Lennon Tyler and her German fiancé often took road trips to Mexico when he vacationed in the United States since it was only a day’s drive from her home in Las Vegas, one of the perks of their long-distance relationship.

But things went terribly wrong when they drove back from Tijuana last month.

U.S. border agents handcuffed Tyler, a U.S. citizen, and chained her to a bench, while her fiancé, Lucas Sielaff, was accused of violating the rules of his 90-day U.S. tourist permit, the couple said. Authorities later handcuffed and shackled Sielaff and sent him to a crowded U.S. immigration detention center. He spent 16 days locked up before being allowed to fly home to Germany.

Since President Donald Trump took office, there have been other high-profile incidents of tourists like Sielaff being stopped at U.S. border crossings and held for weeks at U.S. immigration detention facilities before being allowed to fly home at their own expense.

They include another German tourist who was stopped at the Tijuana crossing on Jan. 25. Jessica Brösche spent over six weeks locked up, including over a week in solitary confinement, a friend said.

On the Canadian border, a backpacker from Wales spent nearly three weeks at a detention center before flying home this week. And a Canadian woman on a work visa detained at the Tijuana border spent 12 days in detention before returning home last weekend.

Sielaff, 25, and the others say it was never made clear why they were taken into custody even after they offered to go home voluntarily.

Pedro Rios, director of the American Friends Service Committee, a nonprofit that aids migrants, said in the 22 years he has worked on the border he has never seen travelers from Western Europe and Canada, longtime U.S. allies, locked up like this.

“It’s definitely unusual with these cases so close together, and the rationale for detaining these people doesn’t make sense,” he said. “It doesn’t justify the abhorrent treatment and conditions” they endured.

“The only reason I see is there is a much more fervent anti-immigrant atmosphere,” Rios said.

U.S. authorities did not respond to a request from The Associated Press for figures on how many tourists have been held at detention facilities or explain why they weren’t simply denied entry.

The incidents are fueling anxiety as the Trump administration prepares for a ban on travelers from some countries. Noting the “evolving” federal travel policies, the University of California, Los Angeles sent a notice this week urging its foreign-born students and staff to consider the risks of non-essential travel for spring break, warning “re-entry requirements may change while you are away, impacting your return.”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in an email to the AP that Sielaff and Brösche, who was held for 45 days, “were deemed inadmissible” by Customs and Border Protection. That agency said it cannot discuss specifics but “if statutes or visa terms are violated, travelers may be subject to detention and removal.” The agencies did not comment on the other cases.

Both German tourists were allowed into the United States under a waiver program offered to a select group of countries, mostly in Europe and Asia, whose citizens are allowed to travel to the U.S. for business or leisure for up to 90 days without getting a visa in advance. Applicants register online with the Electronic System for Travel Authorization.

But even if they are authorized to travel under that system, they can still be barred from entering the country.

Sielaff arrived in the U.S. on Jan. 27. He and Tyler decided to go to Tijuana for four days in mid-February because Tyler’s dog needed surgery and veterinary services are cheaper there. They figured they would enjoy some tacos and make a fun trip out of it.

New York state’s top court put an end Thursday to New York City’s effort to empower noncitizens to vote in municipal elections.

In a 6-1 ruling, the high court said “the New York constitution as it stands today draws a firm line restricting voting to citizens.”

New York City never actually implemented its 2022 law. Supporters estimated it would have applied to about 800,000 noncitizens with legal permanent U.S. residency or authorization to work in the nation. The measure would have let them cast a ballot for mayor, city council and other local offices, but not for president, Congress or state officials.

State Republican officials quickly sued over the law, and state courts at every level rejected it. Republicans hailed Thursday’s ruling from the state’s highest court, called the Court of Appeals.

“Efforts by radical Democrats on the New York City Council to permit noncitizen voting have been rightly rejected,” NYGOP Chair Ed Cox said in a statement. The Republicans’ attorney, Michael Hawrylchak, said they were pleased that the court recognized the state constitution’s “fundamental limits” on voter eligibility.

The heavily Democratic City Council passed the law, and its leaders took the case to the high court. Speaker Adrienne Adams said she was disappointed in the outcome but respected the court. “The council sought to strengthen our city’s democratic process and increase civic engagement by enfranchising the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who pay taxes and contribute to our communities but are unable to make their voices heard in local elections,” she said in a statement.

Democratic Mayor Eric Adams had neither vetoed nor signed the measure but allowed it to become law without his signature. An Adams spokesperson, Kayla Mamelak Altus, said the administration respects the court’s decision.

A handful of Maryland and Vermont towns let noncitizens cast ballots in local elections, and noncitizen residents of Washington, D.C., can vote in city races. San Francisco allows noncitizen parents to participate in school board elections.

Farther south in California, residents of Santa Ana rejected a noncitizen voting measure last year. Some other states specifically prohibit localities from enfranchising noncitizens.

In New York, the state constitution says “every citizen shall be entitled to vote” if at least 18 years old and a state resident. The document adds that county and municipal election voters must live in the relevant county, city or village.

New York City argued that “every citizen” doesn’t mean “citizens only,” and that the city had a self-governance right to choose to expand the franchise for its own elections. The law’s supporters said it gave an electoral voice to many people who have made a home in the city and pay taxes to it but face tough paths to citizenship.

The GOP accused Democrats of violating the state constitution in order to make partisan gains.

In an extraordinary display of conflict between the executive and judiciary branches, Chief Justice John Roberts rejected calls for impeaching judges Tuesday, shortly after President Donald Trump demanded the removal of one who ruled against his deportation plans.

The rebuke from the Supreme Court’s leader demonstrated how the controversy over recent deportations of alleged Venezuelan gang members has inflamed tensions over the judiciary’s role, with a legal case challenging Trump’s actions now threatening to spiral into a clash of constitutional powers.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

The rare statement came just hours after a social media post from Trump, who described U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg as an unelected “troublemaker and agitator.” Boasberg had issued an order blocking deportation flights that Trump was carrying out by invoking wartime authorities from an 18th century law.

“HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”

Although Trump has routinely criticized judges, especially as they limit his efforts to expand presidential power, his latest post escalated his conflict with a judiciary that’s been one of the few restraints on his aggressive agenda. Impeachment is a rare step that is usually taken only in cases of grave ethical or criminal misconduct.

In an interview with Fox News later on Tuesday, Trump emphasized that Roberts “didn’t mention my name in his statement,” suggesting that the chief justice could have been referring to other people who have said Boasberg should be impeached.

Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp’s priority bill to limit lawsuits and large jury verdicts has gotten increasing pushback after an initial boost in support as the legislative session enters its final weeks.

Crowds of business owners and doctors swarmed the Capitol to back Kemp when he announced the proposal, also called tort reform. Now, people who have sued businesses are rallying as Democrats argue the bill is a handout to businesses and insurance companies.

And a number of House Republicans remain skeptical, even though House Speaker Jon Burns said he is confident it will pass.

“There are two Republicans that are trial lawyers, but I’ve heard a more broad group of people express concerns with the bill as currently written,” said Rep. Trey Kelley, a Cedartown Republican.

Millions of dollars have gone into lobbying for and against Kemp’s package. Here are some reasons why people are concerned. Kemp’s bill would require anyone who sues a business or property owner over misconduct or injuries on their property to prove the owner knew about a specific security risk and physical condition on the property, but didn’t provide adequate security.

Women who were sex trafficked and raped at hotels have begged lawmakers to oppose the bill as written.

“Surely, the hotel would notice, with 40 cars coming in and out at any given moment ... the girls walking around in their underwear, never alone, never speaking unless spoken to,” Michal Roseberry, human trafficking survivor, said at a news conference Thursday.

There is an exception for human trafficking victims in the proposed bill, but the kinds of claims they can bring are limited. Opponents plan to offer a broader amendment.

“Even with that exception, as the bill is right now, nobody would ever file a sex trafficking case in Georgia,” said Jonathan Tonge, a University of Georgia law professor who litigates human trafficking cases.

Kemp’s bill would require anyone who sues a business or property owner over misconduct or injuries on their property to prove the owner knew about a specific security risk and physical condition on the property, but didn’t provide adequate security.

Women who were sex trafficked and raped at hotels have begged lawmakers to oppose the bill as written.

“Surely, the hotel would notice, with 40 cars coming in and out at any given moment ... the girls walking around in their underwear, never alone, never speaking unless spoken to,” Michal Roseberry, human trafficking survivor, said at a news conference Thursday.

There is an exception for human trafficking victims in the proposed bill, but the kinds of claims they can bring are limited. Opponents plan to offer a broader amendment.

“Even with that exception, as the bill is right now, nobody would ever file a sex trafficking case in Georgia,” said Jonathan Tonge, a University of Georgia law professor who litigates human trafficking cases.

Trial lawyers are worried that other changes would drag out trials and delay preparation. Lawyers and doctors dispute whether fair compensation is the face value of a medical bill or only the portion an individual directly paid.

Opponents also question whether the problems the bill claims to address exist, and if it would actually solve them.

For example, doctors have said unfair lawsuits make it hard to recruit talent to rural areas and lead them to administer unnecessary medical tests. They also say they’re getting slammed by rising medical malpractice premiums. In an analysis for the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, Northwestern University Professor Bernard Black said it’s difficult to recruit doctors outside of urban areas nationwide.

The State Department says South Africa’s ambassador to the United States, who was declared “persona non grata” last week, has until Friday to leave the country.

After Secretary of State Marco Rubio determined that Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool was no longer welcome in the U.S. and posted his decision Friday on social media, South African embassy staff were summoned to the State Department and given a formal diplomatic note explaining the decision, department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said.

She said Rasool’s diplomatic privileges and immunities expired Monday and that he would be required to leave the United States by Friday.

South African Foreign Ministry spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said in a television interview on Monday that Rasool was still in the U.S. but would be leaving as soon as possible.

Rubio announced his decision in a post on X as he was flying back to the United States from a Group of 7 foreign ministers meeting in Canada. In it, he accused Rasool of being a “race-baiting politician” who hates President Donald Trump. His post linked to a story by the conservative Breitbart news site about a talk Rasool gave earlier Friday in Johannesburg as part of a South African think tank’s webinar. Rasool, speaking by videoconference, talked about actions taken by the Trump administration in the context of a United States where white people soon would no longer be in the majority.

It is highly unusual for the U.S. to expel a foreign ambassador, although lower-ranking diplomats are more frequently targeted with persona non grata status.

Rubio’s decision was the latest Trump administration move targeting South Africa. Trump signed an executive order last month halting funding to the country. It criticized the Black-led South African government on multiple fronts, saying it is pursuing anti-white policies at home and supporting “bad actors” in the world like the Palestinian militant group Hamas and Iran.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa told reporters on Monday that Rasool would give him a report when he returned home.

Ramaphosa said his government has “noted the displeasure that has been expressed by the United States,” and particularly about Rasool’s remarks, but stressed that he believed South Africa was in the process of rebuilding its relationship with the U.S.

“This is a hiccup, a hiccup we are working on straightening out,” he said.

“We will engage with the United States of America in a formal way,” Ramaphosa said. “We will do so with deep respect for them and for President Trump as well. Our relationship with the United States is going to be put on an even keel, so I would like the people of South Africa not to have sleepless nights.”

Bruce said the United States expects a certain level of respect.

“We’ve had a decent level of diplomacy with South Africa. There are some challenges, but you want people in each embassy who can actually facilitate a relationship,” she told reporters on Monday. “And these remarks were unacceptable to the United States, not just to the president, but to every American.”

U.S. President Donald Trump will speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday in a possible pivot point in efforts to end the war in Ukraine and an opportunity for Trump to continue reorienting American foreign policy.

Trump disclosed the upcoming conversation to reporters while flying from Florida to Washington on Air Force One on Sunday evening, while the Kremlin confirmed Putin’s participation on Monday morning.

“We will see if we have something to announce maybe by Tuesday. I will be speaking to President Putin on Tuesday,” Trump said. “A lot of work’s been done over the weekend. We want to see if we can bring that war to an end.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday morning confirmed the plans for the two leaders to speak on Tuesday, but declined to give details, saying that “we never get ahead of events” and “the content of conversations between two presidents are not subject to any prior discussion.”

European allies are wary of Trump’s affinity for Putin and his hardline stance toward Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who faced sharp criticism when he visited the Oval Office a little more than two weeks ago.

Although Russia failed in its initial goal to topple Ukraine with its invasion three years ago, it still controls large swaths of the country.

Trump said land and power plants are part of the conversation around bringing the war to a close.

“We will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants,” he said, a process he described as “dividing up certain assets.”

Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff recently visited Moscow last week to advance negotiations.

Russia illegally annexed four Ukrainian regions after launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the east and the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions in the southeast of the country — but doesn’t fully control any of the four. Last year, Putin listed Kyiv’s withdrawal of troops from all four regions as one of the demands for peace.

In 2014, the Kremlin also annexed Crimea from Ukraine.

In the occupied part of the Zaporizhzhia region, Moscow controls the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant — the largest in Europe. The plant has repeatedly been caught in the crossfire since the invasion. The International Atomic Energy Agency, a U.N. body, has frequently expressed alarm about the plant amid fears of a potential nuclear catastrophe.

During his conversation with reporters on Air Force One, Trump said he was pushing forward with his plans for tariffs on April 2 despite recent disruption in the stock market and nervousness about the economic impact.

“April 2 is a liberating day for our country,” he said. “We’re getting back some of the wealth that very, very foolish presidents gave away because they had no clue what they were doing.”

Trump has occasionally changed course on some tariff plans, such as with Mexico, but he said he had no intention of doing so when it comes to reciprocal tariffs.

In the span of a week, a hush has descended on higher education in the United States.

International students and faculty have watched the growing crackdown on pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia University with apprehension. Some say they are familiar with government crackdowns but never expected them on American college campuses.

The elite New York City university has been the focus of the Trump administration’s effort to deport foreigners who took part in pro-Palestinian demonstrations at colleges last year.

Federal immigration agents have arrested two foreigners — one of them a student — who protested last year at Columbia. They’ve revoked the visa of another student, who fled the U.S. this week. Department of Homeland Security agents also searched the on-campus residences of two Columbia students on Thursday but did not make any arrests there.

GOP officials have warned it’s just the beginning, saying more student visas are expected to be revoked in the coming days.

Columbia’s Graduate School of Journalism issued a statement reporting “an alarming chill” among its foreign students in the past week.

“Many of our international students have felt afraid to come to classes and to events on campus,” said the statement signed by “The Faculty of Columbia Journalism School.”

International students and faculty across the U.S. say they feel afraid to voice opinions or stand out on campus for fear of getting kicked out of the country.

“Green-card-holding faculty members involved in any kind of advocacy that might be construed as not welcome by the Trump administration are absolutely terrified of the implications for their immigration status,” said Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine.

Dubal, who is also general counsel for the American Association of University Professors, says some international faculty are now shying away from discourse, debate, scholarly research and publishing articles in peer-reviewed journals.

A Texas lawmaker who helped pioneer the state’s restrictive abortion laws introduced a bill on Friday to clarify medical exceptions allowed under the law, representing a pivot from Republican legislators who have defended the state’s abortion ban in the face of lawsuits and medical scrutiny.

The bill, introduced by Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes, still requires that patients have a medical emergency for a physician to perform an abortion but strikes language that it be a life-threatening condition. The bill would also require doctors and lawyers to receive training about the law.

“We’ve learned in a number of cases where the physician was willing to treat the mom, but the lawyers for the hospital would advise against it,” Hughes said. “So one of the most important things we want to do is make sure that doctors and the hospital lawyers are trained on what the law is.”

Hughes’ proposed legislation follows similar efforts by Kentucky lawmakers who added medical exceptions to their state’s near-total abortion ban on Thursday.

Texas law currently prohibits abortions except when a pregnant patient has a life-threatening condition. Doctors who are convicted of providing an illegal abortion can face up to 99 years in prison, a $100,000 fine and lose their medical license.

Texas’ abortion laws are among the strictest in the nation and have survived multiple legal challenges since the overturning of Roe v. Wade from opponents who say the law is unclear about when medical exceptions are allowed.

Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the president of the Senate, has made the bill one of his legislative priorities, and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s office said he’s open to supporting the legislation.

“Since the Dobbs decision, there have been 135 medically necessary abortions to save mothers’ lives in Texas with no repercussions for those physicians,” Abbott spokesperson Andrew Mahaleris said in a statement. “Governor Abbott looks forward to seeing any clarifying language in any proposed legislation from the legislature.”

For years, abortion rights advocates have criticized Texas’ abortion laws, which do not allow exceptions for cases of incest or rape, as too restrictive.

“No amount of attempted clarification from Texas lawmakers would suffice because abortion bans are dangerous,” said Ashley Gray, senior policy adviser for the Center for Reproductive Rights. “As long as you’re criminalizing doctors for providing care, patients will suffer.”

In 2024, the Texas Supreme Court said the state’s abortion laws were not too vague, ruling against a group of women who had serious pregnancy complications and were denied abortions. The Texas Medical Board has refused to list specific exceptions for doctors under the law.

Dallas mother Kate Cox was at the center of a separate lawsuit brought in 2023 for a similar issue after a court denied her permission to obtain an abortion after her fetus developed a fatal condition.

A group of more than 100 obstetricians and gynecologists across the state sent a letter in November to state officials urging them to reform the law after an investigation by ProPublica found three women had died after doctors had delayed treating their miscarriages.

The new Austrian government said Wednesday that family reunion procedures for migrants will be immediately halted because the country is no longer able to absorb newcomers adequately.

The measure is temporary and intended to ensure that those migrants who are already in the country can be better integrated, Chancellor Christian Stocker from the conservative Austrian People’s Party said.

“Austria’s capacities are limited, and that is why we have decided to prevent further overloading,” Stocker said.

The new measure means that migrants with so-called protected status — meaning they cannot be deported — are no longer allowed to bring family members still living in their home countries to Austria.

The new three-party coalition made up of the People’s Party, the center-left Social Democrats and the liberal Neos, has said that curbing migration is one of its top issues and vowed to implement strict new asylum rules.

Official figures show that 7,762 people arrived in Austria last year as part of family reunion procedures for migrants. In 2023 the figure was 9,254. Most new arrivals were minors.

Migrants who are still in the asylum process or have received a deportation order are not allowed in the first place to bring family members from their countries of origin.

Most recent asylum seekers came from Syria and Afghanistan, the Austrian chancellery said in a statement.

The European Union country has 9 million inhabitants.

Stocker said the measure was necessary because “the quality of the school system, integration and ultimately the security of our entire systems need to be protected — so that we do not impair their ability to function.”

The government said it had already informed the EU of its new measures. It denied to say for how long it would put family reunions on hold.

“Since last summer, we have succeeded in significantly reducing family reunification,” Interior Minister Gerhard Karner said. “Now we are creating the legal basis to ensure this stop is sustainable.”

All over the continent, governments have been trying to cut the number of migrants. The clamp-down on migrants is a harsh turnaround from ten years ago, when countries like Germany and Sweden openly welcomed more than 1 million migrants from war-torn countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Many communities and towns in other countries, such as Germany, also say they no longer have capacities to find shelter or homes for migrants.

The EU is trying to keep more migrants from entering its 27-country bloc and move faster to deport those whose asylum procedures are rejected.

On Tuesday, the EU unveiled a new migration proposal that envisions the opening of so-called “return hubs” to be set up in third countries to speed up the deportation for rejected asylum-seekers.

So far, only 20% of people with a deportation order are effectively removed from EU territory, according to the European Commission.

President Donald Trump shopped for a new Tesla on the White House driveway on Tuesday, selecting a shiny red sedan to show his support for Elon Musk ‘s electric vehicle company as it faces blowback because of his work to advance the president’s political agenda and downsize the federal government.

“Wow,” Trump said as he eased his way into the driver’s seat of a Model S. “That’s beautiful.”

Musk got in on the passenger side and joked about “giving the Secret Service a heart attack” as they talked about how to start a vehicle that can reach 60 miles (95 kilometers) per hour in a few seconds.

Trump told reporters that he would write a check for the car, which retails for roughly $80,000, and leave it at the White House so his staff can drive it. The president also said he hopes his purchase will boost Tesla, which is struggling with sagging sales and declining stock prices.

“It’s a great product,” he said. Referring to Musk, Trump said “we have to celebrate him.”

It was the latest — and most unusual — example of how Trump has demonstrated loyalty to Musk, who spent heavily on his comeback campaign last year and has been a key figure in his second administration. Tesla’s stock price increased nearly 4% on Tuesday after dropping almost 48% since Trump took office in January.

The Republican president announced on social media overnight that he was going to buy a new Tesla as “a show of confidence and support for Elon Musk, a truly great American.”

Musk continues to run Tesla — as well as the social media platform X and the rocket manufacturer SpaceX — while also serving as Trump’s adviser.

“Elon Musk is ‘putting it on the line’ in order to help our Nation, and he is doing a FANTASTIC JOB!” Trump wrote. “But the Radical Left Lunatics, as they often do, are trying to illegally and collusively boycott Tesla, one of the World’s great automakers, and Elon’s ‘baby,’ in order to attack and do harm to Elon, and everything he stands for.”

The Republican president announced on social media overnight that he was going to buy a new Tesla as “a show of confidence and support for Elon Musk, a truly great American.”

Musk continues to run Tesla — as well as the social media platform X and the rocket manufacturer SpaceX — while also serving as Trump’s adviser.

“Elon Musk is ‘putting it on the line’ in order to help our Nation, and he is doing a FANTASTIC JOB!” Trump wrote. “But the Radical Left Lunatics, as they often do, are trying to illegally and collusively boycott Tesla, one of the World’s great automakers, and Elon’s ‘baby,’ in order to attack and do harm to Elon, and everything he stands for.”

During his first term, top adviser Kellyanne Conway urged people to show their support for Trump’s daughter Ivanka by purchasing her retail products.

“Go buy Ivanka’s stuff,” she said. “I’m going to give it a free commercial here.”

Trump’s wealth and business savvy is core to his political appeal. The president promoted his products while running for office last year, and he attached his name to a cryptocurrency meme coin that launched shortly before he took office.

However, it’s rare to see Trump use his own money to support an ally, no matter how important they are.

Musk is the world’s richest person, with billions of dollars in government contracts. He’s also exerting sweeping influence over Trump’s administration through the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and traveling frequently with the president.

During an interview with the Fox Business Network on Monday, host Larry Kudlow asked Musk “how are you running your other businesses” while also advising Trump.

“With great difficulty,” he said.

“But there’s no turning back, you say?” Kudlow responded.

“I’m just here trying to make government more efficient, eliminate waste and fraud,” Musk said.

Tesla has recently faced protests and vandalism. Police are investigating gunshots fired at a dealership in Oregon, and fire officials are examining a blaze that destroyed four Cybertrucks at a Tesla lot in Seattle.

Japan’s trade minister said this week that he has failed to win assurances from U.S. officials that the key U.S. ally will be exempt from tariffs, some of which take effect on Wednesday.

Yoji Muto was in Washington for last ditch negotiations over the tariffs on a range of Japanese exports including cars, steel and aluminum.

Muto said Monday in Washington that Japan, which contributes to the U.S. economy by heavily investing and creating jobs in the United States, “should not be subject to” 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum and auto exports to America.

His meetings with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett came just two days before the steel and aluminum tariffs are due to take effect. President Donald Trump has also said a possible 25% tariff on imported foreign autos could take effect in early April.

Muto said the U.S. officials acknowledged Japanese contributions and agreed to continue talks, but did not approve his request for Japan’s exemption from the steep import duties.

“We did not receive a response that Japan will be exempt,” Muto told reporters. “We must continue to assert our position.”

As Trump’s tariff threats have triggered tensions and vows of retaliation from Canada, Mexico and China, Japan has been working to firm up ties with other countries.

Last week, the foreign and trade ministers from Japan and Britain gathered in Tokyo for their first “two-plus-two” economic dialogue. They agreed to stand up for “fair, rules-based international trade,” though nobody directly mentioned Trump.

Japan depends heavily on exports and the auto tariffs would hurt, because vehicles are its biggest export and the United States is their top destination.

“Clearly companies in Japan are very concerned,” said Rintaro Nishimura, political analyst and associate at Japan Practice of The Asia Group. “Obviously the auto is the crown jewel for Japan, especially in the context of these tariffs.” He says they are concerned also because the Trump administration is carrying it out in just two months after taking office.

Trump also has criticized Japan’s contributions to the two countries’ mutual defense arrangements, adding to tensions with Tokyo.

Muto said the two sides agreed to keep discussing to find ways to establish a “win-win” relationship that would serve national interests of both countries.

The two sides also discussed energy cooperation, including joint development of liquefied natural gas reserves in Alaska, which Trump and Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba agreed on during Ishiba’s visit to the White House in February.

Italy’s highest appeals court has ordered the government to compensate a group of migrants who were stranded at sea for days on a coast guard vessel in 2018 due to then-Interior minister Matteo Salvini ’s tough anti-migration policies.

Premier Giorgia Meloni on Friday criticized the court decision as “questionable” and “frustrating.”

The Cassation court ruling, which overturns a previous one, ordered the Italian government to pay for damages inflicted to the migrants at the time of the standoff. Judges late on Thursday sent the case back to an ordinary court, asking it to define the exact amount of compensation to be granted.

A group of Eritrean migrants appealed to the Cassation court over the ordeal of 190 migrants by Italy’s Diciotti coast guard ship in August 2018. Thirteen migrants with health problems were first disembarked on the island of Lampedusa, off Italy’s southern coast. The ship then headed to Catania, in Sicily, but was blocked for about 10 days by Salvini’s orders before the remaining 177 migrants were allowed off.

Meloni, who leads a conservative coalition including hardline League leader and vice-premier Salvini, said the ruling won’t help “citizens getting closer to institutions.”

“Due to this decision, the government will need to pay compensation — using money from honest Italian citizens who pay taxes – to people who tried to enter Italy illegally, violating the Italian law,” she wrote in a social media post.

Salvini called the ruling “absurd” in his own post and urged the magistrates to use their own money if they really want to compensate their “beloved migrants.” He has always said that his job was to defend Italy’s borders.

It was the latest chapter of a months-long clash between the Italian magistrates and the Meloni government, which is trying to push forward a radical reform of the judiciary system. Many critics say it puts the judiciary’s independence at risk.

Italian courts have also been challenging Meloni’s flagship initiative to transfer migrants to costly reception centers built in Albania for fast-track processing.