Category News

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander celebrated by spreading his arms wide before the basket went in.

Cason Wallace waited patiently for the ball to pass through the basket while keeping his right arm high in the air.

Soon enough, it followed inevitably.

The Oklahoma City Thunder’s dominant opening period, which ended Game 5 of the Western Conference finals on Wednesday, was sealed with Wallace’s corner 3-pointer at the buzzer.

The Thunder’s best-of-seven series was concluded by Gilgeous-Alexander, who finished with 34 points, eight assists, and seven rebounds.

According to Gilgeous-Alexander, “I didn’t want to travel back to Minnesota and I wanted the fans to enjoy the moment with us.”

For the fifth time in franchise history, the Thunder are making the NBA Finals. This is their first appearance since 2012. When the Seattle-based organization made its first three appearances,

On June 5, Oklahoma City will host Game 1 of the championship game between the New York Knicks and the Indiana Pacers.

Although Gilgeous-Alexander said, “Happy for this moment, but this isn’t our goal.” The road is still being traveled.

The Thunder’s early dominance of the game was evident on Wednesday, with Gilgeous-Alexander, Jalen Williams, and Chet Holmgren buried the Timberwolves beneath the weight of a stifling defense and playmaking.

Oklahoma City quickly won the game, leading by 17 in the first quarter and by 33 at half.

The Timberwolves’ season came to an end in the Western Conference finals for the second year in a row.

This summer, Timberwolves star Anthony Edwards said, “I’m going to work my butt off.” No one will put in that much work for me this summer, I’ll say it.

In the opening quarter, Gilgeous-Alexander, who once more demonstrated why he was chosen as the NBA’s Most Valuable Player (MVP), provided five of his assists.

The Timberwolves’ first hoop came on the first possession the Timberwolves had, and Gilgeous-Alexander had a hand in each of the five Oklahoma City baskets in the 11-0 run that started the Thunder’s march toward the championship.

Gilgeous-Alexander drained a finger roll to start the separation in that stretch, adding four assists, three of which came from Holmgren buckets.

The Timberwolves kicked off Game 4 hot off the field on Monday, but the game ended 128-126.

Minnesota started off offence-wise, going just 1-for-11 from the field in the first five minutes.

In the first half, Gilgeous-Alexander scored or provided 24 of the Thunder’s 26 first-quarter points, outscoring Minnesota 12-9.

In the first half, Minnesota forced 14 turnovers, compared to field goals’ (12). With 21 turnovers, the Timberwolves came in.

Williams added 19 points, eight rebounds, and five assists while Holmgren added 22 and seven.

“These guys really make me feel like I’m playing AAU basketball like I’m back in my 15th year,” Gilgeous-Alexander said. It’s simply enjoyable. That is what makes us exceptional. Being out together is a lot of fun.

Edwards scored 19 points on 7-of-18 shooting, while Julius Randle had 24 for the Timberwolves.

According to Edwards, “they dominated the game from the beginning.” “Tip my hat to those guys, I can’t help but.” They prepared themselves.

According to the Court of International Trade, the US Constitution grants Congress the sole authority to regulate trade with other nations if the president’s emergency powers are not override.

A three-judge panel on Wednesday wrote that the court did not consider the President’s use of tariffs as leverage and whether it was wise or likely to be successful. That use is unlawful because it is prohibited by federal law, not because it is foolish or ineffective.

If the decision is upheld, Trump’s plan to use high tariffs to entice trading partners could be stifled by the ruling. Numerous simultaneous negotiations with China, the European Union, and many other nations result in a great deal of uncertainty.

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law designed to deal with unusual and extraordinary national emergencies, was upheld by the court in favor of Trump’s tariff orders issued since January. This decision did not address tariffs introduced under other laws, such as those that target particular industries like steel, autos, and aluminum.

The Trump administration quickly appealed the court’s authority, disputing its validity. Trade imbalances posed a national crisis, according to a White House spokesman. The deputy press secretary of the White House, Kush Desai, defended Trump’s executive actions as necessary to safeguard US industry and security, saying “it is not up to unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency.”

According to Mike Hanna of Al Jazeera, who is based in Washington, DC, various Democrat and Republican presidents have appointed the court’s judges.

According to Hanna, “this particular court cannot be said to be an activist court because Trump and his supporters have sued other courts for ruling against him.”

Trump himself, former president Barack Obama, and former president Ronald Reagan, who served as the third judge, were the other three.

The Court of International Trade deals with customs and trade law-related issues. The US Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit has the authority to challenge its decisions, which are then upheld by the Supreme Court.

According to Robert Scott, a financial analyst, Trump’s first term’s tariffs failed to produce tangible results. He claimed that the majority of those tariffs did not lead to an improvement in US trade. China’s exports to the world kept rising, and US trade deficits kept growing. Simply put, they changed the way goods were rerouted across the world.

The non-partisan Liberty Justice Center filed a pair of lawsuits on behalf of five small US businesses that import products from nations targeted by the duties, and 12 US states that received the ruling.

The businesses, which include a Virginia-based manufacturer of educational kits and musical instruments to a New York wine and spirits importer, have claimed that the tariffs will hurt their ability to conduct business.

If the judges’ decision states that “no question here is a narrowly tailored relief,” “if the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all.”