Up First from NPR - Greenland Emergency Summit, New World Order, SCOTUS Justices Hear Fed Case

Episode Date: January 22, 2026

European leaders meet for an emergency summit as allies weigh a possible deal with the U.S. on Greenland after President Trump walked back threats of military action and tariffs.Trump’s clashes with Canada and Europe raise fresh doubts about the stability of U.S. alliances, as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney warns coercion and tariff threats are changing the global order.And Supreme Court justices had tough question for Trump's lawyers as they hear arguments over whether a president can fire a Federal Reserve governor, a case that could redefine the independence of the central bank.Want more analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Today’s episode of Up First was edited by Miguel Macias, Andrew Sussman, Rafael Nam, Mohamad ElBardicy, and Alice Woelfle.It was produced by Ziad Buchh, Ben Abrams and Christopher Thomas.We get engineering support from Neisha Heinis. Our technical director is Carleigh Strange.Our deputy Executive Producer is Kelley Dickens.(0:00) Introduction(01:59) Greenland Emergency Summit(05:27) New World Order(09:10) SCOTUS Justices Hear Fed CaseLearn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

President Trump says a framework of a deal has been worked out with NATO on Greenland. His announcement comes after a speech in Davos where he attacked NATO and scolded allies. What do we know about this supposed compromise? I'ma Martinez. That's Leila Faddle. And this is up first from NPR News. The World Economic Forum showed just how much President Trump has angered U.S. allies. Canada's prime minister basically declared the U.S.-led world order dead. and Trump then address him directly in his speech.

They should be grateful to us. Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements. Is the U.S. isolating itself? And Supreme Court justices had tough questions for Trump's lawyers as they weigh whether the president can fire a Federal Reserve governor. Stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day. European leaders meet in Brussels tonight for a summit that was called urgently. as a reaction to President Trump's previous statements about possible military action to take Greenland, the semi-autonomous Danish territory. Trump also had said he would impose new tariffs on countries that opposed him, but then the president spoke Wednesday in Davos.

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. He ruled out military force in an otherwise threatening speech. And on Wednesday, he said that a long-term agreement on Greenland had been reached and that it would be good for everybody. Terry Schultz joins us from Brussels to discuss European reaction and what happens next. Good morning, Terry. Hi, Leila. Okay, so do we know any details of this long-term agreement?

We really don't know the details yet. And I've been scanning Danish media this morning and there are a lot of questions being raised there. It's just been hours since we got word that there. had been a compromise at all after this fiery speech by President Trump at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. And he hadn't indicated any such thing was coming. So while the details haven't been made public, there are reports in the New York Times, for example, that it could include giving the U.S. sovereignty over small pieces of Greenlandic territory, perhaps for building up more military bases there, possibly for participation in the eventual Golden Dome missile defense system.

Now, Lela, the U.S. already has the right to expand its military presence under existing agreement. with Greenland and Denmark. But the land on which these bases would sit does not belong to the U.S. under current arrangements. And ownership has been such a big issue for Trump. And he repeated that multiple times in Davos. Let's listen to one example. 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. So Trump's obvious satisfaction with the compromise indicates it could very well include some limited transfer of landownership, and it's also expected to address U.S. access to mineral rights. How are European leaders reacting to the developments in Davos? Well, there's definitely the feeling of being able to breathe a bit more easily after Trump walk back these threats of military force and imminent tariffs,

which have been a feature of daily discussion here in Brussels recently. Danish foreign minister Lars Likarasmussen summed up Wednesday, saying it ended better than it started, as there had been so much apprehension about what might happen in Davos. Now, we've seen protests in Denmark and Greenland against Trump's ambitions. Is this new framework something their governments are likely to accept or as much as we know about it? Yeah, we're getting some early reactions from Danish and Greenlandic leaders now. And their comments are reinforcing the fact that the details of this deal, as we discussed, are very slim. Denmark's prime minister, Menta Fredrickson, has issued a statement now, underscoring that things like security, investment, and economy can be discussed politically, but not sovereignty.

that, quote, only Denmark and Greenland can make decisions on issues relating to Denmark and Greenland. So it's quite interesting that these talks in Davos were not led by Danes and Greenlanders, but by the NATO Secretary General Mark Routa. Routa is known for his constant flattery of Trump and the two get along well, but a Greenlandic member of Parliament has already written on social media that, quote, NATO in no way has a mandate to negotiate without Greenland. That's Terry Schultz reporting in Brussels. Thank you, Terry.

You're welcome. As the drama over Greenland plays out, this much is clear. President Trump has greatly antagonized U.S. allies in Europe and beyond. That became most clear in Trump's and Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney's remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. For more, we're joined by NPR National Security correspondent Greg Maury. Hey, Greg. Hi, Lela. Okay, so let's get right to it. Just break down how this spat between Trump and Canada's leader, Mark Carney, came to be. Yeah, Carney spoke too. Tuesday the day before Trump. And his remarks went viral as this usually low-key politician made this

sweeping claim saying that the global order built and led by the U.S. for 80 years was not just strained. It had actually come apart. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition. Great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs is leverage, financial infrastructure is coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited. And so Carney didn't mention Trump by name, but the implication was clear. And we should know Carney visited China last week and signed an agreement for his country to buy electric vehicles from China. To drive home that point, Carney said China is now a more reliable partner than the U.S. And how did Trump respond to the Canadian leader? Well, Trump did mention Carney by name, and he actually

took a swipe at him and all of Canada in his speech on Wednesday. I watched your prime minister yesterday. He wasn't so grateful. They should be grateful to us. Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements. So over the past year, Trump has threatened tariffs on Canada, imposed tariffs on Canada, paused tariffs on Canada. So we've seen lots of tension over trade. And, of course, Canada is close to Greenland, and it's a key player in any discussion on Arctic security. Just hard to recall any time when we've seen this level of friction between the leaders of the U.S. and Canada. Now, Trump singled out Canada, but didn't he also have some harsh words for Europe and NATO?

Yes, absolutely. Trump insulted Europe is weak and in decline. And he also repeated a statement he often makes about NATO that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The United States is treated very unfairly by NATO. I want to tell you that. And when you think about it, nobody can dispute it. We give so much and we get so little in return. Now, of course, back in 2001, after the al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in the U.S., NATO countries rushed to join the U.S. in the war in Afghanistan. This was the first and only time that NATO's Article 5 was triggered.

The section saying an attack on one is the national. attack on all. And overall, more than a thousand NATO troops from other countries, Europe and Canada, were killed in that war. Now, Trump did alienate allies in his first term as well, right, Greg? So can we point to something that's really different in this term? Yeah, Trump has really gone from a lot of tough talk to taking stronger actions when it comes to tariffs or economic cooperation or military cooperation. And remember, Trump talked about acquiring Greenland in his first term. drawing mostly eye rolls. This time he got everyone's attention and perhaps even some sort of a deal, though we're still waiting for the details. That's NPR's Greg Miree. Thank you, Greg.

Sure thing, Leila. President Trump is meeting some resistance in his attempt to fire a member of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors. The Supreme Court heard arguments in a case about Fed Governor or Lisa Cook on Wednesday and had tough questions for the president's lawyer. Trump has been critical of the Fed for not lowering interest rates more aggressively. We should be paying a much lower interest rate than we are. We should be paying the lowest interest rate of any country in the world because without the United States, you don't have a country. Politicians often want lower interest rates to boost the economy before the next election, but Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to push the central bank in that direction.

NPR's Scott Horsley joins us now to discuss. Hey, Scott. Good morning. Good morning. So the Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday over Trump's attempt to fire Fed government. or Lisa Cook. How did it go? This Supreme Court has generally given Trump a lot of latitude to fire officials from other independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission. But justices have signaled the Federal Reserve is a special case. And Lisa Cook's lawyer, Paul Clement, really stressed that during oral arguments yesterday. He said Congress deliberately set up the Fed to be insulated from

political pressure. And Clement said for more than a century, other presidents have generally respected those boundaries. No precedent from Woodrow. Wilson to Joseph Biden has ever even tried to remove a governor for cause, despite the ever-present temptation for lower rates and easier money. The whole idea is the Fed sometimes has to make decisions that are unpopular in the short run, like keeping interest rates high to fight inflation, in order to achieve the best economic outcome in the long run. Are interest rates the reason Trump wants to fire cook? Not the stated reason. Trump and his allies have accused Cook of making false statements on mortgage applications, although she denies any wrongdoing.

Justices seem skeptical that Cook could be dismissed over that without having any opportunity to make her own case. Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested, if the bar for firing a Fed governor were set that low, it would weaken or shatter the central bank's independence. If this were set as a precedent, it seems to me what goes around comes around, all the current president's appointees. would likely be removed for cause on January 20th, 2029, if there's a Democratic president or January 20th, 2033. Then where are we? So far, courts have allowed Cook to keep her job at the Fed while this case plays out. The Fed has been cutting interest rates, but not as quickly as the president would like.

Where does the central bank go from here? Most forecasters think the Fed's going to hold interest rates steady when policymakers meet next week. They have cut rates. three times since last September, out of concern over the softening job market. But, you know, inflation is still higher than the Fed would like. And policymakers have signaled they're going to be cautious about additional rate cuts going forward. Now, Trump has not only tried to fire Cook, he's threatened to fire the Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, and the Justice Department even launched an investigation of the central bank. But all that pressure could be backfiring.

Powell, who attended yesterday's Supreme Court hearing, said in a video statement this month, he and his colleagues will not be bullied. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation. Now, Powell's term as Fed Chairman ends in May, but he has the option to keep his seat on the Fed's governing board for another couple of years. He hasn't said whether he'll do so, but if he did, that would deny Trump the opportunity

to appoint another more compliant Fed governor. We're NPR's Scott Horsley. Thank you, Scott. You're welcome. The voices on NPR today include longtime Democratic insider Rom Emanuel. Emmanuel has held many political jobs serving as a member of Congress, President Obama's chief of staff, mayor of Chicago, and most recently, Ambassador to Japan. As he considers a run for president in 2028, he sat for a video interview with our co-host Steve, and he talked of corporate America enabling the Trump administration. I think corporate America, they've sold out America. And what I mean by that is you benefit from a nation built on laws.

And you're watching from the sideline a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law. Everything you have is built on the premise of the rule of law. Number two, the president's declared war on the greatest research system in the world it's ever seen. And your company is a direct beneficiary of that. And you're like the three monkeys. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. You are timid souls. Is there something having to do with corporate America,

where Democrats, something about your approach to social issues or taxes or business or regulation, drove corporate America. I'm saying this shorthand. But the Republican parties are dominated by a monopolist mindset. And our party started to get dominated by a bunch of Marxist. And both Marxism and monopolists don't serve the economy well. You can hear Steve's full interview with Rahm Emanuel on a bonus episode of Up First later today, and you can watch the full video interview on the NPR app.

And that's up first for Thursday, January 22nd. I'm Leila Faldol. And I'm Amey Martinez. You can listen to this podcast sponsor-free while financially supporting public media with Up First Plus. Your subscription will help keep the NPR network strong and support local public radio stations through a recurring monthly donation. Learn more at plus.npr.org. That's plus.npr.org.

Today's episode of Up First was edited by Miguel Macias, Andrew Sussman, Rafael Nalm, Mohamed al-Radisi, and Alice Wolfly. It was produced by Zad Butch, Nia Dumas, and Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Nisha Highness. Our technical director is Carly Strange, and our deputy executive producer is Kelly Dickens. Join us again tomorrow.