By Bryan Mena, CNN

Washington (CNN) — Federal Reserve officials convene this week at a pivotal moment in the US central bank’s 112-year history, with a series of historic events putting a spotlight on their ability to set interest rates without political interference.

Officials are widely expected to announce Wednesday they will keep short-term interest rates unchanged, and possibly hint at holding off on any rate cuts for the next few months. The Fed delivered three consecutive rate cuts late last year, and several policymakers have said in recent public speeches they want to see the effects of those cuts before considering any further adjustments.

The Fed’s independence in making crucial decisions on interest rates, rooted in economic data, remains a hotly debated topic — both publicly and in the judiciary. Last week, the Supreme Court listened to oral arguments in the landmark case of Fed Governor Lisa Cook, who is challenging President Donald Trump’s attempt to remove her from her post on the central bank’s powerful board over unproven allegations of mortgage fraud.

A week earlier, Chair Jerome Powell released a remarkable video pushing back against the Trump administration’s unrelenting pressure campaign, after he revealed that federal prosecutors are investigating part of his congressional testimony last year that touched on an ongoing renovation of the central bank’s Washington, DC, headquarters.

Powell this week oversees his third-to-last meeting as chair, with his term ending on May 15. Trump could name Powell’s successor as soon as this week.

A fight for Fed independence

The conservative Justices on the nation’s highest court seemed skeptical of the administration’s arguments for firing Cook and wanting to keep her out of her post while the litigation plays out.

That included Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Trump’s second nominee to the high court. He warned that future presidents could loosely define a “cause” to fire Fed officials they disagree with, if the Trump v. Cook case sets that precedent.

“What goes around comes around,” Kavanaugh told US Solicitor General D. John Sauer, pointing out how a future Democratic president could use “trivial or inconsequential or old allegations that are very difficult to disprove” to push out Trump appointees.

“Once these tools are unleashed,” Kavanaugh said, “they’re used by both sides.”

In support of the Fed’s independence, current and former Fed officials attended the oral arguments, including Fed Governor Michael Barr, former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, and Powell himself.

Powell has always said central bank independence is essential to the stability of any modern economy. But in his video, he struck a more forceful tone — while calling out the threat that he sees from the Trump administration.

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President,” Powell said in his statement. “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.”

It’s unclear whether Powell will elaborate further on the administration’s efforts to pressure the Fed when he addresses reporters during a post-meeting news conference at 2:30 p.m. ET — or default to his usual playbook of avoiding further escalation by not

By Brian Todd, CNN

(CNN) — As a combat medic with the Army National Guard more than a decade ago, Lauren Feringa says she was exposed to toxins from burning oil fields during the Iraq War.

A few years later, as a civilian contractor in Afghanistan, she says she suffered from concussive blasts, including a vehicle explosion near the gate of a military base where she was working.

When she returned to the US, Feringa believes those injuries and others suffered in military service contributed to complications when trying to start a family. While she carried two children to term, she says she underwent three abortions covered by the Department of Veterans Affairs because doctors determined the fetuses weren’t viable and her health was in danger.

She’s not sure what she would do today. The Department of Veterans Affairs imposed a near-total ban on abortion with a new rule quietly published on New Year’s Eve. The policy rolls back access to abortion in most cases – even in cases of rape and incest and only allowing the procedure in cases where the mother’s life is at risk.

“This is all insane,” says Feringa, who has retired from the Army National Guard and Reserves and has been an outspoken critic of the VA but also says the system helped her through difficult periods. “Women have to be the only authority over what goes on with their bodies.”

“You’re not going to provide care for a woman who’s been raped?” she added. “It seems dystopian.”

Veterans are now one of the latest fronts in the fight over abortion rights. VA medical professionals and reproductive rights advocates have decried the latest rollback in access to abortions in the United States, and Democrats in Congress have introduced legislation that would restore authorization for abortion and abortion counseling in the VA health system.

Opponents to the new policy point out that women veterans who use the VA system for reproductive care are more restricted and have fewer options for abortion services than women who are incarcerated in federal prisons.

They also note the high rate of sexual assault in the military. In 2023, the most recent year for which statistics are available, an estimated 7% of women servicemembers had experienced unwanted sexual contact in the past year, a category that includes sexual assault, according to a Pentagon survey.

“The idea that VA would deny abortion care even in cases of rape – to me that’s disgusting,” said Rachel Fey, interim Co-CEO of the group Power to Decide, a reproductive rights advocacy group. Fey calls the new VA ban “devastating” and “disrespectful” to women who have put their lives on the line for their country.

Asked by CNN why the VA changed the policy, agency spokesman Peter Kasperowicz noted in a statement that “the Department of Justice issued an opinion that states VA is not legally authorized to provide abortions.”

According to the VA’s new rule, the Justice Department opinion says that procedures necessary to save the life of a pregnant veteran are not considered abortions under relevant federal law “and therefore remain permissible.”

Kasperowicz did not elaborate on why the policy was changed with regard to rape and incest.

VA Secretary Doug Collins is set to appear Wednesday on Capitol Hill for a hearing on VA health care, w

CNN

By Eric Bradner, Annie Grayer, CNN

(CNN) — Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar ignored staffers’ pleas to end a town hall early and get a medical check Tuesday after a man rushed the podium and sprayed a substance at the Democratic congresswoman.

Omar, who was not injured in the attack, said after the town hall ended that she has “survived war” and that she is “definitely going to survive intimidation and whatever these people think that they can throw at me because I’m built that way.”

The man accused of attacking Omar has been identified as 55-year-old Anthony J. Kazmierczak, a Minneapolis Police Department spokesperson confirmed to CNN.

Kazmierczak has been charged with third-degree assault and was booked into Hennepin County Jail, according to arrest records. Minnesota court records do not currently list charging or attorney information for Kazmierczak.

It was not immediately clear what the substance was. City forensic scientists responded to process the scene, a police incident report said, according to CNN affiliate KARE.

Kazmierczak has a history of sharing political posts on social media, and in 2021 shared a political cartoon criticizing Omar’s stance on security spending amid calls to defund police.

The US Capitol Police said in a statement the Tuesday incident is “an unacceptable decision that will be met with swift justice” and said it’s working “to see this man faces the most serious charges possible.”

The dramatic moment punctuated a high-profile public appearance for a progressive lawmaker who has been the subject of Republican attacks and scrutiny, as President Donald Trump’s administration focuses its attention on Minneapolis, the city she represents.

Omar condemned federal immigration agents’ “terrorizing” tactics and “reckless and lawless” actions, as she told attendees that the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the Twin Cities is antithetical to “the America we love.”

She also called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s abolition and said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem should resign or be impeached. And she praised how Minneapolis has responded to immigration agents’ presence and the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

“Minnesotans are showing up for one another in ways that people didn’t expect. We are showing the country and the world what real solitary looks like. And we should be goddamn proud of ourselves,” she said.

Trump on Tuesday

Por Rashard Rose, CNN

Los principales líderes del Departamento de Justicia dijeron en una presentación judicial el martes que esperan publicar los archivos del departamento relacionados con Jeffrey Epstein “en el corto plazo”.

La secretaria de Justicia, Pam Bondi, el secretario de Justicia adjunto, Todd Blanche, y el fiscal federal para el Distrito Sur de Nueva York, Jay Clayton, dijeron a dos jueces federales que el departamento no podía “proporcionar una fecha específica” sobre cuándo completaría su revisión de los archivos.

La actualización llega en un momento en que el Departamento de Justicia se enfrenta a una enorme presión para publicar todos sus archivos tras la aprobación, en noviembre, de una ley por parte del Congreso, con un apoyo casi unánime, que le otorgó al departamento el 19 de diciembre de 2025 como fecha límite para hacerlo. Epstein, el delincuente sexual convicto acusado de abusar de decenas de menores de edad, se suicidó en 2019.

La presentación, una carta enviada a los jueces Richard Berman y Paul Engelmayer del Distrito Sur de Nueva York, es la última actualización del Departamento de Justicia mientras continúa revisando y publicando materiales.

Los funcionarios escribieron en la carta que “el Departamento ha revisado millones de páginas de materiales” junto con grabaciones de video y audio y ha logrado “progresos sustanciales” en la identificación de documentos y la finalización de las redacciones para proteger a las víctimas.

“El Departamento no puede proporcionar una fecha específica en este momento y advierte que sus procesos en curso, incluidos sus controles de calidad y preparativos del sistema de gestión de documentos, pueden requerir esfuerzos adicionales para garantizar la protección de la información de identificación de las víctimas y al mismo tiempo cumplir con las amplias demandas de la Ley”, decía la carta.

La carta indicaba que las iniciativas del Departamento de Justicia han incluido una revisión manual por parte de cientos de abogados, agentes y otros profesionales del Departamento, quienes han dedicado días y semanas a esta labor. CNN informó previamente sobre la ardua tarea del departamento para revisar los documentos, solicitando a fiscales de carrera de Florida que se ofrecieran como voluntarios durante las vacaciones de invierno para ayudar a redactar los documentos.

Los archivos se componen de documentos, videos, fotografías y archivos de audio que se encuentran en el sistema principal de gestión electrónica de casos del FBI y provienen, en gran medida, de las dos principales investigaciones del FBI sobre Epstein, en Florida y Nueva York, que abarcaron décadas. Un memorando del FBI de julio de 2025 afirmaba que el departamento había descubierto “más de 300 gigabytes de datos y pruebas físicas” durante una revisión del material de investigación.

El Departamento de Justicia dijo a principios de este mes que había publicado 12.285 documentos (menos del 1 %) de sus archivos relacionados con Epstein, y que más de 2 millones de documentos aún estaban bajo revisión.

Una encuesta de CNN realizada por SSRS entre el 9 y el 12 de enero encontró que pocos estadounidenses están satisfechos con la cantidad de evidencia publicada en el caso Epstein, y la mayoría dice que cree que el gobierno está ocultando

By Joan Biskupic, CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst

(CNN) — When the Supreme Court agreed last September to hear a dispute over President Donald Trump’s billion-dollar tariffs on foreign goods, it heeded the administration’s plea that time was of the essence.

To Trump, the case is a matter of “LIFE OR DEATH for our Country,” as he wrote on social media. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that the US is “on the brink” and “the longer a final ruling is delayed, the greater the risk of economic disruption.”

The court imposed a fast-track briefing schedule and held oral arguments on November 5. That session exposed multiple sticking points among the justices, but the public’s expectation of a relatively quick resolution endured.

As global markets churn and American consumers anticipate even pricier goods, the question persists: Does the president have this tariff authority or not? And when will the Supreme Court tell everyone?

The urgency has been heightened by Trump’s Monday announcement of increased tariffs on goods from South Korea, from 15% to 25%, and last week’s initial threat of new tariffs against European nations that refused to back his plan to control the Danish territory of Greenland. (He backed down from the tariff threat by mid-week.)

The nine justices have begun a recess and are next scheduled to take the bench and possibly issue opinions on February 20. They could interrupt this recess if a decision was finished before then. But such a move would be highly unusual.

Lawyers have advised clients to be patient.

“We’ve said, ‘We know you’re all frustrated. You want a resolution immediately,’” said Oliver Dunford, a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney who filed a “friend of the court” brief on behalf of Princess Awesome children’s clothing and other small US businesses. “But in terms of litigation, this is really, really fast. Getting to the Supreme Court in a matter of months is really fast.”

Dunford, like many lawyers involved in the case, had thought the ruling might have come by now. So did the news media. Throughout January, the financial press, especially, ran weekly stories with such headlines as “No Ruling on Trump Tariffs”, “Supreme Court Doesn’t Rule on Tariffs” and “Is Trump Tariff Supreme Court Ruling Today?”

Asked Tuesday about a possible loss at the Supreme Court, Trump said on Fox News, “We will find something, some other way of doing a similar thing, but it’ll be more inconvenient.” His emergency tariffs are generating tens of billions of dollars for the US Treasury each month.

There are some explanations for the wait, beginning with the sheer difficulty of a case. The justices during oral arguments appeared conflicted over when a president can seize Congress’ usual tariff power. Trump has asserted authority under a 1977 law intended for international economic emergencies.

Then there’s the reality of no hard and fast deadline. In the past, when the justices dashed out rulings, there was a looming external deadline. Last year, for example, the court swiftly heard arguments and resolved a dispute over a federal law that required Chinese divestment of TikTok. The Read more