Connect with us

News

Joe Biden set to voice concerns over Nippon Steel takeover of US Steel

Published

on

Joe Biden set to voice concerns over Nippon Steel takeover of US Steel

Joe Biden plans to intervene in Nippon Steel’s proposed purchase of US Steel, a move that could threaten the deal and anger Japan, one of Washington’s closest allies.

Biden will issue a statement expressing serious concern about the Japanese group’s proposed $14.9bn acquisition of the Pennsylvania-headquartered steelmaker before Prime Minister Fumio Kishida arrives for a state visit in Washington on April 10, according to six people familiar with the decision.

US officials and lawyers have drafted the statement and the White House has privately informed the Japanese government of the president’s decision, according to people familiar with the matter. US Steel’s shares fell more than 12 per cent after the Financial Times published details of Biden’s intentions.

The expression of concern will be interpreted as opposition to the takeover and marks the culmination of months of White House debate about how to respond to a deal that has sparked a bipartisan backlash in Washington against the sale of a US manufacturing icon to a foreign group.

Although US law gives the administration the power to block certain foreign acquisitions on national security grounds, Biden will not say outright that the deal should be blocked, according to people familiar with the matter.

Advertisement

Instead, they say he will issue similar comments to remarks made in December by White House national economic adviser Lael Brainard, who said the president believed the deal deserved “serious scrutiny”.

Pennsylvania is a crucial electoral swing state in this year’s presidential election between Biden and Donald Trump. Both men have courted union votes in the state and Trump has already lashed out against Nippon Steel‘s “horrible” deal to buy the Pittsburgh-based American producer.

The United Steelworkers union, also based in Pittsburgh, has opposed the takeover.

Nippon Steel announced the controversial acquisition in December, leading Biden to pick a side between a powerful union and its voters, and a critical American ally. The president has invested heavily in shoring up alliances, particularly with Japan.

The White House asked US ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel to make the problem go away, putting him in a tough position after he had publicly welcomed the deal as “historic”. Emanuel did not respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

One person familiar with the deliberations said it was “embarrassing” for an administration that talks about the importance of allies and particularly the US-Japan alliance to “send a signal of distrust regarding Japanese ownership of US companies” as Kishida prepares to visit.

“The president knows all this, but sadly it looks like election year politics will win out,” the person said.

In a joint statement following publication of the story, Nippon Steel and US Steel said they welcomed the administration’s scrutiny of the deal as an “objective and comprehensive review of this transaction will demonstrate that it strengthens US jobs, competition, and economic and national security”. 

The groups added that Nippon Steel had made clear there would be no job losses, plant closures or transfer of production. They also said they were in ongoing discussions with the United Steelworkers union.

The timing of Biden’s statement is significant because last week Nippon Steel filed its proposal with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (Cfius), the inter-agency panel that vets inbound investments for national security risks, according to two people familiar with the move. The company declined to confirm the Cfius filing.

Advertisement

“It is unprecedented for a president to make a substantive comment on a case that is pending before Cfius,” said Ivan Schlager, a partner at Kirkland & Ellis and one of the most prominent Cfius lawyers in the US.

“While Cfius is ordinarily immune to political pressure this case involves an iconic asset with unique capabilities coupled with an administration who has made protecting manufacturing and middle-class jobs the foundation of its foreign policy.”

The White House declined to comment on whether the president would intervene. The Japanese prime minister’s office also declined to comment.

News of Biden’s planned statement comes as he tours swing states such as Pennsylvania in a bid to shore up votes ahead of the election in November.

United Steelworkers president David McCall said last month that his union had “received personal assurances that Biden has our backs” in relation to the deal. Trump has also vowed to block the deal if he beats Biden in November.

Advertisement

Nippon Steel has hired US lobbying firm Akin Gump, focusing its energy to win the backing of the United Steelworkers.

But citing confidentiality reasons, the Japanese group was not in touch with the union before announcing the deal and it was only in late February that it signed a non-disclosure agreement with the group, which represents 850,000 US manufacturing workers. Experts in Washington said the company had made a serious mistake by not striking a deal with the union before announcing the deal.

Following talks with Nippon Steel last week, the United Steelworkers said the meeting yielded “no progress”. “We remain convinced that the company does not fully understand its obligations to steelworkers, retirees and our communities,” it said in a letter to its members.

Nippon Steel said in response that it would continue its talks with the union. “We provided the USW with specific commitments which we believe address each of the union’s concerns that have been raised,” it said.

A person with knowledge of Nippon Steel’s thinking said the company does not plan to give up its bid for US Steel even if Biden publicly expresses opposition to the takeover.

Advertisement

An executive told analysts in an earnings briefing last month the group did not expect any political intervention once a Cfius review had been launched.

Japan’s business community has been shocked by the strong reaction in Washington to the deal, especially since the US remains the most attractive mergers and acquisitions market for Japanese companies.

Nancy McLernon, head of the Global Business Alliance, a trade group that represents foreign multinationals in the US, said there was a “big risk” in blocking the acquisition on anything other than national security grounds. 

“It would have a material impact on the relationship with a critical ally. It’s worth noting that Japan is the largest foreign investor in the United States, directly employing nearly a million American workers. Blocking the deal under such pretence would certainly make for an awkward state dinner in April.”

Advertisement

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending