Connect with us

News

US Porsche, Bentley and Audi imports held up over banned Chinese part

Published

on

US Porsche, Bentley and Audi imports held up over banned Chinese part

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Thousands of Porsche, Bentley and Audi cars have been impounded in US ports after a supplier to parent group Volkswagen found a Chinese subcomponent in the vehicles that breached anti-forced labour laws.

According to two people with knowledge of the matter, the carmaker has delayed delivery of the vehicles until as late as the end of March as it replaces an electronic component that was found to have come from “western China”.

The people stressed that VW was not aware of the origin of the part, which was sourced by an indirect supplier further down its supply chain, until the supplier alerted it to the issue.

Advertisement

They added that VW notified US authorities as soon as it was made aware of the part’s origin.

US-China relations remain mired in their worst state since the countries established diplomatic ties in 1979. But Washington and Beijing have been trying to stabilise their relationship following the summit that President Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping held in San Francisco in November.

The US prohibits the import of products that have been made with forced labour in the western Xinjiang region and other areas in China under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act of 2021.

The people would not confirm whether or not the part in question was produced in Xinjiang itself.

The issue affects about 1,000 Porsche sports cars and SUVs, several hundred Bentleys, and several thousand Audi vehicles, according to people briefed on the details. 

Advertisement

In a statement, VW said it “takes allegations of infringements of human rights very seriously, both within the company and in the supply chain” including “any allegations of forced labour”. 

It added: “As soon as we received information of allegations regarding one of our sub-suppliers, we have been investigating the matter. We will clarify the facts and then take appropriate steps. These may also include the termination of a supplier relationship if our investigations confirm serious violations.” 

Questions around forced labour found within its Chinese supply chain are particularly sensitive for VW, which has been facing mounting pressure from human rights groups and investors alike over a facility it jointly owns in Xinjiang’s capital, Urumqi.

The German car company on Wednesday said it would discuss “the future direction of business” in the Xinjiang region with its Chinese joint venture partner SAIC, following the publication of fresh allegations of forced labour in German media.

Chinese officials have defended work programmes in the region as helping employment, but the UN’s top human rights body has said China’s actions may constitute “crimes against humanity”.

Advertisement

A Human Rights Watch report this month warned that carmakers were at risk of buying aluminium produced by victims of forced labour in the region. 

VW is balancing falling sales in China with a desire to increase its presence in the US at a time of growing political tension between the two countries. 

In mid-January, VW discovered that some of its luxury cars bound for North America contained a part that was not compliant with US customs rules, two people with knowledge of the matter said.

The part had been sourced by a supplier further down the company’s supply chain and not by VW directly, according to the people. Typically carmakers deal directly with their largest suppliers and may sometimes be unaware of the provenance of smaller parts produced by other businesses further down the supply chain.

A letter from VW to waiting customers blamed “a small electronic component that is a part of a larger control unit, which will be replaced”, but did not specify the origin of the part. 

Advertisement

With the approval of US customs authorities, the company ordered replacement electronic modules, and had already begun fixing cars, two people said. While some were fixed last week, the backlog is unlikely to be cleared until at least next month. 

Swapping the modules is relatively straightforward and does not require the disassembly of the vehicles, although some more complicated models might take several hours to fix, according to people with knowledge of the process. 

Additional reporting by Edward White in Shanghai

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

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending