The Supreme Court sided with immigration judges on Friday, rebuffing the Trump administration for now in a case with possible implications for federal workers as the justices weigh expanding presidential firing power.

The decision is a technical step in a long-running case, but it touches on the effects of a series of high-profile firings under President Donald Trump. The justices let stand a ruling that raised questions about the Trump administration's handling of the federal workforce, though they also signaled that lower courts should move cautiously.

Immigration judges are federal employees, and the question at the center of the case is about whether they can sue to challenge a policy restricting their public speeches or if they are required to use a separate complaint system for the federal workforce.

Trump's Republican administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene after an appeals court found that Trump’s firings of top complaint system officials had raised questions about whether it's still working as intended.

The Justice Department said the firings are within the president’s power and the lower court had no grounds to raise questions. The solicitor general asked the Supreme Court to quickly freeze the ruling as he pushes to have the immigration judges’ case removed from federal court.

The justices declined, though they also said the Trump administration could return if the lower courts moved too fast. The justices have allowed most of Trump’s firings for now and are weighing whether to formally expand his legal power to fire independent agency officials by overturning job protections enshrined in a 90-year-old decision.

A union formerly representing immigration judges, who work for the Justice Department, first sued in 2020 to challenge a policy restricting what the judges can speak about in public. They say the case is a free-speech issue that belongs in federal court.

In recent months, Trump's administration has fired dozens of immigration judges seen by his allies as too lenient.

While the order is not a final decision, the case could eventually have implications for other federal workers who want to challenge firings in court rather than the employee complaint system now largely overseen by Trump appointees.

The decision comes after a series of wins for the Justice Department on the high court’s emergency docket. The court has sided with the Trump administration about two dozen times on issues ranging from immigration to federal funding.

President Donald Trump’s administration has announced a massive package of arms sales to Taiwan valued at more than $10 billion that includes medium-range missiles, howitzers and drones, drawing an angry response from China.

The State Department announced the sales late Wednesday during a nationally televised address by the Republican president, who made scant mention of foreign policy issues and did not speak about China or Taiwan. U.S.-Chinese tensions have ebbed and flowed during Trump’s second term, largely over trade and tariffs but also over China’s increasing aggressiveness toward Taiwan, which Beijing has said must reunify with the mainland.

If approved by Congress, it would be the largest-ever U.S. weapons package to Taiwan, exceeding the total amount of $8.4 billion in U.S. arms sales to Taiwan during President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration.

The eight arms sales agreements announced Wednesday cover 82 high-mobility artillery rocket systems, or HIMARS, and 420 Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS — similar to what the U.S. had been providing Ukraine during the Biden administration to defend itself from Russia — worth more than $4 billion. They also include 60 self-propelled howitzer systems and related equipment worth more than $4 billion and drones valued at more than $1 billion.

Other sales in the package include military software valued at more than $1 billion, Javelin and TOW missiles worth more than $700 million, helicopter spare parts worth $96 million and refurbishment kits for Harpoon missiles worth $91 million.

The eight sales agreements amount to $11.15 billion, according to Taiwan’s Defense Ministry.

The State Department said the sales serve “U.S. national, economic, and security interests by supporting the recipient’s continuing efforts to modernize its armed forces and to maintain a credible defensive capability.”

“The proposed sale(s) will help improve the security of the recipient and assist in maintaining political stability, military balance, and economic progress in the region,” the statements said.

China’s Foreign Ministry attacked the move, saying it would violate diplomatic agreements between China and the U.S.; gravely harm China’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity; and undermine regional stability.

“The ‘Taiwan independence’ forces on the island seek independence through force and resist reunification through force, squandering the hard-earned money of the people to purchase weapons at the cost of turning Taiwan into a powder keg,” said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun.

“This cannot save the doomed fate of ‘Taiwan independence’ but will only accelerate the push of the Taiwan Strait toward a dangerous situation of military confrontation and war. The U.S. support for ‘Taiwan Independence’ through arms will only end up backfiring. Using Taiwan to contain China will not succeed,” he added.

Under federal law, the U.S. is obligated to assist Taiwan with its self-defense, a point that has become increasingly contentious with China, which has vowed to take Taiwan by force, if necessary.

Taiwan’s Defense Ministry in a statement Thursday expressed gratitude to the U.S. over the arms sale, which it said would help Taiwan maintain “sufficient self-defense capabilities” and bring strong deterrent capabilities. Taiwan’s bolstering of its defense “is the foundation for maintaining regional peace and stability,” the ministry said.

Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung similarly thanked the U.S. for its “long-term support for regional security and Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities,” which he said are key for deterring a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, the body of water separating Taiwan from China’s mainland.

The arms sale comes as Taiwan’s government has pledged to raise defense spending to 3.3% of the island’s gross domestic product next year and to reach 5% by 2030. The boost came after Trump and the Pentagon requested that Taiwan spend as much as 10% of its GDP on its defense, a percentage well above what the U.S. or any of its major allies spend on defense. The demand has faced pushback from Taiwan’s opposition KMT party and some of its population.

for arms purchases, including to build an air defense system with high-level detection and interception capabilities called Taiwan Dome. The budget will be allocated over eight years, from 2026 to 2033.

The U.S. boost in military assistance to Taiwan was previewed in legislation adopted by Congress that Trump is expected to sign shortly.

Last week, the Chinese embassy in Washington denounced the legislation, known as the National Defense Authorization Act, saying it unfairly targeted China as an aggressor. The U.S. Senate passed the bill Wednesday.

Australian leaders promised Monday to immediately overhaul already-tough gun control laws after a mass shooting targeted a Hanukkah celebration on Sydney’s Bondi Beach. At least 15 people died in the attack, which has fueled criticism that authorities are not doing enough to combat a surge in antisemitic crimes.

Among the new measures proposed would be a limit on the number of guns someone can own and a review of licenses held over time. Those and other actions would represent a significant update to the landmark national firearms agreement, which virtually banned rapid-fire rifles after a gunman killed 35 people in Tasmania in 1996, galvanizing the country into action.

“The government is prepared to take whatever action is necessary. Included in that is the need for tougher gun laws,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said.

The violence erupted at the end of a summer day when thousands had flocked to Bondi Beach, an icon of Australia’s cultural life. They included hundreds gathered for the Chanukah by the Sea event celebrating the start of the Jewish festival with food, face painting and a petting zoo. Albanese called the massacre an act of antisemitic terrorism that struck at the heart of the nation.

Police shot the two suspected gunmen, a father and son. The 50-year-old father died at the scene. His 24-year-old son remained in a coma in hospital on Monday, Albanese said. Police won’t reveal their names.

At least 38 other people are being treated in hospitals.

Among those is a man who was captured on video appearing to tackle and disarm one apparent assailant, before pointing the man’s weapon at him, then setting the gun on the ground.

The man was identified by Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke as Ahmed al Ahmed. The 42-year-old fruit shop owner and father of two was shot in the shoulder.

Al Ahmed, an Australian citizen who migrated from Syria in 2006, underwent surgery on Monday, his family said.

Al Ahmed’s parents, who moved to Australia in recent months, said their son had a background in the Syrian security forces.

“My son has always been brave. He helps people. He’s like that,” his mother, Malakeh Hasan al Ahmed, told Australian Broadcasting Corp. through an interpreter.
Authorities had investigated one of the suspected gunman

Albanese confirmed that Australia’s main domestic spy agency, the Australian Security Intelligence Organization, had investigated the younger suspected gunman for six months in 2019.

The ABC reported that the agency had examined the son’s ties to a Sydney-based Islamic State group cell. Albanese did not describe the associates, but said the agency was interested in them rather than the son.

“He was examined on the basis of being associated with others and the assessment was made that there was no indication of any ongoing threat or threat of him engaging in violence,” Albanese said.

The horror at Australia’s most popular beach was the deadliest shooting in almost three decades since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre. The removal of rapid-fire rifles has markedly reduced the death tolls from such acts of violence since then.

Albanese’s proposals to limit the number of guns someone can own and review licenses were announced after the authorities revealed that the older suspected gunman had held a gun license for a decade and amassed his six guns legally.

Leaders of the federal and state governments on Monday also proposed restricting gun ownership to Australian citizens, a measure that would have excluded the older suspect, who came to Australia in 1998 on a student visa and became a permanent resident after marrying a local woman. Officials wouldn’t confirm what country he had migrated from.

His son, who doesn’t have a gun license, is an Australian-born citizen.

The government leaders also proposed the “additional use of criminal intelligence” in deciding who was eligible for a gun license. That could mean the son’s suspicious associates could disqualify the father from owning a gun.

Chris Minns, premier of New South Wales where Sydney is the state capital, said his state’s gun laws would change, but he could not yet detail how.

“If you’re not a farmer, you’re not involved in agriculture, why do you need these massive weapons that put the public in danger and make life dangerous and difficult for New South Wales Police?” Minns asked.