge in San Francisco will consider evidence and hear arguments on whether the Trump administration violated federal law when it deployed National Guard soldiers and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids this summer.

Related Articles

Ousted FDA vaccine chief Vinay Prasad is returning to the agency

Germany invites Trump, Zelenskyy, NATO, EU leaders to a virtual meeting before Trump-Putin summit

Trump’s big bill is powering his mass deportations. Congress is starting to ask questions

Texas Legislature to take another swing at redistricting vote as Democrats extend their walkout

Watch live: Trump says he’s placing Washington police under federal control and deploying the National Guard

The Trump administration federalized California National Guard members and sent them to the second largest U.S. city over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom and city leaders, after protests erupted June 7 when Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers arrested people at multiple locations.

California is asking Judge Charles Breyer to order the Trump administration to return control of the remaining troops to the state and to stop the federal government from using military troops in California “to execute or assist in the execution of federal law or any civilian law enforcement functions by any federal agent or officer.”

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force. The case could set precedent for how Trump can deploy the guard in the future in California or other states.

The Department of Defense ordered the deployment of roughly 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 Marines. Most of the troops have since left but 250 National Guard members remain, according to the latest figures provided by the Pentagon. The remaining troops are at the Joint Forces Training Base, in Los Alamitos, according to Newsom

Newsom won an early victory from Breyer, who found the Trump administration had violated the Tenth Amendment, which defines power between federal and state governments, and exceeded its authority.

The Trump administration immediately filed an appeal arguing that courts can’t second guess the president’s decisions and secured a temporary halt from the appeals court, allowing control of the California National Guard to stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.

After their deployment, the soldiers accompanied federal immigration officers on immigration raids in Los Angeles and at two marijuana farm sites in Ventura County while Marines mostly stood guard around a federal building in downtown Los Angeles that includes a detention center at the core of protests.

The Trump administration argued the troops were needed to protect federal buildings and personnel in Los Angeles, which has been a battleground in the federal government’s aggressive immigration strategy. Since June, federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the U.S. from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms. Some U.S. citizens have also been detained.

Ernesto Santacruz Jr., the field office director for the Department of Homeland Security in Los Angeles, said in court documents that the troops were needed because local law enforcement had been slow to respond when a crowd gathered outside the federal building to protest the June 7 immigration arrests.

“The presence of the National Guard and Marines has played an essential role in protecting federal property and personnel from the violent mobs,” Santacruz said.

After opposition from the Trump administration, Breyer issued an order allowing California’s attorneys to take Santacruz’s deposition. They also took a declaration from a military official on the National Guard and Marines role in Los Angeles.

The Trump administration’s attorneys argued in court filings last week the case should be canceled because the claims under the Posse Comitatus Act “fail as a matter of law.” They argued that there is a law that gives the president the authority to call on the National Guard to enforce U.S. laws when federal law enforcement isn’t enough.

Trump federalized members of the California National Guard under Section 12406 of Title 10, which allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when the country “is invaded,” when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,” or when the president is otherwise unable “to execute the laws of the United States.”

Breyer found the protests in Los Angeles “fall far short of ‘rebellion.’”

“Next week’s trial is not cancelled,” he said in a ruling ordering the three-day bench trial.

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — A 90-day pause on imposing higher tariffs on China is due to expire on Tuesday and it is unclear if it will be extended.

After the most recent round of China-U.S. trade talks, held late last month in Stockholm, Chinese and U.S. officials said they expected the deadline to be extended for another 90 days. The U.S. side said the decision was up to President Donald Trump. So far there has been no formal announcement about whether he will endorse an extension or push ahead with the higher tariffs.

The uncertainty has left businesses in limbo and a decision to raise the import duties could jolt world markets.

SILENCE FROM WASHINGTON AND BEIJING

Trump has repeatedly shifted deadlines and tariff rates, and neither side has indicated what it plans for Tuesday. Extending the Aug. 12 deadline for reaching a trade agreement with China would forestall earlier threats of tariffs of up to 245%.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Trump was deciding about another 90-day delay to allow time to work out details of an agreement setting tariffs on most products at 50%, including extra import duties related to illicit trade in the powerful opiate fentanyl.

Higher tariffs are aimed at offsetting the huge, chronic U.S. trade deficit with China, which hit a 21-year low in July as the threat of tariffs bit into Chinese exports.

It’s not unusual for the U.S. to give hints on where talks stand, but it’s rare for China to make announcements until major decisions are set. So far, Beijing’s refrained from commenting ahead of Tuesday’s deadline.

In an interview with Fox News taped on Thursday but aired on Sunday, U.S. Vice President JD Vance said Trump was considering additional tariffs on Beijing because of China’s purchases of Russian oil. But he said Trump “hasn’t made any firm decisions.”

CHINA RESISTED CUTTING AN EARLY BARGAIN

Prohibitively high tariffs on Chinese exports to the United States would put huge pressure on Beijing at a time when the Chinese economy, the world’s second largest, is still recovering from a prolonged downturn in its property market. Lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have left millions of people reliant on “gig work,” crimping the job market. Higher import taxes on small parcels from China have also hurt smaller factories and layoffs have accelerated.

Related Articles

Nvidia and AMD to pay 15% of China chip sale revenue to US government in an unusual agreement

Ford to invest nearly $2 billion in Kentucky assembly plant to produce electric vehicles

US stocks drift around their record heights as Wall Street braces for an update on inflation

Business People: Coborn’s exec David Best tapped to lead Cub Foods

Real World Economics: In Trump we trust, at our own peril

But the U.S. relies heavily on imports from China for all sorts of products, from household goods and clothing to wind turbines, basic computer chips, electric vehicle batteries and the rare earths needed to make them. That gives Beijing some powerful leverage in the negotiations with Washington.

Even with higher tariffs, China remains competitive for many products. And its leaders are aware that the U.S. economy is only just beginning to feel the effects of higher prices from Trump’s broad tariff hikes.

For now, imports from China are subject to a 10% baseline tariff and a 20% extra tariff related to the fentanyl issue. Some products are taxed at higher rates. U.S. exports to China are subject to tariffs of around 30%. Before the two sides called a truce, Trump had threatened to impose 245% import duties on Chinese goods. China retaliated by saying it would hike its tariff on U.S. products to 125%.

MUCH IS AT STAKE

A trade war between the world’s two largest economies has ramifications across the global economy, affecting industrial supply chains, demand for commodities like copper and oil and geopolitical issues such as the war in Ukraine.

After a phone call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in June, Trump said he hoped to meet with Xi later this year. That’s an incentive for striking a deal with Beijing.

If the two sides fail to keep their truce, trade tensions could escalate and tariffs might rise to even higher levels, inflicting still more pain on both economies and rattling world markets. Businesses would refrain from making investment commitments and hiring, while inflation would surge higher.

Companies are in an “extended wait-and-see mode,” Oxford Economics said in a recent report.

The Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Nvidia and AMD agreed to share 15% of their revenues from chip sales to China with the U.S. government, President Donald Trump confirmed at a press conference Monday.

Related Articles

Ford to invest nearly $2 billion in Kentucky assembly plant to produce electric vehicles

US stocks drift around their record heights as Wall Street braces for an update on inflation

Business People: Coborn’s exec David Best tapped to lead Cub Foods

Real World Economics: In Trump we trust, at our own peril

Shopping for an electric vehicle? How long until that $7,500 tax credit expires?

The Trump administration halted the sale of advanced computer chips to China in April over national security concerns, but Nvidia and AMD revealed in July that Washington would allow them to resume sales of the H20 and MI308 chips, which are used in artificial intelligence development.

The president said he originally wanted 20% of sales in exchange for Nvidia obtaining export licenses to sell the “obsolete” H20 chip to China, but credited Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang for negotiating him down to 15%.

“So we negotiated a little deal. So he’s selling a essentially old chip,” Trump said.

Nvidia did not comment about the specific details of the agreement or its quid pro quo nature, but said they would adhere to the export rules laid out by the administration.

“We follow rules the U.S. government sets for our participation in worldwide markets. While we haven’t shipped H20 to China for months, we hope export control rules will let America compete in China and worldwide,” Nvidia wrote in a statement to the AP. “America cannot repeat 5G and lose telecommunication leadership. America’s AI tech stack can be the world’s standard if we race.”

AMD did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The top Democrat on a House panel focusing on competition with China raised concerns over the reported agreement, calling it “a dangerous misuse of export controls that undermines our national security.”

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking member of the House Select Committee on China, said he would seek answers about the legal basis for this arrangement and demand full transparency from the administration.

“Our export control regime must be based on genuine security considerations, not creative taxation schemes disguised as national security policy,” he said. “Chip export controls aren’t bargaining chips, and they’re not casino chips either. We shouldn’t be gambling with our national security to raise revenue.”

Derek Scissors, senior fellow and China expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, questioned the constitutionality of the deal and also warned against risking national security for revenue.

“There’s no precedent for this, probably because export taxes are unconstitutional, ” said Derek Scissors, senior fellow and China expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “They call it a fee, but 15% of sales revenue is about a standard a tax as it comes. For this reason, I don’t think the ‘arrangement’ is at all durable. ‘’

“If it were to last, it has two possible implications. First, there’s a possible export tax that high-profile companies and goods must consider. Or the tax only applies in exceptional situations, such as changing export controls. Then we’d risk national security for the sake of tax revenue, which is effectively the same as cutting the defense budget,” Scissors said.

Back in July, Nvidia argued that tight export controls around their chip sales would cost the company an extra $5.5 billion. They’ve argued that such limits hinder U.S. competition in a sector in one of the world’s largest markets for technology, and have also warned that U.S. export controls could end up pushing other countries toward China’s AI technology.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC in July that the renewed sale of Nvidia’s chips in China was linked to a trade agreement made between the two countries on rare earth magnets.

Restrictions on sales of advanced chips to China have been central to the AI race between the world’s two largest economic powers, but such controls are also controversial. Proponents argue that these restrictions are necessary to slow China down enough to allow U.S. companies to keep their lead. Meanwhile, opponents say the export controls have loopholes — and could still spur innovation. The emergence of China’s DeepSeek AI chatbot in January particularly renewed concerns over how China might use advanced chips to help develop its own AI capabilities.

Associated Press writers Josh Boak and Shawn Chen contributed to the reporting.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Food and Drug Administration official is getting his job back as the agency’s top vaccine regulator, less than two weeks after he was pressured to step down at the urging of biotech executives, patient groups and conservative allies of President Donald Trump.

Dr. Vinay Prasad is resuming leadership of the FDA center that regulates vaccines and biotech therapies, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said in a statement Monday.

Related Articles

Why young Americans dread turning 26: Health insurance chaos

Cannabis poisonings are rising, mostly among kids

New Medicaid federal work requirements mean less leeway for states

Stigma still keeps police from seeking mental health care, study finds

When hospitals buy physician practices, prices go up

Prasad left the agency late last month after drawing ire of right-wing activists, including Laura Loomer, because of his past statements criticizing Trump.

A longtime a critic of FDA’s standards for approving medicines, Prasad briefly ordered the maker of a gene therapy for Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy to halt shipments after two patient deaths. But that action triggered pushback from the families of boys with the fatal condition and libertarian supporters of increased access to experimental medicines.

Prasad’s decision to pause the therapy was criticized by The Wall Street Journal editorial board, former Republican Sen. Rick Santorum and others. The FDA swiftly reversed its decision suspending the therapy’s use.

Loomer posted online that Prasad was “a progressive leftist saboteur,” noting his history of praising liberal independent Sen. Bernie Sanders.

But Prasad has had the backing of FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who have both called for scrutinizing the use of COVID-19 vaccines. Under Prasad, the FDA restricted the approval of two new COVID-19 shots from vaccine makers Novavax and Moderna and set stricter testing requirements for future approvals.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.