1. FIRE CHIEF UNDER FIRE

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has removed Fire Chief Kristin Crowley after a wildfire devastated the Pacific Palisades neighborhood. The mayor blamed Crowley for failing to properly prepare for the fires and for sending home 1,000 firefighters before the fire started, instead of keeping them on duty as a precaution. However, some people disagree with the mayor’s decision. Crowley, who had been the city’s first female and openly gay fire chief, said she followed standard procedures and that the department had been underfunded. Others also criticized the mayor for leaving the country to visit Ghana right before the fires started. Mayor Bass later admitted that she would not have traveled if she had been warned about the fire danger. The situation has caused a lot of debate. Some say that Crowley should have done more to prevent the disaster, while others believe the mayor is shifting blame instead of taking responsibility. For now, an interim fire chief has been put in charge, and the city will begin a national search for new leadership. In a crisis, leaders must make big decisions—but if something goes wrong, who is responsible? In Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass blamed Fire Chief Kristin Crowley for not doing enough to prepare for a wildfire, while Crowley argued that she wasn’t given enough resources. Some people say the mayor should take the blame because she left the country, while others believe the fire chief made the wrong call. Imagine you are a city investigator who must write a report about what happened. First, make a list of the mistakes you think each leader made. Then, write a paragraph explaining who you believe is most responsible for the fire response failure and why. If you were in charge, what would you have done differently?

2. KING OF A NATION

President Donald Trump has been using royal language to describe his power. After canceling a plan called congestion pricing—which would have charged cars $9 to drive into busy parts of New York City—he posted on social media, “LONG LIVE THE KING!” The White House even shared a picture of Trump wearing a crown on a magazine cover. Many people think presidents should not act like kings. In the United States, leaders are supposed to follow laws, not make decisions on their own like a king would. Some experts say Trump is using an idea called the unitary executive theory, which argues that the president has more power than normal—even enough to ignore laws if he believes it helps the country. Others disagree and say he is going too far. New York’s governor, Kathy Hochul, pushed back against Trump’s actions, saying, “We are a nation of laws, not ruled by a king.” Now, New York is suing to stop Trump from canceling congestion pricing. This case is part of a bigger debate about how much power a president should have. A king and a president are both leaders, but they have very different powers. In some countries, a king makes all the decisions and does not have to follow rules. In the United States, the president must follow laws and work with Congress and the courts. Make a Venn diagram (two overlapping circles) to compare kings and presidents. In one circle, list things only a king can do. In the other, list things only a president can do. In the middle, write things that both leaders have in common. After finishing your diagram, write a paragraph explaining why the United States has a president instead of a king. Why is it important for leaders to follow laws?

3. HIGH-STAKES DEAL

The United States and Ukraine are close to making a major deal that would give the U.S. rights to valuable minerals found in Ukraine, such as titanium, graphite, and lithium. These minerals are important for making technology, batteries, and military equipment. President Donald Trump has been pushing Ukraine’s leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, to agree to the deal. However, Ukraine is still at war with Russia, and Zelensky wants to make sure the agreement is fair and includes security guarantees. At first, Zelensky rejected the deal because the U.S. wanted access to half of Ukraine’s minerals but offered no clear promise to help defend the country. In response, Trump criticized Ukraine and suggested he might side with Russia if Ukraine didn’t cooperate. This has made the situation tense, with Zelensky reaching out to European leaders for support. Now, both countries are reworking the agreement to find a compromise. The final deal could bring billions of dollars to the U.S., but it could also impact Ukraine’s future in the war. In an international deal, both sides want to gain something important while avoiding giving up too much. Imagine you are a negotiator working on this agreement between the United States and Ukraine. Write a short agreement outlining what minerals Ukraine will share with the U.S., how the U.S. will support Ukraine in return, and a fair way to ensure both countries benefit. After writing your deal, explain why you made these choices in a paragraph. Consider how your agreement helps both sides while preventing one country from taking advantage of the other. Think about what each country needs the most and what they might be willing to compromise on to make the deal successful.

4. IN DEFENSE OF THE PRESS

The Trump administration has banned The Associated Press (A.P.), a major news organization, from attending White House events. The reason? A.P. continues to use the name “Gulf of Mexico” instead of “Gulf of America”, the new name President Donald Trump ordered in January. In response, over 40 news organizations, including CNN, Fox News, and The Washington Post, have signed a letter urging the White House to lift the ban. They argue that freedom of the press is protected by the First Amendment, meaning the government cannot control how news organizations report information. Many journalists believe this decision is dangerous because it could lead to more censorship in the future. Even conservative outlets, like Newsmax, which often supports Trump, say they disagree with the ban because it could set a bad precedent for future presidents. While the White House argues that A.P. can still report the news, critics say banning reporters for using words the government doesn’t like is an attack on press freedom. The A.P. says it will continue to report the news as it always has, and legal groups are stepping in to challenge the decision. The fight over this ban is part of a larger debate about who controls information and how the government should interact with the media. Think about what it’s like to live in a country where the government can tell news organizations what words to use or what stories to report. How would that affect the public’s ability to learn the truth? Write a short journal entry from the perspective of a journalist who has just been told they can no longer report on certain topics. Describe how you feel, what concerns you have, and how this rule might affect the country. After writing your journal entry, reflect in a short paragraph on why press freedom is important and what could happen if governments had the power to ban or control news organizations.

5. EXPERIENCE VERSUS LOYALTY

President Donald Trump has removed Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., the nation’s highest-ranking military officer, from his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This move is unusual because military leaders usually stay in place even when a new president takes office. General Brown, a four-star Air Force general, had served since 2023, but Trump and his defense officials criticized him for focusing too much on diversity instead of military strategy. The president replaced him with retired General Dan Caine, who is seen as more loyal to Trump’s policies. In addition to General Brown, Trump also fired several other high-ranking military officials, including the head of the Navy and top Air Force leaders. Some believe these firings will allow Trump to reshape the military to align more closely with his “America First” approach, while others worry that politics is interfering with the way military leaders are chosen. Some in Congress support Trump’s decision, but others—both Democrats and Republicans—say this could harm the military’s stability and morale. The Senate will now have to decide whether to confirm General Caine as the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Presidents choose top military leaders, but the military is supposed to stay separate from politics to ensure national security is protected. Imagine you are on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which must decide if General Caine should be confirmed as the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Write a short speech (5–7 sentences) explaining whether you would vote to confirm or reject him. Consider whether loyalty to the president or experience in military leadership is more important in this role. After writing your speech, explain in a paragraph how politics can affect national security and why it is important to have strong and qualified military leaders.