1. TRUMP’S RENEWED INTEREST IN GREENLAND

European leaders were alarmed after President Trump renewed his stated desire for the United States to control Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of Denmark, and after Stephen Miller refused to rule out the use of force while openly questioning Denmark’s claim to the island. The comments intensified fears in Denmark and across Europe because they suggested a willingness to challenge sovereignty inside the Western alliance system, potentially straining NATO at a time when European governments still rely on U.S. cooperation for issues like Ukraine. European officials appear divided on how publicly confrontational to be, since a direct challenge could provoke a backlash while a weak response could signal vulnerability. As a result, many are considering negotiation strategies that would reduce confrontation without formally transferring ownership, such as offering expanded U.S. military access, increasing NATO activity in the Arctic, or creating economic arrangements involving Greenland’s mineral resources. The reporting suggests that European leaders are weighing not only security arguments but also the possibility that Trump’s interest is tied to political symbolism and legacy-building, which complicates traditional bargaining. Write one well-developed paragraph explaining why Greenland has become such a sensitive issue between the United States and Europe. In your response, describe why European leaders see Trump’s statements as a threat to alliance trust, explain why Greenland is strategically important in the Arctic, and analyze how this situation shows the tension between national ambition and international cooperation. Your paragraph should show how one territorial dispute can affect much larger political relationships.

2. IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN AND ANTI-I.C.E. PROTESTS

Federal immigration authorities expanded an enforcement operation in Minnesota that officials described as their largest to date, as part of a broader crackdown tied to President Trump’s pledge to deport millions of people. The operations in Minnesota have focused particularly on Somalis, even though most people of Somali ancestry in the state are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, and the state is home to one of the largest Somali communities in the world. Federal officials linked the operation to deportation orders and to a major fraud investigation involving misuse of public funds in social safety net programs, in which many defendants have been of Somali origin and many have faced felony charges. The article highlights how enforcement actions aimed at undocumented immigrants can ripple outward into broader communities through fear, stigma, and public suspicion, especially when a specific ethnic group becomes the public focus. It also raises questions about how law enforcement messaging and highly visible operations shape public perception of both criminal accountability and collective blame. Write a focused reflection that distinguishes between individual wrongdoing and group-based suspicion. In one well-organized paragraph, explain how a large fraud case involving people from one community can influence the way the public interprets immigration enforcement actions, and then analyze one ethical risk that arises when government messaging targets “criminals” while public attention lands on an ethnic group. Conclude with a brief recommendation (one or two sentences) for how officials and media outlets could describe such operations in ways that preserve accountability while reducing stereotyping and misinformation.

3. TRUMP CONSIDERS STRIKE ON IRAN

President Trump has been briefed on military strike options against Iran as protests spread and intensify, with demonstrators initially responding to economic grievances and increasingly demanding major political change. U.S. officials described a range of potential targets, including nonmilitary sites in Tehran, and Trump has publicly warned that the United States would respond forcefully if Iranian leaders kill protesters. The situation is complicated by strategic risks that American officials themselves acknowledged, including the possibility that strikes could unify the public around Iran’s government, trigger retaliation against U.S. personnel, or escalate a regional conflict. The article also situates this moment within a pattern of recent military actions under Trump’s second term and within the broader U.S.–Iran relationship, including strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in the past year and Iran’s missile responses. Overall, the reporting presents a tension between the desire to deter repression and the danger that outside military action could worsen the situation for protesters or destabilize the region. Write a response paragraph analyzing whether military force is likely to help or harm protest movements inside another country. Use details from the article to explain how U.S. strikes on Iran could influence the Iranian government, the protesters, and regional stability. Then explain why leaders must consider public reaction, retaliation, and long-term consequences before using force in a situation driven by internal political unrest.

4. X SUES MUSIC PUBLISHERS

X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, filed a federal antitrust lawsuit accusing major music publishers and their trade organization of colluding to pressure the platform into blanket licensing deals at inflated prices. X argues that the publishers used the copyright takedown process and their combined market power to block competition and prevent smaller, individual negotiations. The publishers’ association countered that X is the only major social media platform that does not license songs and that the lawsuit is a distraction from what they describe as years of copyright infringement by the platform. The dispute is part of a longer conflict that includes an earlier lawsuit from publishers alleging widespread unauthorized music sharing on Twitter/X and disagreement over whether X’s policies meet its responsibilities under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The case also draws attention to how legal strategy, venue selection, and platform policies can shape high-stakes fights over creative work, online distribution, and corporate leverage. Write a clear, organized paragraph explaining what this lawsuit reveals about the power struggle between technology companies and the music industry. Describe what X is accusing the publishers of doing, explain how the publishers respond, and analyze why control over online music matters so much in today’s digital economy. Your paragraph should show how legal battles can shape who controls creative work on major platforms.

5. NOBEL PRIZE “TRANSFER” CONTROVERSY

After Venezuela’s opposition leader María Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, suggested that she would like to give or share her prize with President Trump as gratitude for the removal of Nicolás Maduro, the Norwegian Nobel Institute issued a public clarification about the award’s rules. The institute stated that once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be revoked, shared, or transferred, and it emphasized that Nobel decisions are final and not subject to appeal. The episode intersects with ongoing political conflict in Venezuela, including Machado’s leadership role, her being barred from appearing on the ballot despite popular legitimacy, and Trump’s position that he would meet with her while also signaling he would not support her to govern. The story illustrates how prestigious awards can become political symbols that people try to use to claim legitimacy, shape narratives, or reward allies, even when the institution’s rules are designed to prevent that kind of bargaining. It also shows the difference between what public figures say an award represents and what the awarding body says the prize actually is. Write a two-paragraph reflection analyzing how symbolic rewards function in political messaging. In the first paragraph, explain why Machado might frame the prize as belonging to “the Venezuelan people” and why Trump might publicly welcome the idea, focusing on incentives and public perception rather than personal motives. In the second paragraph, evaluate the Nobel Institute’s rule against transferring or sharing a prize and argue whether that rule strengthens the prize’s credibility or limits democratic symbolism, making sure your argument addresses how institutions protect legitimacy in politically charged environments.