News
Here’s what happened on Wednesday.
President Trump took office 101 days ago after a campaign in which voters bought his argument that he could skillfully manage the economy and that his policy prescriptions could both bolster growth and eradicate inflation.
So the news on Wednesday that the nation’s gross domestic product had contracted in the first three months of the year was a sharp political jolt as well as a blinking economic warning.
It came at the end of a quarter in which stock prices were down sharply, Wall Street’s worst performance at the start of a new presidential term since Gerald R. Ford tried to steer the country out of scandal and inflation 51 years ago. And it only added to the widespread uncertainty among businesses and consumers about what the rest of the year might hold as Mr. Trump pursues a trade war that is already choking off supply chains and threatening to push prices up and lead to shortages of critical components and products on shelves.
It is too soon to predict where the American economy is headed for the rest of the year, and Mr. Trump remains insistent that he will produce a flurry of trade deals that will bring manufacturing back to the United States and usher in a new age of prosperity.
But the first-quarter figures brought the political risks for him into focus. For Mr. Trump, what is at stake is a question of fundamental competence on an issue that he has always used to define himself.
If the report proves to be a harbinger of an extended slowdown or recession, the situation could become the economic analog of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s fumbled withdrawal from Afghanistan four years ago this summer. Mr. Biden’s job approval ratings never recovered from that early debacle. Nothing he did later — not the millions of jobs created, not the big legislative victories, not the rapid response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — could restore the sense among voters that he could be trusted to carry out the job with the skill they assumed he brought to it.
Mr. Trump stood in the Rose Garden on April 2, what he called “liberation day,” and rolled out a broad and punitive set of tariffs on trading partners. He has promised that other countries will come begging for a deal to roll back those levies and other tariffs he has imposed.
A substantial number of Americans appear skeptical. In a New York Times/Siena College poll last week, 55 percent disapproved of Mr. Trump’s handling of the economy, with 43 percent approving. About half of voters disapproved of Mr. Trump’s handling of trade.
Some of Mr. Trump’s economic advisers now recognize that the timing and execution of his tariff announcements could prove to be colossal mistakes, even if they applaud the underlying strategy. That is why, every few days, they are announcing new exceptions, most recently to relieve the pain for American carmakers.
“On April 2, standing in arguably the most powerful place in the world, President Trump thought he was projecting American strength,” said Matthew P. Goodman, who runs the geoeconomics center at the Council on Foreign Relations and served under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. “But he discovered that trade is complicated, that you need to be more surgical, and he has had to tack back from that ever since.”
Mr. Trump, the billionaire real estate investor, has acknowledged that his strategy will bring some temporary pain to Americans, but seemed to argue on Wednesday that it would hardly be noticed by ordinary Americans, at least at toy stores.
“Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, you know?” he said. “And maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.”
Whatever the cost of a Barbie, Mr. Trump is facing a fundamental timing problem. It will take years for the huge investments he predicts will flow into the United States to unfold and bring about the industrial renaissance he has promised. Building the most cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication plant, for example, can easily take five years.
“Those chips, those beautiful chips, make those suckers in the U.S.A.,” Mr. Trump said in the White House on Wednesday as he addressed executives and called out how much each had committed to spending on new facilities in the country.
It is too early to know how quickly those investments will take off, including Apple’s commitment, hailed again by Mr. Trump on Wednesday, to invest $500 billion, including a chunk of its manufacturing capability, in the United States over the next four years.
But the economic pain of the tariffs could start within months, with upward pressure on prices and shortages of both industrial and consumer products made abroad.
Much of Mr. Trump’s political problem lies in that disconnect. For many of the products Americans will be paying more for — especially Chinese-made products — there is no American alternative. And for many more, producing them in the United States may make no sense.
For all his downplaying of economic concerns, Mr. Trump is clearly sensitive to the prospect of being blamed for rising prices. When reports began to circulate this week that an Amazon subsidiary was thinking about posting the tariffs customers would be paying on every product, Mr. Trump called Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s founder, to complain.
Giving consumers a breakdown of how much tariffs are costing them, the White House said, would be a “hostile and political act.” Amazon quickly said it had never fully approved the plan, and that it would not go into effect.
But many business leaders are rattled by the environment, saying they have no way of projecting their earnings for the second quarter because the economic environment has never been more opaque.
“I keep telling them not to underestimate Donald Trump,” said David McIntosh, the president of the Club for Growth, the anti-tax advocacy group whose members almost unanimously cheered Mr. Trump’s return to office.
Mr. McIntosh said he is optimistic that Mr. Trump will be successful at negotiating down tariffs with Western-style democracies that rank among America’s biggest trading partners. “I run into a lot of executives who ask, ‘OK, how does Donald Trump do this?’ And my answer is to wrap their minds around ‘The Art of the Deal,’ that he is negotiator in chief.”
The way to calm the markets now, he said, is to “get Congress to get the tax cut bill done,” and to extend the tax cuts Mr. Trump got enacted in his first term.
Mr. McIntosh is pressing to expand that tax cut, specifically by permitting businesses to write off the cost of building new production facilities immediately, rather than depreciate those costs over decades.
Mr. Trump may score some early wins. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Tuesday that “we are very close on India.” He added that South Korea was “sending its A-team” to negotiate and that a deal was also possible soon with Japan. Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, had called him the day before and said “‘Let’s make a deal.’”
Perhaps so, but Mr. Carney also had this to say on Tuesday after winning the Canadian election: “Our old relationship with the United States, a relationship based on steadily increasing integration, is over. The system of open global trade anchored by the United States, a system that Canada has relied on since the Second World War, a system that, while not perfect, has helped deliver prosperity for a country for decades, is over.”
Mr. Carney has vowed to reduce Canada’s dependence on its huge neighbor, no easy assignment since bilateral trade amounts to about a fifth of the country’s economy. China, the most powerful player in Mr. Trump’s trade wars, has been pursuing a similar strategy. And its leader, Xi Jinping, has every incentive to make the next few months as politically painful for Mr. Trump as possible.
Mr. Xi has largely maintained radio silence since Mr. Trump announced an escalating set of tariffs on Chinese goods, settling at 145 percent after several angry moves and countermoves with Beijing. That rate is so high that it essentially freezes trade; already there are reports of freighters loaded with goods that are being turned around, so that importers do not have to pay those tariffs.
Mr. Trump’s bet is that Mr. Xi will blink first because the pain for the Chinese economy will be so great that he will have to strike an accommodation that will, over time, allow the United States to get back to something approaching normal. Mr. Xi is betting the opposite: that Mr. Trump has overreached, and can’t withstand bad G.D.P. numbers, rising inflation or plummeting polls.
Only one of them is right.
News
What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody
BALTIMORE — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation helped galvanize opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, was released from immigration detention on Thursday, and a judge has temporarily blocked any further efforts to detain him.
Abrego Garcia currently can’t be deported to his home country of El Salvador thanks to a 2019 immigration court order that found he had a “well founded fear” of danger there. However, the Trump administration has said he cannot stay in the U.S. Over the past few months, government officials have said they would deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.
Abrego Garcia is fighting his deportation in federal court in Maryland, where his attorneys claim the administration is manipulating the immigration system to punish him for successfully challenging his earlier deportation.
Here’s what to know about the latest developments in the case:
Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country.
While he was allowed to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, he was not given residency status. Earlier this year, he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite the earlier court ruling.
When Abrego Garcia was deported in March, he was held in a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison despite having no criminal record.
The Trump administration initially fought efforts to bring him back to the U.S. but eventually complied after the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in. He returned to the U.S. in June, only to face an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia was held in a Tennessee jail for more than two months before he was released on Friday, Aug. 22, to await trial in Maryland under home detention.
His freedom lasted a weekend. On the following Monday, he reported to the Baltimore immigration office for a check-in and was immediately taken into immigration custody. Officials announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, but they were blocked by an order from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland.
On Thursday, after months of legal filings and hearings, Xinis ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released immediately. Her ruling hinged on what was likely a procedural error by the immigration judge who heard his case in 2019.
Normally, in a case like this, an immigration judge will first issue an order of removal. Then the judge will essentially freeze that order by issuing a “withholding of removal” order, according to Memphis immigration attorney Andrew Rankin.
In Abrego Garcia’s case, the judge granted withholding of removal to El Salvador because he found Abrego Garcia’s life could be in danger there. However, the judge never took the first step of issuing the order of removal. The government argued in Xinis’ court that the order of removal could be inferred, but the judge disagreed.
Without a final order of removal, Abrego Garcia can’t be deported, Xinis ruled.
The only way to get an order of removal is to go back to immigration court and ask for one, Rankin said. But reopening the immigration case is a gamble because Abrego Garcia’s attorneys would likely seek protection from deportation in the form of asylum or some other type of relief.
One wrinkle is that immigration courts are officially part of the executive branch, and the judges there are not generally viewed as being as independent as federal judges.
“There might be independence in some areas, but if the administration wants a certain result, by all accounts it seems they’re going to exert the pressure on the individuals to get that result,” Rankin said. “I hope he gets a fair shake, and two lawyers make arguments — somebody wins, somebody loses — instead of giving it to an immigration judge with a 95% denial rate, where everybody in the world knows how it’s gonna go down.”
Alternatively, the government could appeal Xinis’ order to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and try to get her ruling overturned, Rankin said. If the appeals court agreed with the government that the final order of removal was implied, there could be no need to reopen the immigration case.
In compliance with Xinis’ order, Abrego Garcia was released from immigration detention in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening and allowed to return home for the first time in months. However, he was also told to report to an immigration officer in Baltimore early the next morning.
Fearing that he would be detained again, his attorneys asked Xinis for a temporary restraining order. Xinis filed that order early Friday morning. It prohibits immigration officials from taking Abrego Garcia back into custody, at least for the time being. A hearing on the issue could happen as early as next week.
Meanwhile, in Tennessee, Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in the criminal case where he is charged with human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling.
Prosecutors claim he accepted money to transport, within the United States, people who were in the country illegally. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee for speeding. Body camera footage from a Tennessee Highway Patrol officer shows a calm exchange with Abrego Garcia. There were nine passengers in the car, and the officers discussed among themselves their suspicions of smuggling. However, Abrego Garcia was eventually allowed to continue driving with only a warning.
Abrego Garcia has asked U.S. District Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw to dismiss the smuggling charges on the grounds of “selective or vindictive prosecution.”
Crenshaw earlier found “some evidence that the prosecution against him may be vindictive” and said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.” Crenshaw specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News Channel program that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.
The two sides have been sparring over whether senior Justice Department officials, including Blanche, can be required to testify in the case.
News
Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR
A makeshift memorial stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on December 01, 2025 in Washington, DC. Two West Virginia National Guard troops were shot blocks from the White House on November 26.
Heather Diehl/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Heather Diehl/Getty Images
They survived some of the Afghanistan War’s most grueling and treacherous missions.
But once they evacuated to the U.S., many Afghan fighters who served in “Zero Units” found themselves spiraling.
Among their ranks was Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged with killing one National Guard member and seriously injuring a second after opening fire on them in Washington, D.C. on Thanksgiving Eve.
NPR’s Brian Mann spoke to people involved in Zero Units and learned some have struggled with mental health since coming to the U.S. At least four soldiers have died by suicide.
For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.
This episode was produced by Erika Ryan and Karen Zamora. It was edited by Alina Hartounian and Courtney Dorning.
Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.
News
Video: Behind the Supreme Court’s Push to Expand Presidential Power
new video loaded: Behind the Supreme Court’s Push to Expand Presidential Power
By Ann E. Marimow, Claire Hogan, Stephanie Swart and Pierre Kattar
December 12, 2025
-
Alaska7 days agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas7 days agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Ohio1 week ago
Who do the Ohio State Buckeyes hire as the next offensive coordinator?
-
Washington4 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa6 days agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL6 days agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Cleveland, OH6 days agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World6 days ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans