The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced on Monday that it will lose access to essential satellite data for the hurricane forecast on July 31, when the Department of Defense will stop sharing the images with that US agency.

Initially, NOAA was going to lose access to the data from today Monday, but managed to extend the deadline since NASA, which was also going to be affected by the measure, requested an extension until July 31.

According to a NOAA statement, late on Friday, June 27, the Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command received a request from Karen St. Germain, director of NASA’s Earth Science Division, “to postpone the withdrawal and continue processing and distributing data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program until July 31.”

The original decision to cut off access to satellite data as of today was made with the aim of “mitigating a significant cybersecurity risk,” according to the note.

NOAA’s access to data provided by the Defense Weather Satellite Program was crucial for predicting hurricane formation, since they allowed to mediate variables that were not available to conventional satellites.

In addition, the measure takes place in the middle of hurricane season, which experts expect to be more intense than normal in the Atlantic Ocean.

According to the Colorado State University (CSU), the probability of a major hurricane, category 3 or higher, impacting the United States in the current Atlantic cyclone season amounts to 51%.

This coincides with the approval in the Lower House of Congress of the controversial “great and beautiful bill” of US President Donald Trump, which includes a cut of almost 30% of the annual budget to NOAA and 646 million dollars to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The Justice of Argentina declared on Monday the unconstitutionality of two articles of the decree signed on May 20 by President Javier Milei that limited the right to strike of workers from various sectors, giving rise to a precautionary measure requested by the General Confederation of Labor (CGT), the main workers’ central of the country.

The decision was made by the National Labor Court No. 3, which ordered to stop the application of articles 2 and 3 of decree 340/2025, considering that they violate constitutional guarantees such as freedom of association and the right to strike, established in the Constitution and in international agreements signed by Argentina.

The decree modified article 24 of Law 25,877, which regulates collective labor conflicts, and declared a long list of activities as essential, limiting the possibility of its workers to carry out union action measures.

Judge Moira Fullana, who intervened in the case, argued that the unconstitutionality is based on the fact that, at the time of the signing of the decree, the National Congress was in full function, so there was no justification of necessity and urgency that deserved to skip the legislative treatment of such modifications.

On June 2, Fullana had provisionally failed to suspend the application of this measure, in response to another precautionary measure, requested by the Association of State Workers (ATE).

Until before its recent challenge, Decree 340/2025 required to guarantee between 50% and 75% of the usual benefits in sectors such as the production of medicines and/or hospital supplies, land and underground transport, radio and television, industrial activities, the food industry, the production and distribution of building materials, all airport services, logistics services, mining activity, refrigeration activity, mail and the distribution and marketing of food and beverages, among others, even during trade union conflicts.

The Government also included in that list of essential services all branches of maritime and river transport, customs, immigration services and education at all levels.

The measure, originally included in an extensive decree of general deregulation of the economy signed by Milei shortly after its assumption in December 2023, had already been unconstitutional by the Argentine Justice at that time.

The US Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will address a challenge presented by the Republican Party and supported by the Government of President Donald Trump to reduce the limits that have been imposed for decades on the expenses that political parties can make in a coordinated manner with individual campaigns.

The challenge was filed by the Republican national committees of the two Houses of Congress and two campaigns for the 2022 legislative elections, that of the current vice president, JD Vance, who ran as a senator for Ohio, and former congressman Steve Chabot, who lost the re-election of his seat, also for Ohio, in the House of Representatives.

In turn, the initiative has the support of the Federal Electoral Commission, currently under the direction of the Trump Administration, which has refused to defend the current legislative framework indicated that the restrictions in force violate the first amendment of the Constitution, which affects, among others, religious freedoms, of expression, press or assembly.

This leaves the Democratic National Committee and other related committees as the only advocates of these restrictions.

According to the current law, approved in 1971 and modified over the years by the Supreme Court and Congress, parties can invest money unlimitedly if they do so independently to support a candidate, but instead there are limits to the amounts if those expenses are made in a coordinated manner with the candidate’s campaign.

The challenge is the latest in a long series of cases that have sought to dynamite the restrictions on campaign financing agreed by Congress almost 55 years ago.

Already in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled in favor of not putting limits on expenses implemented independently by external entities.

The highest US court will attend to the oral arguments and issue a ruling in its next session, which begins in October.