Trump reverses, pauses tariffs.

I’m Isaac Saul, and this is Tangle: an independent, nonpartisan, subscriber-supported politics newsletter that summarizes the best arguments from across the political spectrum on the news of the day — then “my take.”

Are you new here? Get free emails to your inbox daily. Would you rather listen? You can find our podcast here.

Today's read: 17 minutes.

Tomorrow.

We’ll be publishing Isaac’s interview with Richard Hanania, a controversial conservative commentator who recently disavowed his support for Trump. Hanania is perhaps best known as a former white supremacist whose pseudonymous writing for white nationalist and alt-right websites from the early 2010s was uncovered just as he was becoming an influential conservative voice. In our interview, we talk about whether his evolution was genuine or career opportunism, how his views have shifted, and why he’s changing his mind about Trump. We’ll also discuss some of the criticism of our decision to interview Hanania in the first place.

Quick hits.

1. The House passed the Republican budget blueprint by a 216–214 vote after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) made assurances to GOP holdouts about finding at least $1.5 trillion in cuts in the budget. (The vote)
2. The consumer price index for March showed consumer prices increased 2.4% from the year prior, less than economists expected and down from a 2.8% year-over-year increase in February. The month-over-month CPI fell 0.1%. (The report)   
3. Federal judges in New York and Texas blocked the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelan men who are at risk of deportation under President Donald Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. (The rulings)
4. President Trump ordered the Justice Department to investigate and revoke the security clearances of former Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency director Chris Krebs and former Homeland Security official Miles Taylor. Krebs had criticized Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen, while Taylor criticized the president’s conduct during his first term. (The directive)
5. President Trump signed four executive orders aimed at bolstering the U.S. coal industry, including directives to federal agencies to identify coal resources on federal lands, remove barriers to coal mining, and prioritize coal leasing efforts. (The orders)

Today's topic.

Trump’s tariffs pause. On Wednesday, President Donald Trump announced a 90-day pause on the individualized tariffs imposed on U.S. trading partners, with the exception of China. The pause came roughly 13 hours after the tariffs took effect, and the White House said tariff levels would return to 10% on all imports during the pause. Conversely, President Trump raised the tariff on Chinese imports from 104% to 125%, effective immediately, citing “the lack of respect that China has shown to the World’s Markets.” Combined with the existing 20% tariff announced in February, the White House says the effective tariff rate on Chinese imports is now 145%.  Additionally, increased 25% tariffs on cars, steel, and aluminum from all countries will remain in place. 

“Based on the fact that more than 75 Countries have called Representatives of the United States, including the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, and the USTR, to negotiate a solution to the subjects being discussed relative to Trade, Trade Barriers, Tariffs, Currency Manipulation, and Non Monetary Tariffs, and that these Countries have not, at my strong suggestion, retaliated in any way, shape, or form against the United States, I have authorized a 90 day PAUSE, and a substantially lowered Reciprocal Tariff during this period, of 10%, also effective immediately,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

Prior to the announcement, the United States imposed individualized tariffs on dozens of countries, with President Trump justifying the move by declaring a national emergency due to trading practices that purportedly posed “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States.” The move prompted a range of responses from foreign leaders, with some seeking negotiations and deals with the White House and others promising retaliatory measures.

On Friday, China responded to the additional 34% levy on its goods with a matching 34% tariff on U.S. imports. President Trump then raised the tariff on Chinese products to 104%, after which China increased their tariffs on U.S. goods to 84%, prompting Trump to raise the rate on Chinese imports again to 125% — or 145% cumulatively. Furthermore, on Wednesday, the European Union approved a set of retaliatory duties on a broad swath of U.S. goods, though it paused these duties after Trump announced the U.S. pause; meanwhile, Canada imposed a 25% tariff on select vehicle imports from the U.S. 

The White House said that the existing 25% tariff on Canadian and Mexican goods not covered under the USMCA trade pact are unaffected by the pause, and that energy and potash imports from the two countries will also continue to be tariffed at 10%. 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reaffirmed Trump’s claim that over 75 countries had contacted the administration in attempts to negotiate the tariffs, adding that “each one of these solutions is going to be bespoke, it is going to take some time and President Trump wants to be personally involved. That’s why we’re getting the 90-day pause.”

Immediately following President Trump’s announcement of the pause, major stock indexes rallied. The one-day gain was the largest for the S&P 500 since 2008, for the Dow Jones Industrial Average since March 2020, and for the Nasdaq Composite since January 2001 (and its second-best day ever).

Today, we’ll cover the latest on the tariffs and the global response, with views from the left and right. Then, my take.

What the left is saying.

• The left sharply criticizes Trump’s handling of the entire saga, with many noting that the rationale for the pause runs counter to his justification for the tariffs. 
• Some say the ongoing trade war with China remains a potent threat.
• Others worry that Trump has done lasting damage to America’s global standing.

The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial board called the pause “a respite from chaos as Trump blinks.”

“The president tried to claim victory amid the wreckage of his defeat. But to clear-eyed analysts, it is painfully obvious Trump is in deep over his head. He has no idea what he’s doing, yet continues to whipsaw the world around like a madman while callously risking Americans’ life savings and livelihoods,” the board wrote. “Trump did not care about the financial pain and anxiety he inflicted on small-business owners, farmers, factory workers, or old-age pensioners. It was only after billionaire tech moguls, private equity vultures, and GOP mega-donors began squealing that Trump blinked.”

“No one should be surprised by Trump’s chaos, recklessness, and incompetence. He did the same nonsense during his first term, issuing illegal orders, picking needless fights, and floating inane ideas,” the board said. “Experts said Trump’s tariff math was wrong, made no sense, and would cause a recession. History showed tariffs worsened the Great Depression. The tariffs were estimated to cost the average American household $4,600 a year in higher prices. They were also projected to increase inflation and spur layoffs. Trump ignored all the facts and warnings. He decided to mess around and find out — no matter the cost to everyone else.”

In Vox, Eric Levitz explored “the questionable assumption fueling the stock market rally.”

Trump’s 125% tariff on Chinese imports “marked the culmination of a week-long, tit-for-tat volley of tariffs between Beijing and Washington. Now, with US imports facing an 84 percent tariff in China, more or less all trade between the world’s two greatest economic powers has ceased,” Levitz wrote. “Nevertheless, stock markets soared following Trump’s announcement, with the S&P 500 seeing its biggest rally in five years…. But we aren’t out of the woods yet. Trump’s current plans may look moderate compared to the shocking radicalism of his initial ‘reciprocal’ tariffs. But, prior to Trump’s inauguration, a 10 percent universal tariff — combined with a total decoupling of the US and Chinese economies — was widely considered the worst-case scenario.”

“Wall Street’s burgeoning optimism for the American economy therefore depends on the assumption that Trump will continue retreating from his current position. If he instead maintains his current course, the US will face surging prices and a heightened risk of recession,” Levitz said. “Trump backing down further on tariffs is no safe bet. As he has made clear in recent days, he believes that the United States should run a trade surplus in goods with every country on the planet — and that any country that runs a trade surplus with us is ripping America off. So long as Trump maintains this belief, it is hard to see how he negotiates resolutions with America’s major trade partners.”

In The New York Times, Thomas L. Friedman wrote about “what Trump just cost America.”

“Think of what Trump; his chief knucklehead, Howard Lutnick (the commerce secretary); his assistant chief knucklehead, Scott Bessent (the Treasury secretary); and his deputy assistant chief knucklehead, Peter Navarro (the top trade adviser), have told us repeatedly for the past weeks: Trump won’t back off on these tariffs because — take your choice — he needs them to keep fentanyl from killing our kids, he needs them to raise revenue to pay for future tax cuts, and he needs them to pressure the world to buy more stuff from us,” Friedman said. “After creating havoc in the markets standing on these steadfast ‘principles’ — undoubtedly prompting many Americans to sell low out of fear — Trump reversed much of it on Wednesday.”

“But don’t think for a second that all that’s been lost is money. A whole pile of invaluable trust just went up in smoke as well. In the last few weeks, we have told our closest friends in the world — countries that stood shoulder to shoulder with us after Sept. 11, in Iraq and in Afghanistan — that none of them were any different from China or Russia. They were all going to get tariffed under the same formula — no friends-and-family discounts allowed,” Friedman wrote. “Do you think these former close U.S. allies are ever going to trust getting into a trench with this administration again?”

What the right is saying.

• Many on the right are glad that Trump paused the bulk of the tariffs but worry about the lack of a clear strategy from the White House.
• Some argue the pause will isolate China. 
• Others say tariffs are still justified but call for better communication from the administration.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote “Trump blinks on tariffs, again, for now.”

“President Trump says trade wars are easy to win. Investors think otherwise, and on Wednesday Mr. Trump decided maybe investors are right,” the board said. “Markets celebrated with a stock-market rally in hope that perhaps Mr. Trump isn’t entirely oblivious to the damage he’s causing. The rout in dollar assets reversed, at least somewhat, and the rise in the benchmark 10-year Treasury yield eased. It would be hard to find better evidence that markets believe the biggest threat to the world economy is Mr. Trump’s tariffs.”

“The pause is a partial reprieve, but hardly an end to the tariff mayhem. For one thing the Administration can’t get its story straight. Mr. Trump’s pause came not long after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told bankers the economy is ‘in pretty good shape.’ He dismissed the bond rout as normal trading. But then why the tariff pause?,” the board wrote. “If decoupling from China is Mr. Trump’s goal, one way to mitigate the damage is by expanding trade with allies. But Mr. Trump’s tariffs slam friend and foe alike. Mr. Trump’s pause could give the Administration time to negotiate trade deals with many of his targets. But he’s not pausing his 10% base tariff on most countries.”

In RedState, Bonchie said the pause “puts China in the crosshairs.”

“That news sent stocks soaring, with the three major markets all up over five percent as of this writing. While there's still a ways to go to make up the losses of the last week, that's certainly a welcome start for everyone invested, including all the Americans who rely on the stock market to build their retirements,” Bonchie wrote. “Where does this go from here? It seems like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has firmly taken control of the ship. He is now advertising that countries that do not retaliate will be ‘rewarded’ as deals are struck. Ninety days should offer a long enough period to get most of this done with our allies and favored partners. 

“What does this mean for those who wanted to use tariffs to remake the economy? I'm not sure. There's still a lot to be decided here, but for now, a more pro-growth strategy seems to have been adopted, and that's a good thing for all Americans (and Republicans politically). It also gives the United States the leverage it needs to take on China without ancillary factors getting in the way. If Trump can get deals with nations like Japan, Vietnam, and South Korea relatively quickly, then the CCP will be isolated in a way it hasn't been in a long time.”

In Blaze Media, Christopher Bedford suggested “the White House’s mixed messaging threatens to sabotage Trump’s trade war.”

“Tariffs aren’t a one-dimensional tool. They can be used for all types of policy objectives… Is the goal to reshore American industry? Lower and erase trade barriers? Or simply break dependence on China? The problem for President Donald Trump’s administration is that disorganized and mixed messaging (with a heavy dose of wishful coping) threatens to undermine the whole thing,” Bedford wrote. “Not all the goals are at odds! But some of them are, and expectations certainly aren’t set for which goal the administration is pursuing.”

“Lowered trade barriers around the world would be all well and good for trade hawks, but not so much for those who believe the United States needs to rebuild its famed industrial power,” Bedford said. “Trump’s longest-held political view is that the United States is getting ripped off by the world. He’s beat this drum for decades, and by all accounts he’s completely committed to changing that at long last. Vance, Lutnick, and Navarro all share Trump’s view. They want a change and aren’t likely to retreat from that position. But if they’re intending to take the long, hard road toward reshoring, they’d best let us know what we’re in for.”

My take.

Reminder: "My take" is a section where I give myself space to share my own personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, don't unsubscribe. Write in by replying to this email, or leave a comment.

Skipping any preamble today, here are 16 thoughts on what just happened: 

1. Trump blinked. In the moments after Trump blinked, many of his sycophantic fans insisted that we were observing “The Art of the Deal,” that he had won, had isolated China, had brought our trading partners to the negotiating table, and that this was the plan all along. This, obviously, is nonsense; Trump was watching the U.S. bond market and stock market collapse (simultaneously) and the Treasury yields refuse to come down, realized he was cornered, and folded his hand.
2. Nevertheless, a lot of people pretended that Trump capitulating was actually him conducting his grand opening gambit to reform global trade. And then… the president got in front of a microphone. And to remove any doubt about what had happened, he said the obvious and frightening truth out loud: He decided to pause the bulk of his reciprocal tariffs because people “were getting a little bit yippy, a little bit afraid.” He said he watched JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warn about the market reaction and a possible recession on TV. He said he was making tariff decisions “instinctively,” had to be flexible, and was keeping an eye on the markets. So, in case there was any doubt, that’s Trump’s real reasoning for the tariff reversal. Trump was not executing any grand plan. This was not The Art of the Deal. He saw the stock and bond markets collapsing, people around him got afraid, and he backed down. 
3. Now, let’s back up and revisit some questions from a few days ago. I wanted to understand the Trump administration’s grand plan, and it turns out they didn’t have one. When they said they were rolling out global tariffs to negotiate new trade deals but also said the tariff rates weren’t a negotiation tactic, that wasn’t 4D chess. It was a lack of a plan. When they said the plan was to end up with zero tariffs and total free trade and also said they wanted to raise tax revenue, that wasn’t 4D chess. It was a lack of a plan. When they warned about the need to be “tough” and “take our medicine” and promised that under no circumstances would they back down, and then backed down, that wasn’t 4D chess. It was a lack of a plan. 
4. I am a political moderate. My political ideology is drawn from a wide range of thinkers across the classical liberal, progressive, conservative, and Trumpist ideologies. I like some of what Trump does. I do not like some of what Trump does. I am not a sycophant. I am not a hater. So I want to be as clear as I can: Criticizing the absurdity of the last week is absolutely essential for anyone who values intellectual honesty. We should plainly and repeatedly call out the stupidity we’ve seen unfold over the past several days with clarity and consistency. Doing this does not make you a partisan hack. It does not mean you have Trump Derangement Syndrome. In the insanity of this information cesspool we all live in, it has been a very embarrassing, contradictory, nonsensical, and unproductive week for the Trump administration. We should all be able to call that out without fear of criticism or accusations of partisanship — otherwise, this great big wild nation might completely and utterly lose its collective mind.
5. I think, maybe, nothing was accomplished? What deal did we make? What did we win? The administration says representatives from other countries are calling to negotiate. That’s great, but to negotiate for what? Previously, the White House has said this is not a negotiation, and now they won’t say who has called to negotiate —  but also this isn’t a negotiation, it’s about rectifying unfair trade practices, which Trump has defined as anyone we have a trade deficit with (I explain why that is nonsense here) but today seems to just be China. We’ll see if this 90-day pause brings about a slew of incredible new trade deals, at which point I will publicly eat my words and concede this global brinkmanship was all worth something. But for now, we should not be pretending a deal was made when we’ve seen absolutely no proof of deals that have been made.
6. Things are still not great! The market rallied yesterday, but that did not make up the ground from the major sell-off that preceded it. Any middle-class American with a stock portfolio or 401k has probably seen something in the ballpark of a 10% shave off their investments over the last week or two for no good reason. We also know, from a rare moment of clarity from the administration provided by Scott Bessent, that one key objective of high tariffs was bringing down the yield on Treasury notes. Instead, yields kept climbing until Trump paused the tariffs. So they got the opposite result they had hoped for, and we still can’t expect Treasury yields or the Federal Reserve’s interest rate to come down. We still have massive tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada, and a flat tariff for the rest of the world, which are likely to stymie growth and increase prices in the coming months. Also, these “reciprocal” tariffs aren’t gone but paused for 90 days, a pause Trump can undo at any moment, which creates a great deal of uncertainty. Small businesses are still scrambling amid the volatility, some manufacturers have already canceled huge contracts, and who’s to say whether they can trust the future and come back to the U.S.?
7. Are we all comfortable with one person having this kind of power? Does Congress have any interest in wresting its constitutional power of the purse back from the executive? I’m really asking. Some random X account with “Bloomberg” in its name moved trillions of dollars of market wealth earlier this week with an inaccurate tweet that Trump was going to back off the tariffs. Then, when Trump actually did post a tweet backing off the tariffs, the market absolutely exploded. How comfortable are you with any one person with an iPhone being able to impact the economy this way? 
8. It seems very obvious that some people knew this announcement was coming and profited from it Bigly. Market sleuths have documented absolutely massive, unusual market buys just minutes before the announcement was made — people placing risky and totally irrational bets on a quick turnaround in the market that only make sense if they knew the president was about to make a market-shifting announcement. To me, this should be front-page news and launch a serious fraud investigation. Thankfully, some members of Congress are calling this out.
9. What did we learn? I’ll go first. The bond market did not behave as a lot of people thought it would, which seems somewhat alarming. It appears countries like Japan and China have a lot more influence over us — and our financial viability — than we are ready to admit. Also, many, many smart people will defend the president no matter how silly it makes them look. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones and all our other Real Markets We Attach Value To can look a lot like volatile crypto stocks under the right circumstances. Oh, also, applying massive, global, “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly every nation on earth while also hammering one of our largest trading partners with tariffs in excess of 100% is a very good way to immediately crash the economy. So, if you ever want to do something like that, you now have a good playbook to follow.
10. Politicians can be dishonest and predictable and vapid in ways that are infuriating. For example, there’s this freshman Congressman from Pennsylvania whose race I followed because it was in my home state, competitive, and very expensive. He spent his campaign demanding that members of Congress stop trading stock and hammered his opponent for not cosponsoring a bill to ban stock trading in Congress. It was a very convincing populist shtick that a lot of people took seriously (including me). Now that he’s in Congress, he is not only not cosponsoring any such bills to ban stock trading, he’s one of the most prolific stock traders in Congress. This is a certain genre of politicking that is so insulting to our intelligence that it takes all my willpower to stop my blood from boiling. This is the same kind of hypocrisy that can lead a politician to shamelessly spend all week touting the line that tariffs are good, that they will make us rich, that they will restore American manufacturing, that they will create jobs, and then say after the president pauses tariffs that this is great, that we have reformed global trade, that we’re winning, that this is all part of The Plan. It’s  lets-see-how-gullible-all-of-you-really-are politics, and it’s one of those things that causes me to lose my cool. 
11. Phew. That’s 10 points of basically nothing but harsh criticism for the administration, all well deserved. But maybe it’s getting a little boring. Let me try to steelman Trump’s decision making without debasing myself by detaching from reality and pretending that this was some kind of master plan from the start and Trump got what he wanted… 
12. Putting aside for a moment the path he took to get there, Trump is now pursuing the tariff route that a lot of mainstream, pro-tariff people wanted him to pursue in the first place. For instance, Oren Cass cheered this outcome: an across-the-board 10% tariff on all imports, some “tough love” to Canada and Mexico, and an all-out confrontation with China. Cass put it like this: “Phasing in the reciprocal tariffs strengthens them considerably, retaining the benefits of negotiating under credible threat (and making the threat more sustainable and thus credible) while reducing costly disruptions before firms can adapt.” China is poorly positioned to weather this storm, and in the U.S., the biggest economic issue (inflation) seems to be improving. And, of course, you could argue that Trump never would have gotten the world’s attention (and China’s) if he had taken some traditional route to open negotiations.
13. In other words, with the more outlandish tariffs paused (or, hopefully, off the table), we’ll now get a chance to see a more evidence-based tariff policy. Cass and others have been advocating for Congress to formalize an across-the-board 10% tariff, and Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) actually proposed a bill to that effect in January. So, I’m interested to see the impact of that more purposeful strategy: What happens when we actually confront China? How much revenue does a 10% across-the-board tariff actually raise, and does it meaningfully help with our government’s budget issues? What does it do for American manufacturing and job markets? We’ve been completely locked into Trump’s instincts and whims for the past week, but now we can test the mainstream pro-tariff economic plan.
14. Rep. Golden isn’t the only Democrat who supports broad tariffs, and it wasn’t so long ago that tariffs were an almost exclusively left-wing proposal. Michigan’s Democratic governor and 2028 presidential hopeful Gretchen Whitmer was welcomed to the White House in an oddly positive fashion yesterday, with Trump heaping praise upon her. Rather than hammer Trump publicly over the tariffs, Whitmer has emphasized their common ground and insisted there is a way to enact tariffs that is helpful for Americans. That’s… interesting. Trump’s approval on the economy seems to be cratering for the first time ever (outside a pandemic), and at least a faction of the opposition party appears hesitant to break with him on the issue that is driving that unpopularity. Politically, to me, not voicing a unified opposition to the president nearly driving the economy off a cliff seems idiotic. But at least it has some intellectual honesty — they’re not pretending they hate the policies they’ve been supportive of simply because Trump is now backing them.
15. A remarkable story about Gary Cohn and Trump was making the rounds yesterday. Cohn is Trump’s former chief economic advisor, and he wrote in his book that he used to spend a great deal of time trying to convince Trump that Americans didn’t want to work in factories any more. In his telling, he’d regularly bring Trump economic data to make his point, explaining why an average worker would prefer to be at their desk in an air- conditioned office than working in front of a 2,000-degree blast furnace, but Trump was unconvinced. He seems earnestly attached to an outdated vision of the American worker, which very well might be the viewpoint that drove all the tumult we’ve experienced the last few weeks. 
16. I’ll conclude by reiterating what I’ve said from the get-go: While I’ve been very critical of the administration over the last week, I still don’t think we can reasonably pass judgment on the efficacy of Donald Trump’s tariff policy — however it ends up — for some time. Maybe economists or tariff experts can, but I definitely do not feel equipped to. The uncomfortable truth for most journalists, pundits, and politicians is that this is a project whose long-term results in six months or six years matter a lot more than the market’s reaction over the course of six days. I’m skeptical — I think this was a ham-handed and unnecessarily chaotic rollout, and I ultimately believe Trump’s tariff policy is potentially economically ruinous; but it would be dishonest of me to pretend this story (and its ending) is already written. 

Take the survey: What do you think of Trump’s decision to pause tariffs? Let us know!

Disagree? That's okay. My opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.

Your questions, answered.

We're skipping the reader question today to give our main story some extra space. Want to have a question answered in the newsletter? You can reply to this email (it goes straight to our inbox) or fill out this form.

Under the radar.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken held a final hearing on a $2.8 billion settlement between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its largest conferences (the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC) that is poised to alter the landscape of college athletics. The deal would distribute $2.78 billion in backpay to college athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024 but were fully or partially shut out from the NCAA’s “name, image and likeness” rules, which began in 2021 and allow student-athletes to accept payment to promote products or services. Additionally, the settlement will allow schools to pay athletes directly, establishing a pool of $20.5 million for each school in the agreement’s first year. Judge Wilken must approve the deal before it can go into effect, and she could rule as soon as April 14. The Associated Press has an explainer on the story.

Numbers.

• –4.4%. The percent change in the Nasdaq Composite between market close on April 2 (when President Trump announced his “liberation day” tariffs) and market open on April 3. 
• –3.3%. The percent change in the S&P 500 between market close on April 2 and market open on April 3. 
• –2.5%. The percent change in the Dow Jones Industrial Average between market close on April 2 and market open on April 3. 
• 1:18pm ET. The time on Wednesday that President Donald Trump announced the 90-day tariff pause. 
• +7.1%. The percent change in the Nasdaq Composite between 1:15pm and 1:35pm ET  on Wednesday. 
• +6.5%. The percent change in the S&P 500 index between 1:15pm and 1:35pm ET on Wednesday. 
• +6.1%. The percent change in the Dow Jones Industrial Average between 1:15pm and 1:35pm ET on Wednesday.

The extras.

• One year ago today we wrote about President Biden’s newest student-debt cancellation plan.
• The most clicked link in yesterday’s newsletter was the ad in the free version for Native Path’s bone density supplements.
• Nothing to do with politics: Ranking the 100 best sci-fi films ever made.
• Yesterday’s survey: 2,302 readers answered our survey on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. J.G.G. with 84% supporting the court’s due-process decision. “The due process ruling is a win, but the habeas corpus requirement and not weighing in on the AEA leaves a lot to be desired,’” one respondent said.

Have a nice day.

Josie Church and Anne Wallace-Hadrill have been neighbors in Oxford since the 1980s, but have been unknowingly linked by their shared birthday since 1924. The women bonded after their husbands died, staying busy with volunteering and creative activities. Since discovering their shared birth date, the duo has celebrated the day together for years; on April 1 of this year, they celebrated their 101st birthday. When asked for tips on leading a long life, Church responded, “Just live.” Good News Network has the story.

Don't forget...

📣 Share Tangle on Twitter here, Facebook here, or LinkedIn here.

🎧 We have a podcast you can listen to here.

🎥 Follow us on Instagram here or subscribe to our YouTube channel here

💵 If you like our newsletter, drop some love in our tip jar.

🎉 Want to reach 370,000+ people? Fill out this form to advertise with us.

📫 Forward this to a friend and tell them to subscribe (hint: it's here).

🛍 Love clothes, stickers and mugs? Go to our merch store!