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

Summary

• Reports of Houthi missiles launched on Saudi Arabia: oil extends gains near month-highs.
• Trump says US blockade of Iran ports 'reinstated': states that US to be reimbursed at rate of 20% of cargo shipped for vessels wishing to transit. CENTCOM affirms with closure message.
• Strikes escalated over weekend: US hit over 140 Iranian military targets; Iran attacks US-linked facilities across the Gulf.
• Shipping tensions boil: Iran claims the strait is closed, but commercial vessels continue transiting under US protection.
• Oil prices climb: on rising risk to global shipping & energy markets, as diplomacy clearly unraveling.

Oil Surges To Month-Highs on Yemen Missile Attack on Saudi Arabia

Reports are emerging out of Saudi Arabia of inbound ballistic missile attacks on its air bases and/or an international airport. With Houthi potential involvement unfolding, there are fears that this war is now rapidly expanding. Oil is reacting to what is both the complete unraveling of the MoU and new signs of the Houthis joining the war on Iran's side:

• US blockade encompasses entirety of Iranian coastline: RTRS
• Saudi defenses dealing with Houthi missile attack: Alekhbariya
• Tasnim reports of an attack on Abha International Airport in Saudi Arabia
• Yemeni war media identifies the coordinates of important airports and ports in Saudi Arabia that will likely be targeted by Houthi attacks, reports Tasnim
• Explosions heard on Iran's Larak Island in Hormuz Strait: Tasnim
• Several violating ships were targeted in the Strait of Hormuz, reports Tasnim

WTI climbs to near $78 around one month highs...

CENTCOM statement affirming Trump's blockade announcement:

At the Commander in Chief's direction, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces will resume blockading maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports on July 14 at 4 p.m. ET.

CENTCOM forces will enforce the blockade against vessels transiting to or from Iranian ports and coastal areas. The U.S. military continues to support traffic flow through regional waters for all vessels not violating the blockade.

The resumption of the U.S. blockade against Iran follows the initial implementation from April 13 to June 18. CENTCOM forces redirected more than 140 compliant vessels, disabled nine non-compliant ships, and allowed over 50 commercial vessels supporting humanitarian aid to pass through the blockade during the two-month period.

All mariners are advised to monitor Notice to Mariners broadcasts and contact U.S. naval forces on bridge-to-bridge channel 16 when operating in the Gulf of Oman and Strait of Hormuz approaches.

Iran Foreign Minister response:

POTUS is absolutely right. Whoever provides secure and safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz should be compensated for this service.

Iran has always been the GUARDIAN of the Strait and will remain so FOREVER.

20% is of course too much. We will be fair

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 13, 2026

Iran: Pay a 1% toll and you've got guaranteed safe passage through Hormuz.

Trump: Pay a 20% toll and get shot at while crossing.

Which transit scheme do you think the world would prefer? ?? https://t.co/gd5DNh5xL0

— Rosemary Kelanic (@RKelanic) July 13, 2026

Trump: Blockade Reinstated, US To Be 'Reimbursed' on 20% of Cargo

A stunning new Trump statement via Truth Social, proposing that the United States will collect an astounding rate of 20% of cargo shipped for vessels wishing to transit the Strait of Hormuz. He has declared the US military is "reinstating the Iranian blockade" due to the IRGC continuing to try and enforce Iran's own protocol. This could of course amount to a US 'fee' of tens of millions of dollars for each vessel, significantly more than what Iran was seeking to impose. Iran's retaliation continues? New reports of major incident in Saudi Arabia:

Oil extends gains, rise 7% to session highs:

Oil jumps this morning on the bellow succession of headlines...

• IRAN'S REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS SPOKESPERSON: WE CONTINUE TO ASSERT OUR AUTHORITY AND CONTROL OVER THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ
• TRUMP: REINSTATING THE IRANIAN BLOCKADE
• TRUMP: US WILL BE REIMBURSED 20% ON CARGO FROM HORMUZ

Trump: US to Take Over Strait & Get Paid For It

President Trump in surprising commentary issued to "Fox & Friends" has said the United States will probably take over the Strait of Hormuz and should be reimbursed for controlling it. His words have raised eyebrows given Washington's stance has been that no one can collect tolls for transit through the vital international waterway. He said once the US gains control of it, following a weekend bombing campaign on Iranian coastal sites, "we'll probably run it" and "we should be reimbursed for that."

"We’re going to keep the strait, and we’ll probably run it. We’ll become the guardian of the strait. Maybe we’ll call it the guardian angel of the strait. And we should be reimbursed for that," he says in the Fox phone interview.

Again, US officials have throughout Operation Epic Fury voiced that it is an illegal outrage for Iran to suggest it would charge fees, but now...

Trump: "We're gonna keep the strait, and we'll probably run it. We'll become the guardian of the strait. We should be reimbursed for that. When we do that, we're gonna be reimbursed. We're gonna get paid." pic.twitter.com/O4ckjB2FkK

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 13, 2026

Below is a fuller transcript of the Monday morning exchange:

Fox: It looks like they're back to trying to take control of the Strait, what's your response?

Trump: Well, we're taking over the straight. They have nothing, they've got nothing. So.... something that nobody knows, yesterday they had an eleven hour meeting, everything's eleven hours with these guys you know you can't settle a one sentence in, one hour, in one minute... It should be one minute—But we had a deal, but nobody knows, we had a deal, it was a done deal, but then they broke it, they always break it. And so we're just going to hit them very hard. And we're gonna keep the uh Strait, and we'll probably run it, we'll become the guardian of the Strait, maybe we'll call it "The guardian angel of the Strait". And we should reimbursed for that, when we do that we're gonna be reimbursed because the other nations are very wealthy, they're on our side. We guarded the Strait for 50 years, more, and, we never got paid for it. They made all the money and the US was just, you know, not, it's just amazing. We guarded it for nothing.

The Iranians have been quick to respond, with its top military command asserting that Iran will not allow the US to intervene in the management of the strait. State-run IRNA also states:

Iran says we will not be forced to pay the 'enemy' for ship passage.

So this sets up the warring sides for further clashes in the Persian Gulf region, as absolutist demands continued to be adhered to, and red lines continue to be tested and blown past. Below is more from the Iranian Foreign Ministry articulating enforcement of its passage protocol:

Iran's FM Spox. Esmail Baghaei:

The United States bears direct responsibility for the recent developments in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Americans reneged from day one; they are trying to bypass the secure route coordinated with Iran. pic.twitter.com/zlkvM6EkUS

— Clash Report (@clashreport) July 13, 2026

Overnight Attacks

The US and Iran exchanged another round of strikes overnight, extending a weeklong surge in fighting and casting dark clouds of uncertainty over whether the Strait of Hormuz remains open to commercial shipping.

US Central Command revealed US forces unleashed air-delivered munitions on dozens of Iranian air-defense systems, coastal radar systems, missile launch sites, and drone capabilities, bringing the weekend total to about 140 targets. This move aimed to degrade the IRGC's ability to threaten commercial shipping in the Hormuz chokepoint, which it has done over the past week.

Iran responded with attacks on US-linked facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, and Oman, while also claiming it intercepted two vessels using what it called an "illegal route" through Hormuz.

IRGC Fires Warning Shots

Early Monday, Iranian state TV reported that IRGC forces fired "warning shots" at multiple ships attempting to transit the Hormuz chokepoint.

"This morning, two ships that were attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz illegally were targeted and stopped by warning shots fired by the navy of the Revolutionary Guards," said a correspondent on state TV.

Tehran has declared the strait closed until further notice, but the US military, President Trump, and maritime monitors say the southern route remains passable.

Bloomberg data shows the LNG tanker Al Hamra safely transited the Hormuz chokepoint over the weekend and is now full steam ahead in the Gulf of Oman. Axios noted earlier that 20 commercial ships managed to transit the Hormuz chokepoint in coordination with the US military.

Bloomberg data only tracks ships with transponders on. 

Crude Climbs as War Back on Menu

Brent crude futures traded up 3.5% to the midpoint of $78 a barrel, while WTI futures are up around 3.4% to $73.85 amid increasingly heated tit-for-tat attacks.

Here is Deutsche Bank equity research analyst Chris Robertson's summary of developments last week and through the weekend:

Last week, Iran declared that the Strait of Hormuz is closed until further notice. Iran attacked a commercial container ship attempting to transit the region, causing a fire aboard the vessel.

The Joint Maritime Information Center (JIMC) said on Sunday that the southern Omani route remains available, but that the threat level is rated as "severe".

Regardless of any claims around the Strait being closed or open, what matters is that commercial ship owners are likely not willing to risk transit in an active war zone, putting ships and crews at risk of attack.

We reiterate our initial concerns that despite major destruction of traditional Iranian naval vessels and assets, the ongoing threat that shipowners face is asymmetric warfare technologies such as drones and missiles. These types of threats are much harder to predict or plan for, thereby maximizing uncertainty related to mitigating voyage risks.

We expect transit activity will slow, especially as it relates to vessels planning to enter the Gulf through the Strait which, unlike exiting activity, is the real sign that conditions are normalizing. We believe that an ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz will lead to downward pressure on shortterm tanker rates as ships remain in other regions, thereby increasing effective supply of those ships.

Diplomacy Unravels

As of Monday morning, it is clear that US-Iran diplomacy is unraveling, while US forces are systematically degrading the IRGC's ability to close the maritime chokepoint. Commercial ships continue to transit the waterway, undermining Tehran's claim that the critical waterway is effectively shut.

Tehran must also recognize the longer-term strategic risk: every disruption accelerates global investment in pipelines, export terminals, and other infrastructure designed to bypass Hormuz. Once those alternatives are operational (Read Here), Tehran's greatest source of geopolitical leverage will evaporate. Then what?

*  *  *

Overnight/Weekend Developments

• US President Trump threatened that the US military would “completely decimate and destroy all areas” of Iran if its leaders attempted or carried out an assassination on him.
• US forces said they struck 140 Iranian military targets on Saturday and were also reported to have carried out another round of strikes on Sunday, while Iran targeted at least five US allies across the Middle East in drone and missile assaults early on Sunday, as well as announced that the Strait of Hormuz would be closed until further notice. However, the Joint Maritime Information Centre said the path along the Omani coastline is still available for transit, while it was separately reported that a Chinese tanker transited through Hormuz via an Iran-designated route.
• US official said around 20 commercial vessels transited through the Strait of Hormuz in coordination with the US military over the last 24 hours, in addition to several vessels without US coordination, according to Axios.
• US military announced on Sunday evening that it began a new wave of strikes against Iran to continue degrading its ability to attack civilian mariners and commercial ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, while Iranian TV reported explosions in Qeshm, Jask, Bandar Abbas and Sirik.
• US Central Command denied a claim by Iran that three US service members were killed in Kuwait, while it stated that there have been no reports of US casualties in the region, with all personnel accounted for and safe. CENTCOM later commented that it completed a new wave of offensive strikes on Iran, hitting dozens of targets at multiple locations to degrade Iran's ability to continue attacking international shipping flowing through the Strait of Hormuz.
• Kuwait’s military said three border posts were attacked and that a drilling platform owned by the Kuwait Oil Company was struck in a drone attack, while it was separately reported that US intelligence sources noted observations that Iran was preparing to carry out a massive attack on the UAE and Kuwait.
• Iran said it caused heavy damage to Jordan’s Prince Hassan Airbase, as well as claimed it targeted the Al-Udeid Airbase in Qatar and a US Navy logistics base in Dukm, Oman. Furthermore, Iran also targeted Kuwait and the US base in Bahrain.
• Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued a written statement, vowing to avenge the death of his father and said that it was the demand of the nation.
• Iran’s Foreign Ministry condemned US attacks on Iranian infrastructure, which it said were a violation of the ceasefire deal and the UN Charter, while it warned Gulf states over the use of territory for US attacks.
• Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Gharibabadi said no action against Iran should go unanswered and called for a pre-set response to any attempt against Iran, its military, Supreme Leader and officials.
• Iranian lawmaker and member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, Kashkavi, said Iran prefers to manage the Strait of Hormuz through cooperation with regional states, particularly Oman, and stated that the clear official position is that future management of the Strait will be arranged by Iran.
• Iran denied social media reports that claimed the Bushehr nuclear power plant had been attacked, while its nuclear agency said all units continue to operate normally and that the plant is in a safe and stable condition.
• Iraq’s PM is to visit Washington on Monday, while oil and gas deals are expected to be announced, although the Islamic Resistance in Iraq warned the government against US economic deals and demanded a US troop withdrawal.
• Yemen’s Foreign Ministry reiterated that Yemen would continue its support of Iran in the face of ongoing US and Israeli aggression.
• Israeli artillery conducted further shelling in southern Lebanon, according to Lebanon’s National News Agency.
• Explosions were heard around Iran’s Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island on Monday afternoon, Mehr News reported, while there is also the possibility of clashes in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.
• Reported fire at Kharg Island appears to be a result of routine flaring, according to Nour News.
• Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson said the US violated all clauses of the MoU in less than a month and stated that Iran will not execute commitments in the MoU as long as the US is not fulfilling its commitments. He added that the MoU is in "crisis" phase. Muscat talks with Oman were solely focused on the Strait of Hormuz. On the recent strikes, none of the US bases in any country in the region have been removed from the target list and that the defensive strikes of Iran are solely against the bases, facilities and positions used by the US to attack Iran, including their logistical and support facilities. In terms of further talks, mediators are still continuing their efforts to mediate between Iran and the US in recent days and Iran is in contact with mediators.
• Iran's IRGC said only way to open the Strait of Hormuz is to end US military interventions and respect the sovereignty of the countries bordering it.
• There is no clear timetable for Israel’s withdrawal from the experimental areas in southern Lebanon amid a policy of consolidation and non-compliance with the framework agreement, Al Araby reported citing sources.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

I have taught torts, including defamation for over 30 years, but I have never seen the like of the Hunter Biden defamation case.

The defendant made defamatory statements and then just refused to appear. That led to an equally bizarre $1.7 million award by U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson of the Central District of California to Biden, consisting of just $1 in nominal damages and the rest in punitive damages.

Here is the most interesting line of the opinion: “the damage to Plaintiff’s reputation is difficult to calculate.”

It may be the single greatest understatement in the history of judicial opinions.

However, the court also noted “Plaintiff does not seek actual damages above a nominal amount.”

That means that Hunter Biden’s counsel, in a default case, elected not to argue for compensatory damages due to loss of reputation. Why would he do that?

It might be that he has little reputation to lose and that opening up that part of the case was fraught with perils.  However, it also created a potential major appellate issue. His counsel was making it clear that they were litigating purely for punitives.

For Hunter Biden, this is a much-needed windfall. His art sales notably collapsed with the value of currying favor to the Bidens. He is reportedly being pursued by creditors, including former counsel.

The question is whether the award will stand.

For many critics, Hunter Biden is virtually ‘libel proof” as an individual who has no reputation to lose. However, as we have previously discussed, that status is reserved for the most reviled personalities who cannot be defamed due to the lack of any positive reputation.

Judge Wilson, a Reagan appointee, admits in his opinion that determining reputational harm to someone like Biden is difficult to do and further recognizes the argument that “prior tarnishing of Plaintiff’s reputation may reduce the reprehensibility of Defendant’s conduct.”

The case involves a claim by former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne that Biden took part in an $800 million bribery scheme involving Iran and failed to defend his claims in court.

Hunter Biden has long been accused of influence peddling that generated millions for him and his family. I have been one of his longest critics as part of a corrupt family enterprise.

However, this claim was not one of those that his critics, and Congress, focused on during the Biden years. There is no evidence that he took a bribe or payment in a quid pro quo for releasing the money to Iran.

The lawsuit was part of a flurry of such actions brought against Biden’s critics. Most were later dismissed, but played a part in the scorched-earth campaign of Biden. I was even threatened with such an action after criticizing his counsel and financial backer, Kevin Morris.

As Biden dropped the other lawsuits, this one continued to be litigated. It was an easy kill. Byrne simply did not defend himself and defaulted. That left the matter to Judge Wilson, who was clearly irate.

The opinion recounts an extraordinary pile-up as Byrne sought to replace lawyers:

“Defendant initially attempted to replace Mr. Murphy with three new lawyers: Eric Neff, Tom Yu, and Stefanie Lynn Lambert Junttila. ECF Nos. 290, 291, 292. Ms. Lambert was not a member of the California Bar, and her application to appear pro hac vice was denied2 due to her recent history of unethical conduct, which gave the Court reason to doubt she would abide by the Court’s rules and practices. ECF No. 295. When Defendant learned that Ms. Lambert was not qualified to represent him in this case, Defendant also instructed Mr. Neff and Mr. Yu to remove themselves.

Moreover, Defendant himself, now unrepresented, still failed to appear at trial. Accordingly, the Court issued an order to show cause why it should not enter default judgment against Defendant and ordered the parties to return the following day. At that hearing, on July 30, 2025, Defendant again failed to appear. Mr. Yu, who was not authorized to represent Defendant at trial, argued on Defendant’s behalf for a continuance, in lieu of default judgment.”

The defendant would miss a series of filing and appearance dates, including orders that he appear in person.

Wilson, 85, ruled in his opinion that Byrne acted with “intentional misrepresentation” and “conscious disregard” for Hunter’s rights. Making things worse, Byrne was found to have continued making the false claims after the lawsuit, and said Byrne continued to amplify the false allegations even after Hunter filed the lawsuit against him.

Accordingly, the court found that the “defamation went far beyond mere negligence,” and that Byrne actively sought to spread the false claim on social media and to make the story go viral.

The problem is that the actual compensatory damages are rather to gauge for a plaintiff who was found by Congress to have actively sought to use his influence or access to his father to shake down foreign figures and businesses.

In these well-documented dealings, there were gifts such as diamonds, lavish expense accounts, and a sports car, in addition to massive payments that Hunter claimed were “loans.” There are messages like the one to a Chinese businessman, openly threatening Joe Biden’s displeasure if money is not sent to them immediately. In the WhatsApp message, Hunter stated:

“I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the Chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

So, accusing Hunter Biden of influence peddling would hardly seem a material blow to his reputation.

Wilson awarded just $1 in nominal damages to Biden but then ordered $1.7 million in punitive damages. Byrne was also ordered to pay nearly $35,000 in previously imposed court sanctions within two weeks or face an additional $1,000 penalty for each day payment is delayed after the deadline.

That 1:1,700,000 ratio is a bit startling. The general rule is that a ratio of greater than 1:10 in compensatory to punitive damages can raise serious constitutional concerns. What makes this case different is the contempt and default elements.

In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case, BMW of North America v. Gore, striking down a punitive damage award. The case involved the practice of the company to repair and repaint cars damaged in transit without telling the customers. The jury in the original trial awarded $4,000 in compensatory damages for the lost value to the car in not having a factory paint job and other damage; it then imposed $4 million in punitive damages for the company’s dishonesty.

The Court stated three factors in crafting punitive awards: (1) the degree of reprehensibility of the nondisclosure; (2) the disparity between the harm or potential harm suffered by plaintiff and the punitive damages award; (3) and the difference between this remedy and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.

Even though the Alabama Supreme Court previously reduced the punitive award by half, the U.S. Supreme Court still found that the award violated the Due Process Clause as “grossly excessive.”

The fact that this case involves nominal damages may allowed for greater leeway in the ratio. See Arizona v. ASARCO LLC, 773 F.3d 1050, 1058 (9th Cir. 2014). That is clearly a critical part of the decision of counsel to ask for only nominal damages while litigating for punitive damages. However, this ratio is astronomical.

Judge Wilson addresses BMW v. Gore but effectively untethers the ratio analysis from this case, precisely what Biden’s counsel had hoped in seeking only nominal damages. It is an approach that would effectively gut BMW v Gore. Any litigants with a bad reputation or insufficient reputational harm could simply ask for nominal damages and then ask for the moon in punitive damages.

However, it gets weirder. I was curious how, without any record on harm, the Court could come up with $1.7 million. It turns out that the Court used the damages awarded by a Canadian court against Byrne in a similar defamation case. That case in a foreign jurisdiction awarded $1.134 million. Wilson simply blithely declares that, since Byrne continues such conduct, “a $1.134 million award would be inadequate to deter this particular Defendant. The Court therefore calculates a punitive damages award of $1.7 million, approximately 50% greater than the total judgment in the prior case.”

That is it. The court simply used the damage award in a foreign torts case and elected to increase it by 50%.  However, that earlier judgment only included $250,000 in punitive damages.

I think that the court is dead wrong on the punitive damages analysis. The only question is whether the extent of Byrne’s contempt and default will work to quiet the concerns of appellate judges.

It is a case worthy of appeal.

It is a fascinating car wreck of a case with a scandal-plagued plaintiff, a defaulting plaintiff, the use of a foreign judgment as the basis for a damages award, and a 1:1,700,000 ratio in damages. We will be watching if an appeal is filed by Byrne.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”