U.S. President Donald Trump gives a speech at the World Economic Forum (WEF) on January 21, 2026, in Davos, Switzerland. The annual meeting of political and business leaders comes amid rising tensions between the United States and Europe over a range of issues, including Trump’s vow to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Stocks closed markedly higher on Wednesday after President Donald Trump backed off of tariff threats over Greenland. The major indexes recovered most of the losses they suffered the day before amid trade tensions centered on the Danish territory.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 588 points, or 1.2%, while the S&P 500 jumped 1.1%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq increased 1.1%.
U.S. stocks surged on Wednesday afternoon after Trump said he would retract his proposed tariff, which had been set to hit products from seven European Union members, plus the U.K., on Feb. 1.
Earlier in the day, stocks ticked up but remained relatively muted after Trump ruled out use of the military in his push for Greenland during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Minutes after the speech, European lawmakers suspended a trade agreement with the United States over Trump’s then-ongoing tariff threats.
The EU and U.S. struck the trade agreement in July, moving to decrease tariffs on European goods and restore stability to the commercial relationship. At the time, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement “creates certainty in uncertain times.”
European officials described Trump’s new round of levies as a threat to Greenland, a self-governing territory of EU-member Denmark.
Under Trump’s plan, eight European nations – including Denmark, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – were set to be slapped with 10% tariffs beginning on Feb. 1. Those levies are set to escalate to 25% on June 1.
Trump issued a social media post around 2:30 p.m. ET in which he announced he was rolling back the tariff threat on account of a “framework” deal with NATO on Greenland.
“This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations,” Trump said, adding that further negotiations would be overseen by Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, among others. The president provided no details about the framework deal he announced.
Stocks climbed within minutes of the social media post. Meanwhile, U.S. Treasury yields fell, reversing an uptick a day earlier.
President Donald Trump gives a speech at the World Economic Forum January 21, 2026 in Davos, Switzerland. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte have “formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland” and as a result he will not be imposing the tariffs he threatened on European allies who didn’t agree to his takeover efforts.
“Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,” Trump wrote in a social media post.
“This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations. Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the Tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st,” the president added.
His post did not provide further details on the “framework” for Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark.
Trump continued to be light on specifics during interviews with CNBC and CNN, particularly on whether the U.S. would have ownership of Greenland as he’s demanded.
“Well, we have a concept of a deal. I think it’s going to be very good deal for the United States, also for them, and we’re going to work together on something having to do with the Arctic as a whole, but also Greenland, and it has to do with the security, great security, strong security and other things,” Trump said on CNBC.
When pressed on whether U.S. ownership of Greenland was involved, Trump said he “didn’t want to say yet” and it was “complex.”
On CNN, Trump said the U.S. got “everything we wanted.”
“It’s the ultimate long-term deal, and I think it puts everybody in a really good position, especially as it pertains to security and minerals and everything else,” Trump said.
He also told CNN the deal would be “infinite,” saying: “It’s a deal that’s forever.”
Earlier Wednesday, while speaking at the world Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump notably ruled out using military force to take control of Greenland.
“We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said in his remarks.
Still, Trump argued no other country can defend Greenland but the United States and said he wanted “immediate negotiations” on the issue.
“All we’re asking for is to get Greenland, including right, title and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it. You can’t defend it on a lease. No. 1, legally it’s not defensible that way, totally. And No. 2, psychologically, who the hell wants to defend a license agreement or a lease which is a large piece of ice in the middle of the ocean, where, if there is a war, much of the action will take place on that piece of ice,” Trump said.
As part of his Greenland push, Trump last week announced a new 10% tariff rate against eight European nations would go into effect next month. Those levies would later be increased to 25% until the U.S. is able to purchase Greenland, the president said.
Those threats resulted in European officials on Wednesday suspending a trade agreement with the U.S. worked out last summer.
ICE Police and Immigration & Deportation (Douglas Rissing/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The Department of Homeland Security has now picked another state on which to focus its immigration enforcement action: Maine.
On Wednesday, DHS launched “Operation Catch of the Day” — an operation targeting criminal illegal migrants in the state, according to a DHS spokesperson.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday sharply questioned President Donald Trump’s assertion of unchecked power to remove a member of the Federal Reserve over the mere allegation of gross negligence and without any opportunity for a hearing to dispute the claims.
A majority of justices also appeared likely to deny Trump’s request to immediately remove Lisa Cook from her position as litigation continues, though it was less clear whether the court would definitively weigh in on the substance of the allegations or the proper standard for removal under the law.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
DHS is using the CBP Home Mobile App to incentivize self-deportation. (Department of Homeland Security)
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Homeland Security announced on Wednesday that it is increasing its stipend for those who are in the United States illegally and self-deport by $1,600.
Previously, DHS offered $1,000 to those who use the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Home App to self-deport, but now, it’s raising that number to $2,600.
DHS claimed that since January 2025, 2.2 million people who are in the U.S. illegally have voluntarily self-deported — with “tens of thousands” using the CBP app. A report from the Brookings Institution released last week called DHS’ data into question, saying the department’s numbers “should not be considered a serious source.”
“To celebrate one year of this administration, the U.S. taxpayer is generously increasing the incentive to leave voluntarily for those in this country illegally- offering a $2,600 exit bonus,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a release. “Illegal aliens should take advantage of this gift and self-deport because if they don’t, we will find them, we will arrest them, and they will never return.”
The increased amount is to mark to the first year of President Donald Trump’s term in office, and may only be temporary, DHS said in the release.
For months, the department has been pushing self-deportations — spending millions on advertisements that showcased it’s previous $1,000 payment and a plane ticket that people who register to self-deport are given.
It’s not clear how much money in total has been given to people who have self-deported.
DHS said in the first year of Trump’s term, there were 675,000 deportations. The authors of the Brookings Institution report estimated a figure much lower last week — saying there were between 310,000 and 315,000 removals in 2025.
Deporting migrants who are illegally in the U.S. was one of Trump’s key campaign promises, but advocates have said that Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol tactics have gone too far in some cases.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — Deliberations are underway in the trial of former Uvalde schools police officer Adrian Gonzales on Wednesday after prosecutors and defense lawyers delivered their closing arguments.
Before jurors were sent to deliberate, District Attorney Christina Mitchell gave an impassioned plea, saying, “I know this case is difficult, and it has been difficult. But we cannot continue to let children die in vain.”
“What happened to Uvalde on May 24 can happen anywhere, at any time,” she said. “If it’s going to happen, and if we have laws mandating what the responsibility of a law enforcement peace officer is for a school district, then we better be ready to back it up.”
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting, which became one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
Defense’s closing argument
Convicting Gonzales will send a clear message to officers who respond to this country’s next mass shooting, defense attorney Jason Goss said.
“What you tell police officers is, ‘Don’t go in. Don’t react. Don’t respond,'” Goss warned jurors. “We cannot have law enforcement feel that way.”
Goss argued that prosecutors tried to “massage the facts” of the case and “twist them all into a pretzel” to argue Gonzales failed to act. According to Goss, Gonzales did the best he could with the information he had when he arrived at Robb Elementary. While other officers arrived within the same timeframe, only Gonzales is being penalized for attempting to take action that day, he argued.
Goss attempted to empathize with the jurors and the families of victims, arguing he understood the desire for criminal accountability. But he reminded jurors, “The monster who hurt those kids is dead.”
But convicting Gonzales, Goss argued, would do “an injustice” for the victims of the shooting.
“You do not honor their memory by doing an injustice in their name,” he said.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
A large vinyl decal displaying the official circular logo of the European Parliament, along with the full blue and yellow starred flag of the European Union, is affixed to the glass curtain wall of the institution’s building in Brussels, Belgium, on December 16, 2025. Michael Nguyen/NurPhoto via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — European lawmakers on Wednesday suspended a trade agreement with the United States over tariff threats issued by President Donald Trump as part of his push to acquire Greenland.
The announcement came minutes after President Donald Trump reasserted his call for U.S. ownership of Greenland during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The speech followed tariff threats issued by Trump days earlier against seven European Union countries, plus the U.K., over the issue.
European leaders, meanwhile, have pushed back on Trump’s ambitions. Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a member of the EU.
Members of the Committee on International Trade (INTA) – a body within the European Parliament – hold “unshakable commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland,” European Parliament member Bernd Lange, an INTA chair on EU-US trade relations, said in a statement on Wednesday.
“By threatening the territorial integrity and sovereignty of an E.U. member state and by using tariffs as a coercive instrument, the U.S. is undermining the stability and predictability of EU-US trade relations,” Lange added.
The EU and US struck the trade agreement in July, moving to ratchet down tariffs on European goods and restore stability to the commercial relationship. At the time, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement “creates certainty in uncertain times.”
On Wednesday, Lange said the E.U. would pause the ratification process in response to Trump’s proposed tariffs. Under Trump’s plan, eight European nations – including Denmark, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – will be slapped with 10% tariffs beginning on Feb. 1. Those levies are set to escalate to 25% on June 1, Trump said.
In his speech on Wednesday, Trump ruled out use of the military in his push for Greenland. “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said.
U.S. stocks slumped on Tuesday in response to the tariffs, with the Dow closing down 870 points, but recovered roughly half of those losses in a rally on Wednesday morning. In Europe, the pan-continental STOXX 600 index ticked slightly lower on Wednesday.
ABC News’ David Brennan contributed to this report.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — As soon as Wednesday afternoon, a Texas jury will begin deliberating whether a law enforcement officer should be held criminally responsible for failing to act in the face of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
Defense’s closing argument
Convicting Gonzales will send a clear message to officers who respond to this country’s next mass shooting, defense attorney Jason Goss said.
“What you tell police officers is, ‘Don’t go in. Don’t react. Don’t respond,'” Goss warned jurors. “We cannot have law enforcement feel that way.”
Goss argued that prosecutors tried to “massage the facts” of the case and “twist them all into a pretzel” to argue Gonzales failed to act. According to Goss, Gonzales did the best he could with the information he had when he arrived at Robb Elementary. While other officers arrived within the same timeframe, only Gonzales is being penalized for attempting to take action that day, he argued.
Goss attempted to empathize with the jurors and the families of victims, arguing he understood the desire for criminal accountability. But he reminded jurors, “The monster who hurt those kids is dead.”
But convicting Gonzales, Goss argued, would do “an injustice” for the victims of the shooting.
“You do not honor their memory by doing an injustice in their name,” he said.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — As soon as Wednesday afternoon, a Texas jury will begin deliberating whether a law enforcement officer should be held criminally responsible for failing to act in the face of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
How did defense lawyers approach the case?
Defense lawyers spent less than three hours on Tuesday calling two witnesses before resting their case. Gonzales declined to testify in his own defense.
Gonzales’ lawyers have argued that he not only followed his training that day but also highlighted that other officers had similar — if not better — opportunities to stop the shooter.
They accused prosecutors of “Monday-morning quarterbacking” Gonzales’ actions that day and argued he acted appropriately based on the limited information he had in the moment. They also highlighted that Gonzales attempted to enter the building with other officers but was directed by his commanding officer to retreat to call in for SWAT support.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
Jeffrey Epstein is seen in this image released by the Department of Justice in Washington, December 19, 2025 (U.S. Justice Department)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge in New York on Wednesday declined to appoint a special master to oversee the Justice Department’s production of the remaining Epstein files, despite “legitimate concerns” about whether the DOJ is faithfully complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The Dec. 19 deadline the law imposed for the release of all files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has come and gone, and at least two members of Congress say the Justice Department is still in possession of as many as two million potentially relevant documents.
Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York said last week they’re still reviewing and redacting material from the investigations into Epstein and co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell to comply with court orders about protecting victims.
Several Epstein victims wrote letters supporting legislators’ push for a neutral monitor.
In his opinion released Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer said the “questions raised by the Representatives and the victims are undeniably important and timely” and raise “raise legitimate concerns about whether DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law.”
However, the judge concluded he lacks jurisdiction to supervise the Justice Department’s compliance with the Epstein Act.
“The Representatives have not articulated how the criminal statutes under which Maxwell was charged would empower the Court to enforce the EFTA,” Engelmayer wrote.
The opinion also said the members of Congress — Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif. — have no role in the matter.
“The Representatives do not seek to opine on any live issue before the Court,” Engelmayer wrote. “And the appointment of a neutral to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA is far afield from any matter pending before the Court.”
Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November, following blowback the Trump administration received seeking the release of materials related to their probe of Epstein, who died by suicide in a New York jail in 2019. President Donald Trump signed the act into law on Nov. 19.
Materials released to date include a trove of photographs and court records, including a complaint to the FBI about Epstein that was filed years before he was first investigated for child sex abuse, and documents containing previously unknown details about plans for Epstein’s 2019 arrest.
The files released so far, however, have yet to show evidence of wrongdoing on the part of famous, powerful men, against the expectations of many of those who have been pushing for the files’ release.
