Sunday, August 23, 2026

US imposes 50 percent tariffs on $20bn in Canadian goods after talks fail

US imposes 50 percent tariffs on $20bn in Canadian goods after talks fail

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/22/us-imposes-50-tariffs-on-20bn-worth-of-canadian-goods-after-talks-fail 

US imposes 50 percent tariffs on $20bn in Canadian goods after talks fail

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney says Ottawa will impose retaliatory tariffs ‘dollar for dollar’ after trade talks with the US fail.

 

A drone view shows the Florence Spirit cargo vessel docked at the ArcelorMittal Dofasco steel plant, a day after U.S. President Donald Trump paused new tariffs on Canadian goods for three days, in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, August 20, 2026. REUTERS/Carlos Osorio
The United States will impose 50 percent tariffs on about 5 percent of Canadian exports [File: Carlos Osorio/Reuters]
By Al Jazeera Staff
Published On 22 Aug 2026

The United States has imposed 50 percent tariffs on about $20bn worth of Canadian goods after trade negotiators from the two countries failed to finalise a trade deal despite three days of talks in Washington, DC.

With a deadline imposed by US President Donald Trump expiring at 12:01am Eastern Time (04:01 GMT) on Saturday, US and Canadian officials made clear that an agreement had not been reached.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said his country would match the new tariffs “dollar for dollar”.

“In recent weeks, we made important progress toward improving Canada’s position as having the best deal in the world with the US,” said Carney in a statement. “However, that progress has not been enough to meet our objectives for Canadians.”

Carney outlined what his government would do to protect Canadians from the impact of the trade war, saying that it would introduce new measures to support workers and businesses.

His government’s retaliatory measures, meanwhile, would target US exports of steel, dairy products, appliances, agricultural machinery, paper and electronics.

In a speech later in the day, Carney suggested that last-minute changes at the bargaining table had prompted him to recall his negotiators to Ottawa.

“In recent days, the United States proposed new terms that were uneconomic, unfair and undermined the net benefits for Canada and called into question the reliability of any deal,” he said. “In short, they asked too much and they offered too little.”

He also suggested the US side attempted to restrict Canada’s ability to forge trade deals with other countries, in violation of its sovereignty.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, however, pinned the blame on Canada, saying that it was “a missed opportunity for Canada to partner with the United States”.

“Canada declined to finalise the trade deal under the terms agreed earlier this week,” Greer said. “Despite the US offer to Canada to receive the best treatment of any major exporter to our market, new demands and walkbacks of other commitments by Canada have upended the careful balance reached in the past days.”

The tariffs will hit about 5 percent of Canadian exports to the US, including electronics, industrial machinery and dairy products, adding to pre-existing US tariffs on steel, lumber and autos.

Trump imposed tariffs on key imports from Canada early in his second term last year, prompting Ottawa to retaliate with a suite of countermeasures.

The two countries have gone back and forth ever since, with Trump periodically introducing new tariff threats.

The Trump administration had announced the tariffs in July after the US president accused Canada of “discriminatory treatment of American products”.

But Trump told reporters on Friday that he expected a deal with Canada could be reached – something that ultimately did not prove to be correct, for now.

The tariffs could hurt many Canadian businesses exporting affected goods to the US.

“Tariffs of 50 percent would effectively price hundreds of Canadian goods out of the US market,” Julian Karaguesian, a lecturer and trade expert at McGill University in Montreal, told Al Jazeera earlier this week.

But experts warn that the increased import taxes on Canadian goods could also prompt a backlash from US consumers who might see price increases as well.

Democrats also slammed the Trump administration in the hours after the tariff negotiations fell through, blaming the president for damaging relations with US allies.

“Our closest ally. Our critical trading partner,” California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote on social media.

“And Trump is hitting Canada with 50% tariffs. What the actual f*** are we doing?”

1:57
  • Now Playing
    01:57
    US debt hits $40 trillion: Who does Washington owe and why does it matter?

    US debt hits $40 trillion: Who does Washington owe and why does it matter?

  • Next
    02:47
    Gaza families search for children missing after years of war

    Gaza families search for children missing after years of war




 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Abortion could return to Supreme Court, this time with a focus on women’s health

 

Abortion could return to Supreme Court, this time with a focus on women’s health

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/8/22/800087722/news/abortion-could-return-to-supreme-court-this-time-with-a-focus-on-womens-health/ 

Abortion could return to Supreme Court, this time with a focus on women’s health

by Stateline
78
Share:




Save
51 Comments
Add Daily Kos to Google
FILE - Abortion-rights activists demonstrate against the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade that established a constitutional right to abortion, on Capitol Hill in Washington, June 30, 2022. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Abortion-rights activists demonstrate on Capitol Hill in June 2022 against the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade that established a constitutional right to abortion.AP

2 years after ruling on emergency abortion care, justices may see another Idaho case about health exceptions.

By Kelcie Moseley-Morris for Stateline

A federal court ruling out of Idaho has potential implications for exceptions in abortion bans nationwide and could eventually end up before the U.S. Supreme Court to decide.

U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled earlier this month that the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides a narrow right for a pregnant patient to obtain an abortion if the pregnancy could be a risk to their health, including their mental health. It’s the first ruling since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health in 2022 to find that the U.S. Constitution includes a right to abortion access in certain situations.  

Mary Ziegler, a legal historian and law professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law, said Winmill’s ruling could be the beginning of a “slow erosion” of the Dobbs decision, similar to the way that anti-abortion advocates used lawsuits and legislation to chip away at the law established by Roe v. Wade after it was decided in 1973.

“They kind of worked over the course of decades to do a death by a thousand cuts, chipping away at its breadth,” Ziegler said. “This may be kind of a funhouse mirror version of that.”

Related | These Republican lawmakers challenged abortion bans. Then they faced backlash.

For years, anti-abortion state officials and advocacy groups used various legal tactics to diminish access to abortion nationwide after Roe v. Wade determined that the procedure was a constitutional right. Over time, state legislatures passed procedural laws that made it more difficult for providers to offer abortion services, as well as so-called “fetal pain” laws, and worked up to passing the six-week and 15-week abortion bans that eventually led to Dobbs. 

Two years ago, U.S. Supreme Court justices were asked to consider whether Idaho could set aside federal law mandating stabilizing care in an emergency if that stabilizing care, in a doctor’s opinion, was to terminate a pregnancy. Now the question could be whether any pregnancy scenario where a patient’s physical or mental health is threatened is something that all states can regulate under Dobbs.

Health exceptions

Out of the 13 states that have near-total abortion bans, five have no exception for preserving a pregnant patient’s health, including Idaho, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Dakota. 

All 13 have an exception to save a pregnant woman’s life, but doctors say there most often is no clear moment when they can easily say a person will die without an immediate abortion. Instead, doctors are left to guess whether terminating a pregnancy to save a patient would cost them their license to practice or land them in prison.

Even in states with health exceptions, some doctors hesitate to act because of the ban,  opting for delays that can cause medical complications such as organ damage or fertility loss. An Arkansas woman said she was denied an abortion during a miscarriage in 2024, resulting in a days-long ordeal that eventually led to her being transferred out of state to Kansas, where abortion is legal.

Related | She faced a life-threatening miscarriage. Under Arkansas’ abortion ban, even calls to the governor’s office didn’t help.

Winmill’s legal decision blocks enforcement of Idaho’s near-total abortion ban when a pregnancy is terminated under those circumstances. Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, a Republican, appealed the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, and also asked Winmill to pause that injunction while the decision is appealed.

“The state’s interest in protecting unborn children from unjustified abortion is irreparably harmed by the order, and public interest and equity support a stay for that same reason,” Idaho Assistant Solicitor General Aaron Green wrote in the request for a stay.

The attorney general and leadership at the Idaho Family Policy Center, a religious organization that helped craft the legislation that established the state’s ban, have expressed confidence that Winmill’s decision will be reversed quickly.

“The Fourteenth Amendment protects the basic rights that are part of the historical fabric of our nation, not a right to take the life of an innocent child in the womb, an act that was a crime at the time that the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified,” said Caleb Pirc, general counsel for the Idaho Family Policy Center, in a statement. “We fully expect Judge Winmill’s attempt to shoehorn a right to abortion into the Constitution to be swiftly rejected on appeal.” 

Supreme Court watch

Dr. Stacy Seyb, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist  for Idaho’s largest health system, St. Luke’s, sued state officials and the Idaho Board of Medicine in 2024, arguing that the state’s near-total ban prevented him from providing appropriate care to all of his patients. Maternal-fetal medicine specialists handle the most high-risk pregnancies, including patients carrying multiples and those with conditions such as high blood pressure and gestational diabetes.  

In his ruling, Winmill wrote that although Dobbs allowed states to regulate abortion access, that case was about elective abortions, and that his ruling was about a pregnant woman’s ability to seek care under “the most difficult and tragic circumstances,” almost always when the woman wanted the pregnancy.

Related | Conservatives force abortion rights back into spotlight 

“By banning health-preserving abortion, Idaho attempts to deny this fundamental right on the basis that the threat of harm comes from a fetus, which depends on the woman for survival,” Winmill wrote. “But a pregnant woman’s health is not a state resource to be allocated at the legislature’s whim. The Fourteenth Amendment exists precisely to prevent subjugation like this.”

Winmill discussed the history of abortion bans in his opinion, writing that when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, the states and territories that restricted abortion also included exceptions for therapeutic purposes when a doctor was acting in good faith.

But Winmill went further than many judges have gone by including a pregnancy’s threats to mental health, something that only Alabama has recognized as an explicit healthcare exception for abortions among states with bans, according to KFF. There, a psychiatrist is required to diagnose a pregnant patient with a serious mental illness that could result in their death or the death of the fetus in order to qualify for that exception.

“The brain is an organ of the body, and healthcare providers use empirical tools to reliably assess the risk of suicidality and the most effective treatments,” Winmill wrote. “It is an affront to human dignity to bar pregnant women from receiving life-saving care on the basis that the threat comes from a mental health condition rather than a physical health condition.”

Idaho’s role

Idaho has been at the center of the national debate about when health conditions take priority over an abortion ban since the first year after the Dobbs decision. 

The U.S. Department of Justice under former President Joe Biden sued Idaho to require that it acknowledge a federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act — better known as EMTALA — in the context of patients who come to the emergency room with pregnancies that may need to be terminated to prevent infection or other adverse health outcomes.

Cartoon by Mike Luckovich
By permission of Mike Luckovich and Creators Syndicate.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard that case in late April 2024, but sent it back to the lower appellate court in June, saying it was too early in the process for justices to have considered ruling on it. The case was later dropped by the DOJ under President Donald Trump, but St. Luke’s filed its own lawsuit against the state that is still ongoing. That case is also before Winmill in federal court.

At the time of the EMTALA arguments, Idaho officials had argued that if it allowed women to get a legal abortion in an emergency room, anyone could come to a hospital’s emergency department  and threaten to harm themselves.  

Tanya Pellegrini, co-director of litigation at The Lawyering Project and one of the attorneys who represented Seyb in this month’s case, said that wasn’t true under EMTALA, and it won’t be true following Winmill’s ruling. 

“I think the order really speaks for itself in terms of why mental health should not be treated differently from physical health,” Pellegrini said.

Ziegler said she won’t be surprised if Seyb’s case ends up before the Supreme Court in the near future, because it strikes at the heart of questions about the Dobbs decision that have yet to be fully resolved.

“It’s a really important question that they’ll have to address sooner or later,” Ziegler said. 

We'll get straight to the point: The financial hardships that Daily Kos is facing this year are tough.

We continue to be paywall-free. We continue to be supported by our readers, not billionaires or corporations. But we need to bring in more revenue. We are leaning on our community more than ever to help make ends meet.

$
OR
Donate with
6 Tags

Was this story worth reading?

Recommending and sharing stories helps us decide which stories are most important to show our readers.

78
Share:




Conversation

|

All comments are subject to our Community Guidelines. The views expressed in comments are those of the individual authors and don't necessarily reflect the views of Daily Kos.

All Comments

  1. Comment by Hutch Mansell.

    On abortion:

    Ole Moses (and priests) performed thousands of them.

    A pity that the god squad has never been allowed to view Numbers 5:11-31 which is the instruction manual sent to Moses from Sky Daddy.

    To ruin the leading fund raiser for organized religion would be disastrous for those who serve as the middlemen between Sky Daddy and his money.

  2. Comment by WawaintheBay.

    “ The Fourteenth Amendment protects the basic rights that are part of the historical fabric of our nation, not a right to take the life of an innocent child in the womb, an act that was a crime at the time that the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified,” said Caleb Pirc, general counsel for the Idaho Family Policy Center, in a statement.”

    It was criminalized by 30 out of 37 states, but it was not a federal crime. So this argument is as specious as all the others turning people into state property.

    Which, of course, was why the 14th Amendment was ratified in the first place…we used to understand these things in America.

  3. Comment by karmsysback.

    That Dobbs might be weakened, and ultimately rendered toothless, by a steady stream of maternal-health challenges, is most interesting. Thank you.

  4. Comment by Doctor DDDD.

    Pregnant women should purchase liability insurance for their fetus. A $1M policy isn't expensive. Then if the woman dies or is injured during pregnancy or childbirth she--or her estate-- can collect from the infant or the fetus' estate.

  5. Comment by shmuelman.

    It's incredibly fucked that this debate is still going on.

  6. Comment by Bolino.

    "Out of the 13 states that have near-total abortion bans, five have no exception for preserving a pregnant patient’s health, including Idaho, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Dakota. "

    50 states being ruled by 13

    How American

    • Reply by maynardgkrebs45.

      So what is a fetus?

    • Reply by DannyGlands.

      A miserable little pile of secrets.

  9. Comment by SteveinBA.

    This was inevitable, RGB said Roe v Wade on deteriorating privacy was not up to the, look let's be honest this country IS A leans right always has, Supreme Court Ditto, we had the votes guys,along with voting rights, was it the right time? Debatable, but gentle reader , it's always the right time

    To do the right thing..

    Love Nancy, Obama,

    You got creamed anyway.

    My thoughts.

    John McCain

  10. Comment by Philip Woods.

    Protect the unborn until after they're born! Then,

    F them!

    No health insurance, no SNAP, no Medicaid, no child care, no living wage, no Head Start, ever rising prices, contaminated food products, limited vaccine availability, unlimited billions for war, nothing to help the average person or child!

    • Reply by sgkos.

      Denying abortion is simply a way to control, distract and frighten the masses. Not rocket science.

    • Reply by tobendaro.

      They are killing actual children and adults, ICE, war, Palestinians. Abortion ban and arguments against are a scam on the country just like all the stuff that spews out of their mouths.

  11. Comment by CaptainDunsel.

    Pregnancy is dangerous, and it doesn't always go well. Yes, it's natural, blah, blah, blah, but faith and happy thoughts don't prevent complications. Either the abortion opponents are living in a fantasy world, or they just don't want women to have any autonomy, whatever the cost. Possibly both.

    • Reply by TabletopGamer.

      They are stupid and evil.

    • Reply by CaptainDunsel.

      I'm afraid you're right. Better than smart and evil, I suppose.

    • Reply by Ahianne.

      Pregnancy is natural. So is death.

  12. Comment by Felix.

    The legal mechanism to outlaw not just abortion, but contraception, and any product or information about sexuality that a government official wants to suppress, is already in place in the form of the 19th century Comstock Act, which is still on the books. Lickspittle General Todd Blanche has stated that he will use it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/aug/22/trump-attorney-general-todd-blanche-abortion-rights

    Look for that to be implemented sometime after the midterms, or whenever the fascist party decides it no longer needs to concern itself with the will of the majority.

    the Guardian
    Trump’s new attorney general poses a huge threat to abortion rights | Moira Donegan
    A call revealing Todd Blanche’s plans to crack down on mifepristone lays bare the danger

  13. Comment by PiPiLstkng.

    Historically, upper class, White women have always been able to get abortions regardless of the law. Medically they were just classified D&C (dilation and curettage). But if you didn't live in a wealthy area (think upper east side Manhattan or Greenwich Connecticut or 90210) then those options were not available to you. And things have reverted to that situation. Now, if you live in a state where abortion is illegal, you just fly to a private GYN cash only practice or to Geneva, Switzerland and get an abortion there. If you are working class, you have a lunatic sheriff in Texas track your car across 83,000 license plate readers to arrest you for your reproductive decisions.

    War on abortion is class and race warfare. We need to start treating it that way.

    • Reply by CaptainDunsel.

      Abortion is legal in California, and my D & E for fetal demise happened during the Clinton Administration, and yet I still ran into trouble. There were very few doctors available who were willing to risk their own personal safety to perform a late-term abortion, never mind that the fetus was dead already. Doctors are persecuted by anti-abortion fanatics and sometimes killed.

      Of course it's worse if you're poor and/or non-white, but it still sucks for everybody.

    • Reply by Wes from Dubuque.

      Ditto for us back in the mid '80's in Illinois. After the D&E it turned out that his entire brain case had collapsed. Under these draconian laws, you and DW could have been/would have been prosecuted for not carrying the dead fetus to "term". (how does one even talk about "term" for a dead fetus?!).

      I just can't wrap my mind around such cruelty.

    • Reply by karma13612.

      The problem is that a dead fetus which is not removed with haste is a ticking time bomb for the mother. The fetus begins to rot, and it creates a horrible infectious mess in her womb. And it can then cause sepsis when the bacteria circulates thru the blood stream. If the products of pregnancy are not removed, it is often a death sentence for the mother. We have legislators with zero medical training making decisions about what a woman can and cannot do with her body.

      It’s an absolute travesty.

    • Reply by Birdwatcher long time.

      The cruelty is intoxicating for the GOP.

    • Reply by CaptainDunsel.

      Damn, I'm sorry.

  14. Comment by Leftleaner.

    The only mention of women in the constitution is the 19th Amendment giving us the right to vote. And there is all that previous law about witches that is so handy. At some point the conservatives will just decide we don't actually have rights at all, maybe joining the Taliban to call us 'living beings'.

    • Reply by Dejah.

      One wonders why there are any women in such churches.

    • Reply by Leftleaner.

      Women have been taught from birth to submit, to be docile, to do what we are told, that men are always in charge. It’s a hard lesson to unlearn.

    • Reply by A Noah Count.

      Phyllis Schlafly deserves a lot of the opprobrium for that.

    • Reply by newman1979.

      Ther were no criminal laws for abortion in 1790, either here or in England. The first law was in Massachusetts in 1821 with restriction in the 3rd trimester (quickening).

    • Reply by Ahianne.

      The earlier comment was released from deactivation and is visible now, so apparently a case of trigger happy bots.

    • Reply by BarbeCul.

      Thanks very much, Ahianne. I think the "released from Limbo" comment is as follows:

      ----------------

      " Ditto for us back in the mid '80's in Illinois. After the D&E it turned out that his entire brain case had collapsed. Under these draconian laws, you and DW could have been/would have been prosecuted for not carrying the dead fetus to "term". (how does one even talk about "term" for a dead fetus?!).

      I just can't wrap my mind around such cruelty. "

      ---------------

      I understand what you mean by "trigger-happy bots" of course. But what I do NOT understand is how even the MOST F-ing trigger-happy bots could see anything "offensive" about ANY-f'ing-THING* in that comment.

      *[In my youth, we found it amusing to insert four-letter words into the middle of multisyllabic words; I did live in what we referred to as "the Slums". Now that I am no longer youthful, I find it pleasantly nostalgic to do the same. I hope I can be forgiven.]

      This may seem like a small thing. But recently a very valuable member of our community has been BANNED for comments just as innocuous as the one above.

    • Reply by Matilda Briggs.

      No need to apologize! Inserting one word into the middle of another word for emphasis is a practice called tmesis that goes back to ancient Greece.

    • Reply by Dejah.

      Yeah, they tried that with me at one point... did not work. I taught my daughters to be difficult. And so they were... FOR ME!

    • Reply by CaptainDunsel.

      I wonder. The Taliban was certainly able to crack down, but I think it's going to be harder to put that genie back in the bottle here. Not that we have experienced true equality, but still, I think we are capable of kicking up a hell of a fuss if they try to take more of our rights away. I don't think they're as willing to kill us over it the way the Taliban is, so we should be able to push back. It depends more on how much we value our freedom than it does on how much they want to take it away.

    • Reply by CaptainDunsel.

      You can say "women and girls" if you mean all ages. "Females" implies non-human animals.

  15. Comment by Carnelian Orb.

    Gods bless our beloved fascist junta, for they are doing the LORD's work by getting rid of those uppity wimmins.*

    _____

    *Yes, it is sarcasm

    • Reply by SteveinBA.

      I'm an okie,

      Elizabeth Warren, no fear

      Always prepared for battle

  16. Comment by juliabliss.

    Are we going to spend the next 50 years going back to Roe days? Who decides whose life is endangered, by what definition?

    Considering our current SCOTUS I'm not too optimistic but appreciate people keeping up the fight!

  17. Comment by Koagirl.

    I had an abortion in 1966 at Stanford Hospital in Palo Alto California. I was 22. It cost me $1200. It was called a therapeutic abortion, and it was totally legal. I told my doctor that I would kill myself if I was forced to have this unwanted mistake and my doctor believed me. He told me I'd have to talk to a head shrink, and I agreed to do so. There were lots of women in the group room at the hospital, and all of us were there to get abortions. I have never regretted my abortion, nor have I ever been ashamed of it. I am angry at all these actions against women's rights. I will never vote for any GOP candidate or any other candidate that doesn't support women having control of their body functions. I got pregnant because I didn't know how birth control pills work, nor did I know how to take them. In 1966 pharmacies didn't give you instructions on how to take this medication and my doctor didn't explain it either.

  18. Comment by Ex Real Republican.

    If you demand a fetus be birthed because "killing an unborn child is murder" and you're against universal healthcare that would end the murder by spreadsheet by insurance companies, you are

    a failed human being.

    100% of Gopigs are failed human beings.

  19. Comment by ladyrima.

    Of course, all of this discussion is bullshit. The only acceptable reason to have an abortion is “I’m sorry, that’s none of your goddamn business!“

    • Reply by Carnelian Orb.

      Amen!

Active Conversations

The following is a list of the most commented articles in the last 7 days.

Trending Conversations

The following is a list of the most commented articles in the last 2 days.

 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)