CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

A Biden-appointed federal judge - who quit her previous job as partner at the Jones Day law firm because they did work for the 1st Trump administration - just ruled against the administration's plan to create a database to verify citizenship to be able to vote in US elections. 

Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled on Monday that officials across several government agencies "haphazardly combined and repurposed the private information of millions of Americans, including citizenship data that they knew to be unreliable," in order to comply with the Trump administration's attempts to implement election integrity measures. 

A March executive order directed the Social Security Administration (SSA) to create a “State Citizenship List” derived from its data, naturalization records and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, an existing database maintained by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that is used to determine eligibility for federal programs.

Since the EO, said Sooknanan, "states have partnered with the federal government to access the database and are actively removing United States citizens from voter rolls based on inaccurate information," she wrote in her 75-page ruling. 

"All in all, the federal government has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote. This Court cannot stand idly by while that happens," she continued. 

According to Sooknanan - ruling in favor of the League of Women voters, efforts to establish the database were unlawful - and violated the Social Security Act, Privacy Act and Administrative Procedure Act.

BREAKING: We just won a court order blocking the Trump-Vance admin’s attempt to haphazardly consolidate Americans’ sensitive data into a massive government database.

This protects millions from baseless investigations and unlawful voter roll purges – a critical win for voting… pic.twitter.com/cZxduqtqRi

— Democracy Forward (@DemocracyFwd) June 22, 2026

Reacting to the ruling, far-left organization Democracy Now wrote "This protects millions from baseless investigations and unlawful voter roll purges – a critical win for voting rights." 

Meanwhile, DHS general counsel James Percival said on X: "t’s amazing how hard the Left will fight to stop us from solving problems they insist do not exist. Judge Sparkle Soknanan’s latest ruling preventing DHS from addressing alien voting is just the latest example." 

It’s amazing how hard the Left will fight to stop us from solving problems they insist do not exist. Judge Sparkle Soknanan’s latest ruling preventing DHS from addressing alien voting is just the latest example!

— James Percival (@DHSGenCounsel) June 22, 2026

China’s monthly gold imports reached their highest in more than two years in May, showing the world’s biggest buyer’s appetite for bullion remained resilient as prices remained under pressure; the number prompted some to scratch their heads as to where all this gold is going in light of tepid official central bank purchases, coupled with the lowest gold withdrawals from the Shanghai Gold Exchange since the covid outbreak. 

As Bloomberg reports, imports were around 163 tons last month, the highest since March 2024, according to customs data released on Saturday. Volumes for the first five months of 2026 were about 692 tons, up by about 76% from a year earlier. 

Chinese demand for physical bullion bars, as well as metal linked to gold accumulation plans (low-barrier products that allow investors to buy gold incrementally), have been among the main drivers of the surge, said Song Jiangzhen, a researcher at the Guangzhou Southern Gold Market Academy. 

China also started implementing a new import licensing regime for gold from June 1, with certain banks facing fewer restrictions. But the change may have prompted some banks to use up their existing quotas before the new system began, Song said.

Curiously, in its latest official monthly update, China's central banb, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) only increased its gold reserves by nearly 10 tonnes last month, its 19th consecutive month of bullion purchases. The State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) announced on Sunday that China's official gold reserves rose by 320,000 troy ounces or 9.95 tonnes in May to a total of 74.96 million troy ounces or 2331.52 tonnes.

China's total foreign exchange reserves rose to $3.4422 trillion at the end of May, increasing by $31.7 billion or 0.93% from April. This is the highest level for China’s FX reserves since November 2015; they have remained above $3.3 trillion for the past 10 months.

SAFE attributed the growth of reserves to a number of factors, including a firmer US Dollar Index and rising global asset prices, adding that China's sound economic momentum has underpinned the stability of its reserves.

Experts have noted that China's rising foreign exchange reserves are closely linked to the country’s export performance.  China's total foreign trade in the first four months of 2026 rose to $2.39 trillion, an increase of 14.9% year-on-year, with exports rising by 11.3% percent to $1.37 trillion and imports rising 20% percent to $1.01 trillion, according to the latest data from China's General Administration of Customs

According to the latest central bank gold purchase tracker from Goldman, of the 59 tonnes of gold purchased by central bank in April, China's PBOC was estimated to have bought 24 tonnes of gold, or well below the recent pace of imports which are about 5x greater. While the pace of central bank gold purchases has moderated to ~50 tonnes/month on a 3-month (seasonally adjusted) and 12-month moving average basis, Goldman views the ongoing diversification trend as structural.

Goldman remains bullish on gold, with continued central bank diversification the main structural driver of the bank's constructive base case for gold prices, contributing 9% to its forecast for appreciation by Dec26. As we highlighted last week, a recent World Gold Council survey supports Goldman's optimistic view: a record 45% of the 76 central banks surveyed between February and May expect to increase their own gold reserves over the next 12 months, while ~90% expect global reserves to rise with the remainder expecting broadly stable holdings. As a result, Goldman assumes continued central bank accumulation of 50t/month in 2026 and 40t/month in 2027.

Meanwhile, as Kitco notes, China’s domestic gold market has shown definite signs of cooling in recent weeks. 

“Amid heightened market uncertainty, gold ETFs have seen an overall reduction in assets under management, with several funds experiencing significant net outflows,” noted a report from Gelonghui Finance. “As of June 3, 14 gold ETFs recorded combined net outflows exceeding RMB 10 billion [$1.48 billion] over the past month.”

“The previously widely accepted investment view of 'buying on dips amid falling gold prices' has started to face divergence under current volatile market conditions,” they added.

Gold prices have retreated by about a quarter from the record highs reached in January, weighed down by EM selling (most notably Turkey in the early days of the Iran war), and global inflation fears amid the war in the Middle East which have pushed the US dollar sharply higher. While strong buying from Chinese consumers was a key catalyst for the January frenzy, domestic demand has since moderated, but without a major slump.

Adding to the mathematical mystery, the latest numbers from the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) showed that gold withdrawals in May totaled only 63.5 tonnes – the lowest level since February of 2020 during the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak, and around half of what they were in March of this year. Industry professionals told Gelonghui Finance that “while short-term gold price volatility may persist, the core rationale supporting gold’s strategic allocation value remains intact over the medium to long term.”

In other words, there appears to be a gap between near record imports, tepid official central bank demand, and muted gold withdrawals from the SGE. 

This is not a new development: as we documented previously, China is well known for indicating just modest central bank purchases, even as total Chinese purchases of gold on the London OTC market are orders of magnitude higher. 

China reported 5 tonnes of gold purchases in February (160k oz per PBOC).
China actually bought 50 tonnes of gold in February (per GS) pic.twitter.com/oQifGszNcQ

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 13, 2025

Separately, Bloomberg also reported that at least four of the 11 banks participating in Hong Kong’s new gold clearing system are importing large bullion bars in preparation for the mechanism’s planned launch in July.

Traders are receiving orders from some of the clearing banks to move 400-ounce gold bars into the city, Bloomberg reported citing people familiar with the matter. The bars meet the London Good Delivery industry standard.

The 400-ounce bars are typically traded by banks and sovereign entities in London, the world’s largest bullion trading hub, but are less common in the Asian market, which is dominated by much smaller kilobars. The banks need to build up inventories to allow for physical delivery when clearing begins next month.

By launching its gold clearing system, Hong Kong is securing first-mover advantage in a push to become Asia’s preeminent hub for bullion trading. Last week, Singapore announced its own plans to launch a clearing mechanism by the end of the year.

Both cities are aiming to capitalize on strong demand in Asia, where many investors remain bullish about the long-term prospects for the precious metal as an alternative store of wealth despite the recent drop in price as the war in the Middle East fanned concerns around inflation and higher interest rates.

In an emailed response to questions, a spokesperson for the government agency behind the system, known as the Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau, said the clearing company had been “working closely with the market to formulate the framework and rules of the clearing system” and that preparatory work had entered its final stage.

Eleven banks are on the board of the Hong Kong Precious Metals Central Clearing Company. Some of these lenders will become clearing banks from the launch, whereas others will take longer to build up their bullion capacity. While Hong Kong plans to start by using the London Good Delivery standard, its future plans are still to be decided, the people said.

In Singapore, the clearing system will be aligned with the London Good Delivery framework for large bars, as well as delivery and settlement standards for kilobars adopted by major exchanges in Chicago and Shanghai.

Authored by Ron Paul

Against the odds, the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the US and Iran appears to be holding, after threats and counter-threats. It may collapse, but it has survived a first round of talks between the two sides in Switzerland over the weekend.

President Trump started a war on Iran against all sober guidance and in violation of the US Constitution's requirement that only Congress can declare war. There must be a reckoning for our elected leaders who violate their oath of office, the Constitution, and simple common sense.

However, what is more telling is the reaction when President Trump finally took the correct move and attempted to end the war. The neocons who had hailed him as a great leader – Levin, Bolton, Pompeo, etc. – suddenly turned against him when he turned against further escalation of the war.

Even Trump’s top funder, Miriam Adelson, attacked Trump in her newspaper Israel Hayom. "You could have been the greatest president of all, but you failed," the newspaper wrote in an editorial.

Not much gratitude from the Israel-first crowd, even if the war was started to benefit Israel.

And more telling even than this was the reaction of the "opposition" party in Congress, the Democrats. They attacked him harder for ending – or at least pausing – the war more than for starting the war in the first place!

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) called the MOU a "capitulation." Sen Chris Murphy (D-CT) called the MOU an "embarrassing document." Sen. Amy Klobuchar falsely claimed that President Trump was paying Iran $300 billion to re-open Hormuz.

This is more evidence – as if any is needed – that our foreign policy is run by the "uniparty." When it comes to wars, there is no Republican Party nor is there a Democratic Party. There is only the "yes!" party.

Congress remains silent in the run-up to war. Congress remains silent when the President launches a war. Congress even remains silent when the war begins going badly. It is only on those rare occasions that a president takes steps to correct his mistake that Congress finds its voice.

Yes, there is plenty to criticize. After weekend talks, the US side, led by Vice President JD Vance, is celebrating as a "breakthrough" that the Strait of Hormuz is open again and that Iran has reportedly agreed to the return of UN inspectors. But the Strait was open before this war and UN inspectors were in Iran before President Trump unilaterally pulled out of the JCPOA "Iran Deal" in his first term.

The only difference now is that we burned through likely several hundred billion dollars, we lost dozens of aircraft and other military equipment, and we likely lost more service members than the Pentagon is admitting.

It is a reminder of why the Founders intended to make sure that any war must be declared by the people’' Representatives before the first bullet is shot: it should be very hard to launch wars.

Nevertheless, those who are truly against the wars should, in my opinion, hold their fire for the time being in hope that a lasting resolution can be found. The President is being attacked from all sides by the war party. Now may not be the best time for the peace party to join in.

The founder of China's largest e-commerce and logistics companies fired off a warning shot to hundreds of thousands of delivery workers that the rise of automation and AI adoption in the last-mile will result in hundreds of thousands of job losses "sooner or later." 

Richard Liu, founder and chair of JD.com, told the audience at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation CEO Forum in Beijing on Sunday, according to the Financial Times, that 700,000 delivery workers will be replaced by robots "sooner or later."

"In the future, when robots are delivering parcels, sooner or later, there will be a day when couriers are basically no longer needed," Liu said, adding, "It will definitely be robots delivering parcels. But I really do not want our 700,000 brothers to go without meals, without jobs."

Liu's timeline for the robotic takeover of last-mile delivery was vague and uncertain, but a number of robot delivery companies are already in pilot programs or commercialization across major Chinese cities.

He said JD has signed deals with 120 schools to retrain couriers for roles such as robot maintenance and repair, noting that the rise of robots will require new technical jobs. 

Liu elaborated on the shift of some couriers into robot repair jobs, saying "robots are machinery . . . they will always, at some point, have faults."

His comments come as China's gig economy continues to expand, with temporary and blue-collar platform workers expected to reach 320 million this year, or about 40% of urban employment. At the same time, youth unemployment remains elevated, raising concerns that robotics and AI could squeeze both blue-collar and white-collar workers.

The pace at which China adopts automation across its economy should outpace the U.S., given that development is happening at hyperspeed and many of the world's robotics supply chains are based in the world's second-largest economy.

You were promised robots that take the night shift.

The pitch writes itself. Machines that never tire, never quit, never ask for a raise. The end of human labor as we know it.
Here's what the money actually bought.

Figure is worth $39 billion. It has 40 robots loading parts at… pic.twitter.com/eeLXjHKp82

— Rand Group (@randgroup) June 22, 2026

Earlier this month, Barclays internet equity analyst Ross Sandler published a note titled "Autonomous Food Delivery Likely Hits Critical Mass By 2030," outlining how automation in last-mile delivery could push delivery costs down to as little as $1 per order in the US. 

"The promise of autonomous food delivery is still a few years out, but showing very positive signals in markets that have been quick to embrace it. AVs should reduce the cost of delivery for both marketplaces (currently $8-$10 per order) and for consumers (tipping, $5 per order) down to as low as $1 per order," Sandler wrote in the note.

He continued, "As witnessed already in select APAC geos with low delivery costs, when this kind of improvement happens to the cost curve, consumer adoption should go through the roof. China's online food delivery penetration is 40% of orders in tier one cities, well ahead of the US, with cost being the biggest delta." 

"UBER and DASH have a number of strategies in place in both SDR (sidewalk delivery robotics) and drones, but claim that these efforts are not likely to hit a material percentage of orders until 2030 and beyond."

The analyst sees "sidewalk delivery robots as the nearer-term opportunity. Current costs are around $5 to $7 per drop, but could fall toward $1 over time as utilization improves. Drones offer faster delivery and a larger "wow" factor, but regulatory hurdles, battery limitations and airspace approvals make the path more complicated."

A recent UBS note on forecasts for global shipments of humanoid robots suggests the surge will begin later this year or next and really erupt in the 2030s. 

There was also news earlier that Nvidia is pushing to develop software and chips to improve humanoid robot safety and enable closer human interaction, including physical collaboration in workplaces.

First signs:

• $150 Humanoid Robot House Cleaning Service Threatens To Undercut Maid Services

The next evolution of AI is robotics, displacing blue-collar jobs in the physical world. We suspect the adoption rate will be much slower in the U.S. than in China because supply chains are not as robust in the West. But for workers in jobs that can be easily replaced by robots, such as last-mile delivery or production-line work, it may be time to find a construction job as the historic data center buildout progresses.

Blue-collar or white-collar, no one is safe from the AI revolution, as Goldman analysts revealed the top 20 college degrees most exposed to AI job disruption (read here). 

We suspect that, just like data center buildouts and localized resistance, there will be public uproar when jobs are eliminated by robots later this decade.

Authored by Robert Rapier via OilPrice.com,

• Oil futures have quickly priced in a favorable outcome from U.S.-Iran diplomacy, but physical oil flows, shipping networks, and refinery supply chains take much longer to normalize.

• Low global inventories and the need to replenish strategic and commercial stockpiles could create significant demand for crude even after supply disruptions ease.

• Gasoline prices are influenced by refining capacity, inventories, distribution costs, and seasonal demand, meaning pump prices may remain elevated even if crude oil continues to fall.

Gasoline prices have started to fall, and that is welcome news for drivers. After months of pain at the pump following the war with Iran and the disruption of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, even modest relief is noticeable.

But falling from crisis levels is not the same thing as returning to normal.

That distinction may define the next several months in the oil market. The developing U.S.-Iran agreement has given traders a reason to mark down crude prices. Markets are forward-looking, and they have quickly priced in a scenario in which the Strait of Hormuz reopens, Gulf exports resume, and the energy shock that pushed gasoline prices sharply higher begins to fade.

That may ultimately prove correct. But the physical oil market does not move as quickly as futures prices. Tanker routes, insurance markets, shipping backlogs, refinery crude slates, and depleted inventories all take time to normalize. Even if the diplomatic framework holds, the path back to pre-war gasoline prices is likely to be slower and more uneven than the recent drop in crude prices might suggest.

Prices Are Falling, But From Very High Levels

The national average gasoline price had climbed from under $3 a gallon before the conflict to more than $4 during the spring. Over the past three months, gasoline prices were more than $1 a gallon above pre-war levels, with consumers facing the combined effect of higher crude oil prices, refinery disruptions, and seasonal fuel demand.

That is why recent declines can be both real and incomplete. A drop from $4.50 to $4.05 is meaningful. It helps household budgets and eases some inflation pressure. But it still leaves gasoline far above where it was before the conflict began.

This is where the public conversation can become misleading. If prices fall for several weeks, some will argue that the oil shock is over. But the relevant question is not whether gasoline prices can come down from their highs. They already have. The better question is whether they can quickly return to pre-war levels.

That is a very different question.

Futures Markets Move Faster Than Tankers

Oil prices react immediately to headlines. A reported ceasefire, a diplomatic framework, or a sign that the Strait of Hormuz may reopen can move crude futures within minutes. That is exactly what happened as traders began to discount a lower geopolitical risk premium.

But moving physical barrels is different.

The Strait of Hormuz is the most important energy chokepoint in the world, and months of disruption cannot be unwound with a press release. Ships that were delayed have to be rescheduled. Insurers have to reassess war-risk premiums. Crews and cargo owners need confidence that passage is secure. Ports must deal with congestion. Refiners that changed crude sourcing patterns may not immediately switch back.

That is all important because gasoline prices are tied not only to the price of crude oil, but to the availability of the right crude in the right place at the right time. If refiners are still competing for prompt cargoes, or if logistical constraints keep barrels from flowing smoothly, gasoline prices can remain elevated even as futures markets anticipate relief.

Low Inventories Create A Bullish Backdrop

The bigger issue is inventories. During a major supply disruption, the world does not simply consume less oil and wait patiently for the crisis to end. It draws down inventories. Commercial stocks fall. Strategic reserves may be tapped. Refiners and importers use whatever supply they can secure. 

For example, the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which was already drawn down significantly in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, has now been further drawn down to its lowest level since 1983.

When the crisis eases, those barrels have to be replaced.

That creates what could be called an inventory trap. Reopening Hormuz is bearish for oil prices because it allows more supply to move. But the need to refill depleted inventories is bullish because it creates additional demand for barrels just as the market is trying to normalize.

In other words, the end of the disruption does not necessarily create an immediate glut. It may instead trigger a period of aggressive restocking.

This is especially important for countries that rely heavily on imports from the Persian Gulf. Many will want to rebuild strategic and commercial inventories before the next geopolitical flare-up. Companies may do the same. If buyers conclude that inventories are too low for comfort, they may bid for barrels even as traders are assuming the crisis premium should disappear.

That restocking demand can put a floor under oil prices.

Gasoline Does Not Track Crude One-For-One

Another reason gasoline may not quickly return to pre-war levels is that crude oil is only one component of the pump price. It is the biggest component, but not the only one.

Refining margins, distribution costs, taxes, seasonal fuel specifications, regional supply constraints, and local inventories are all factors. Gasoline prices often rise quickly when crude spikes, but the decline can be slower when crude falls, particularly when refiners are still dealing with tight supply or strong demand.

This is also the time of year when gasoline demand tends to be seasonally strong. The summer driving season adds pressure just as the market is trying to recover from a major geopolitical disruption. Even if crude continues to ease, gasoline inventories and refinery utilization will help determine how much relief drivers actually see.

That is why a lower Brent crude price does not automatically mean a quick return to $3 gasoline.

The Market May Be Pricing In A Best-Case Scenario

None of this means gasoline prices cannot keep falling. They can. If the Iran agreement holds, if Hormuz traffic normalizes faster than expected, if inventories rebuild smoothly, and if crude prices continue to decline, drivers should see further relief.

But that is a favorable scenario with many moving parts.

The risk is that markets have already priced in much of the good news. They are assuming that the diplomatic breakthrough translates quickly into normal shipping flows, lower crude prices, lower inflation pressure, and a calmer economic backdrop. That may be too much to assume before the details of the agreement are known and before tanker traffic has returned to normal levels.

There are several ways this could disappoint. The agreement could be delayed. Implementation could be uneven. Shipping insurance could remain expensive. Regional security concerns could persist. Countries could compete aggressively to refill depleted stocks. Any of those factors could slow the decline in oil and gasoline prices.

That does not mean another price spike is inevitable. It simply means the market may have moved from fear to relief faster than the physical system can justify.

The Big Picture

The developing Iran agreement is good news if it reduces the risk of a wider war and allows the Strait of Hormuz to reopen. It should help bring oil prices down from the extreme levels reached during the conflict. Consumers should welcome that.

But the oil market is not a light switch. Reopening a chokepoint does not instantly refill inventories. It does not immediately clear the tanker backlogs. It does not erase insurance risk. It does not automatically bring gasoline prices back to where they were before the first missiles flew.

The most likely outcome is not that gasoline prices stay at crisis levels forever. It is that the road back to pre-war prices is far slower than many consumers expect.

Gas prices are falling. That part is real. But the bullish backdrop from low inventories, restocking demand, and lingering logistical risk has not disappeared. Until those issues are resolved, the market may struggle to deliver the kind of quick, complete relief that drivers are hoping for.

A federal judge has quashed six DOJ grand jury subpoenas issued to Minnesota officials, including Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her and officials in Ramsey and Hennepin counties.

US District Judge Patrick J. Schlitz ruled that the subpoenas amounted to harassment, and said that the Justice Department inquiry into whether Minnesota officials obstructed or impeded law enforcement is illegitimate. 

"Initiating a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to coerce them into taking official action, particularly official action that the federal government cannot directly require those political opponents to take, is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use [of] the grand-jury process," Schlitz wrote in his ruling. 

Tensions between the Trump administration and Minnesota's Democratic leadership came to a boiling point in January amid clashes between federal immigration enforcement officers and protesters in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Area, which included the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, social justice warriors who paid the ultimate price.

The DOJ told the Epoch Times in an email that "The Department takes the unlawful obstruction of federal law enforcement operations extremely seriously and will continue to act in full compliance with the law to investigate these matters."

Walz hit back in a statement, saying "The U.S. Justice Department is pursuing criminal investigations into the President’s political opponents.

"This case was just one example of that, but we are seeing daily reminders of this administration’s lawlessness—in Minnesota and around the country. We all must continue to seek justice and uphold the law."

Looks like we'll never get to the bottom of this...

??REPORT: Minnesota anti-ICE Signal group leader has been identified as Amanda Koehler, a ‘protest’ organizer & campaign strategist for Tim Walz. https://t.co/CeBLKfHJfa

— Election Wizard (@ElectionWiz) January 24, 2026