What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: Constitutional clarity

Context

Through the Presidential Reference, the Supreme Court has underscored that prolonged gubernatorial delays in assent undermine democratic governance.

Introduction

The Presidential Reference hearings following the Supreme Court’s April 8, 2025 judgment revisited the powers of Governors and the President in granting assent to State Bills. The proceedings reaffirmed that indefinite delays by Governors undermine democratic governance. By addressing 14 questions, the five-judge Bench reinforced constitutional principles and examined the federal balance between the Centre and States.

Core Issue from April 2025 Judgment

• The Presidential Reference hearingsarose after the Supreme Court’s April 2025 judgment, clarifying Governor and President’s powers on assent to Bills.
• Judges reaffirmed that Governors cannot indefinitely withhold assentand must act in line with constitutional intent.
• CJI B.R. Gavaiquestioned if the Court should remain “powerless” while Governors paralyse legislatures, echoing concerns about blocking democratic functioning.

Key Arguments in the Hearings

• States’ counselpresented arguments influenced by political contexts, but the Bench focused on Articles 200 and 201.
• The claim that constitutional silenceon timelines allows unlimited discretion for Governors was firmly rejected.
• The Solicitor-Generalcalled Governors a “check on hasty legislation”, but this was seen as conflicting with democratic principles.
• Justice Vikram Nathasserted that Governors “cannot sit over the wisdom of the legislature indefinitely.”

Federal Balance and Selective Application

• Kerala’s counselhighlighted that Opposition-ruled States alone face prolonged delays, pointing to selective application rather than constitutional vagueness.
• The Bench examined why judicial reviewapplies under Article 356 (President’s Rule) but not under Article 200, exposing inconsistency.
• The hearings emphasized that the April judgment’s frameworkis constitutionally sound and preserves federal cooperation and State autonomy.

Centre’s Approach and Constitutional Boundaries

• The Centre’s choice of Article 143 (Presidential Reference), instead of review or curative petitions, raised questions about intent.
• Scholars notethat an Article 143 advisory opinion cannot override a binding Article 141 precedent.
• If genuine claritywas sought, judicial remedies already existed.
• The Court’s final opinionshould guide the Centre to respect constitutional boundaries and avoid disrupting the federal balance.

Conclusion

The hearings on the Presidential Reference reaffirm the April 2025 judgment as a cornerstone of federal balance. By rejecting indefinite gubernatorial discretion and reinforcing the importance of State autonomy, the Court protected democratic governance. The Centre must now accept these constitutional boundaries, rather than seek expanded powers, to preserve the spirit of cooperative federalism envisioned in the Indian Constitution.

 

Editorial 2: ​A brief respite

Context

The true impact of the 50% tariffs will be reflected in the September trade data.

Introduction

India’s August 2025 trade data, released by the Commerce and Industry Ministry, provides temporary relief to the Central government, which faces pressure from labour-intensive sectors like seafood, textiles, and apparel. However, the sustainability of this improvement depends on the trajectory of India–U.S. trade negotiations, especially amid America’s punishing tariffs, which threaten to erode export momentum in the coming months.

Positive Export Trends and Narrowed Deficit

• Goods exportsrose 7% YoY to $35.10 billion in August.
• Imports fellby 12% to $61.59 billion, largely due to steep declines in gold (-57%) and silver (-60%) imports.
• As a result, the merchandise trade deficitnarrowed to $26.49 billion in August, compared to $27.35 billion in July.
• These trends offer a short-term respite, but sustainability remains uncertain.

Impact of U.S. Tariffs on Exports

• The U.S. imposed 25% reciprocal tariffson August 7 and 50% tariffs on August 27.
• Exports to the U.S.dropped to $6.86 billion in August, down from $8.01 billion in July.
• Overall exportsfell sequentially from $37.24 billion in July to $35.10 billion in August.
• The slowdown indicates that American stockpilingbefore tariffs has ended, and September data may reveal deeper impacts.

Sectoral Performance in Exports

• Electronics, gems & jewellery, and engineering goodssaw mild declines.
• Textilesrecorded the sharpest fall at -2.7% YoY, reflecting tariff pressure.
• Despite this, textiles, seafood, and other labour-intensive sectors showed impressive YoY growth overall.
• Pharmaceuticals, exempt from tariffs, performed strongly with exports rising 94% YoYto $2.51 billion in August.

Worrisome Import Trends and China’s Role

• Imports saw sharp declines across sectors: transport equipment (-26.54%), coal (-26.2%), wood (-14.46%), and iron & steel (-10.98%).
• Such contraction may indicate either slowing domestic demandor a shift toward cheaper local suppliers under tariff pressure.
• Despite strained ties, China remains India’s top import source, with shipments growing 19% (April–August).
• This underscores the disconnect between diplomacy and trade dependence.

Conclusion

While exports grew and the trade deficit narrowed in August, the sharp decline in imports signals possible domestic slowdown. With labour-intensive sectors under strain and U.S. tariffs threatening export growth, challenges remain. Despite strained relations, China’s role as a key trading partner persists, highlighting the disconnect between diplomacy and economic dependence in India’s external trade strategy.