Trump Touts Economy in Michigan; Supreme Court Considers Bans on Transgender Athletes

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Here's the Scoop" – January 13, 2026

Main Theme & Purpose

This episode of "Here’s the Scoop," hosted by Yasmin Vesugin for NBC News, covers two major topics: the political and economic narrative as Trump touts his administration's economic accomplishments in Michigan amid stubborn inflation, and the Supreme Court's oral arguments on whether states can bar transgender women from participating in girls’ and women’s sports. Additional news headlines round out the episode, including updates on Temporary Protected Status for Somali immigrants, developments in the House’s Epstein probe, global political shifts, climate change statistics, and a quirky viral app from China.

---

Segment 1: Trump Touts the Economy in Michigan

Economic Update & Political Strategy

• Discussion of the latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) report:

  • December inflation up 2.7% year-over-year ([01:00]).
  • Grocery prices remain high despite a drop in gas prices.
  • White House claims the inflation crisis has been defeated.

• Public Sentiment & Political Realities:

  • Jonathan Allen, NBC’s Senior National Politics Reporter, joins from Detroit.
  • Allen notes that inflation’s cumulative effects are still felt:

    "People know whether things are easier or harder…2.7% on top of 2.7% — things are much more expensive." ([02:38])

• Election Year Challenges:

  • The public continues to rank the economy as their top concern—64% of adults feel the country is on the wrong track ([04:11]).
  • Allen interprets Trump’s latest speech as a reaction to mounting political pressures:

    "The crisis the White House is feeling about the politics of affordability…he is focused on it even as most headlines…have to do with things overseas." ([03:35])

• Collaboration with Elizabeth Warren:

  • Trump’s unusual engagement with Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren regarding caps on credit card interest rates ([05:30]).
  • Allen assesses the possibilities and skepticism:

    "I don't think she trusts him at all…she’s willing to put that behind them…but also indicating she does not trust him to follow through on it." ([06:23])

• Focus on Foreign vs. Domestic Policy:

  • Tension among Trump’s supporters around his attention to foreign policy matters ([07:08]).
  • Allen explains Trump’s economic linkages to foreign affairs (e.g., Venezuelan oil deals) and skepticism over tangible short-term benefits to American consumers:

    "…the idea that the US Consumer is going to be benefiting from minerals in Greenland…anytime in Trump's presidency is hard to fathom." ([08:38])

---

Segment 2: Supreme Court Considers Bans on Transgender Athletes

Context and Stakes

• The Supreme Court hears two significant cases from Idaho and West Virginia regarding the right of transgender women and girls to compete in female sports ([10:29]).
• These rulings will affect similar laws in 27 other states, with federal funding implications for schools and institutions.

  "The outcome…is going to determine the fate of those laws and similar measures in 27 other states." ([10:54])

Interview: ACLU Attorney Shruti Swaminathan

• Case Details:

  • Idaho’s and West Virginia’s laws bar transgender girls and women from girls’/women’s teams at all age levels ([11:42]).
  • Plaintiffs include Lindsay Hecox (college) and Becky Pepper-Jackson (K-12).
  • Notable: The states only identified these two individuals as subject to their respective laws.

• Legal Arguments:

  • Claimed violations of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause and Title IX ([13:06]).
  • Swaminathan emphasizes scientific facts about hormone therapy negating competitive advantage in both plaintiffs.

  "Both athletes do not have the athletic advantage that Idaho and West Virginia claim…The largest known biological driver behind sex based differences in athletics is circulating testosterone levels…" ([14:32])

• Context in Recent Supreme Court Rulings:

  • Last year’s court upholding Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy is acknowledged as concerning, but not necessarily broadly applicable ([15:51]).
  • Swaminathan:

    "…the court made clear that it wasn't addressing larger questions about what standard scrutiny for discrimination against trans people is more generally applicable." ([16:06])

• Hope from Prior Decisions:

  • Cites the Bostock v. Clayton County decision (2020) as precedent for positive LGBTQ outcomes ([17:53]).
  • Notes a strategic narrowing in opinions by some conservative justices which may signal a less sweeping ruling.

  "...a false narrative that the people defending the rights of trans Folks have been the ones to propel this sports issue in court..." ([18:33])

Supreme Court Reporter Lawrence Hurley’s Take

• Hurley predicts a narrow decision likely upholding state bans, focusing specifically on sports and citing Title IX’s sex-based provisions.

  "…the conservative majority seems unlikely to embrace the arguments…that the laws violate either the Equal Protection clause…or Title IX. Although this case had the potential to have big implications…comments…indicate it could be quite a narrow ruling…very limited to sports…" ([20:00])

---

Segment 3: Headlines Roundup

Immigration Policy

• Temporary Protected Status for Somalis Ending:
  • Somali immigrants to lose TPS by March 17th—a shift that may end up in court ([21:08]).
  • Julia Ainslie explains the history and significance.

Legislative & Global Updates

• House Oversight Committee:

  • Bill and Hillary Clinton refuse to appear for depositions in the Epstein probe; House may seek contempt ([21:57]).
  • The Clintons allege the subpoenas lack legislative purpose and are politically motivated.

• International:

  • Former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yul faces the death penalty, accused of rebellion after martial law imposition ([22:33]).

Health & Environment

• Cancer Survival Rates Improve:

  • 70% of people now survive at least five years post-diagnosis—a jump from 50% in the 1970s ([23:09]).

• Climate Change:

  • US carbon emissions rose 2.4% last year, attributed to data centers, crypto mining, and a cooler winter ([23:42]).

Lighthearted Tech Trend

• Viral App: "Are You Dead?"
  • Popular in China: users confirm their wellbeing daily, or an alert is sent to emergency contacts ([24:16]).
  • Host quips about alternative app names for the US.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Economic Realism – Jonathan Allen:

  "It's very difficult for a politician to talk to voters and tell them to believe the politician over what... would say is their lying wallet." ([02:38])

• On Trust in Political Partnerships – Jonathan Allen:

  "I don't think she [Warren] trusts him at all... But she, but also indicating she does not trust him to follow through on it." ([06:23])

• On Gender, Biology & Law – Shruti Swaminathan:

  "The largest known biological driver behind sex based differences in athletics is circulating testosterone levels… both athletes do not have the athletic advantage that Idaho and West Virginia claim." ([14:32])

• Reporter Prediction – Lawrence Hurley:

  "...it could be quite a narrow ruling that’s very limited to sports in the specific context of sports, and the fact that Title IX includes a provision that allows sex classifications based on biology." ([20:00])

• On the App Culture – Yasmin Vesugin:

  "I am just hoping that maybe we could change the name. Something like…I don't know, what's up buddy? Or you good or even you up?" ([24:46])

---

Useful Timestamps for Reference

• [01:00] – Episode content begins: inflation & economy
• [02:04] – Jonathan Allen on inflation and public sentiment
• [03:35] – Political crisis of affordability
• [05:30] – Trump-Warren policy conversation
• [07:08] – Foreign vs. domestic focus
• [10:29] – Supreme Court segment begins
• [11:32] – ACLU’s Shruti Swaminathan breaks down the court cases
• [14:32] – Arguments on hormones and advantages in sports
• [17:53] – Bostock and legal optimism
• [20:00] – Lawrence Hurley’s reporting from Supreme Court
• [21:08] – Headlines segment (TPS, House, global, health, environment, tech)

---

Tone & Style

Yasmin Vesugin maintains a direct, inquisitive, and slightly conversational tone throughout, ensuring complex issues are made accessible and placing a premium on public understanding and actionable insights. Guests and correspondents provide measured, expertise-driven commentary that balances facts, analysis, and, when appropriate, plain skepticism or hopefulness.

---

Summary Takeaway

This episode provides an accessible-yet-informative dive into how economic realities and cultural controversies are intersecting in US politics at the start of 2026. With developments in high-stakes Supreme Court cases, election-year economic strategies, and evolving cultural battles, “Here’s the Scoop” delivers exactly what the title promises: clear, quick, and insightful news coverage.

Transcript

[Tabs AI Platform Narrator]

If you are a CFO or controller, closing the books should not feel like a monthly fire drill. Contracts, billing and revenue recognition often live in different systems. Leaving finance to reconcile everything by hand. Just to close Tabs fixes this. Tabs is an AI native revenue platform that unifies erp, CRM and billing data to automate billing, collections and revenue recognition. Close faster and get paid sooner.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Learn [e-mail] at Nature's Bounty, the belief is simple.

[Nature's Bounty Narrator]

You already have a brilliant body. Supplements just help support your journey. For over 50 years, nature's bounty has offered vitamins and supplements to help you eat, sleep, thrive, repeat. From magnesium glycinate for heart and muscle support to hair growth capsules for fuller, thicker hair and probiotics with 20 billion live cultures for digestion, Nature's Bounty it's in your nature to thrive. Learn [e-mail] these statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Hey everybody. Welcome to here's the scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Vesugin. Today on the show, the Supreme Court's hearing oral arguments over whether states can ban transgender athletes from participating in girls and women's sports. We're gonna speak to a lawyer involved in the case. Plus, Bill and Hillary Clinton are refusing to appear in their scheduled depositions on Jeffrey Epstein before the House Oversight Committee. And some good news on the cancer front. Up first, though, the final consumer Price index report of 2025 is out and surprise, surprise, inflation is not going anywhere. According to the data, prices rose 2.7% in December compared to just a year ago. Meanwhile, the president is in Michigan today talking about what his administration has done for the economy and for affordability. But aren't American consumers buying what the president is putting down? I want to bring in Jonathan Allen. He is NBC News senior national politics reporter and he is joining us from the site in which the delivered that speech in Detroit, Michigan. Hence some of the background noise. Hey, John.

[Jonathan Allen]

Hey. As sorry about the echo.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Yeah, no, we appreciate you taking some time to talk to us today. Let's talk about this CPI number, this Consumer Price Index data out today. The White House press secretary, Caroline Levitt said that it confirms the president has, quote, defeated the inflation crisis inherited from the Biden administration. Is that what it's showing? Especially when you talk about the feels versus the reels. All right, we're looking at the CPI number. However, you're also talking to folks out there who Say, no, no, my groceries continue to go up. There is also, though, a drop in the price of gas.

[Jonathan Allen]

Yeah. I think it's very difficult for a politician to talk to voters and tell them to believe the politician over what the politician would say is their lying wallet. You know, people know whether things are easier or harder. And when you look at the inflation number, look, 2.7% in a vacuum is not a terrible inflation number. But 2.7% on top of 2.7%, things are much more expensive. And I've traveled the country extensively and in recent months, and a lot of people are hurting.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

So with that in mind, Right. We are nine months out from a midterm election. Everybody votes with the economy in mind, no matter what is happening overseas. The president's talking where you are today in Michigan, and he's talking about the affordability crisis, quote, unquote. Is this speech a sign of the strength of the economy or possible weaknesses? The administration sees it's a sign of crisis.

[Jonathan Allen]

The crisis the White House is feeling about the politics of affordability. After the president dismissed it, called it a Democratic hoax. You know, after the president has tried to say that everything he's already done has fixed the economy, and yet we are seeing new policy after new policy come out because the president knows that the American public's not buying it. This is now his third event on the economy in the last couple of months. Is trying to show people that he is focused on it, even as most of the headlines we're watching have to do with things that are going on overseas.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

All you got to do, though, is look at the numbers, as you mentioned. Right. 64%. According to this NBC News poll conducted in November and December, 64% of adults felt the country's on the wrong track with the economy remaining a top concern. That is not good for a president who wants to maintain control of the House and the Senate come November.

[Jonathan Allen]

Yeah. If Americans were to go to the polls today and vote based on the economy, which is typically what they vote on, it would be hard to see Republicans maintaining control of the House. The Senate's a little bit of a different beast. The climb for Democrats to take the Senate is a little higher. But this is why you're seeing the president scramble on this issue. He believes that his policies have been very good. He believes he's made the right decisions. He tells people, just wait, and the things I've already done will take effect. And yet here he is coming out with new policies after finding out that that just wasn't popular and When I say new policies, I mean he's taking on policies from, from Democrats, from, from the left. He wants to basically price controls on credit card interest rates and on mortgages. So, I mean, we'll see how it all plays out, obviously, in November. But for the time being, the President realizes that there is a huge problem or he wouldn't be making speeches like this.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

I got to talk about this conversation that the President had with a very unlikely bedfellow, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is cred did with creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. We know they discussed legislation to cap credit card interest rates. What else do we know about this conversation and any possible common ground they.

[Jonathan Allen]

Could have, Basically, what Warren said about this conversation. And I spoke to Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary yesterday, who confirmed that the conversation did take place. Senator Warren, observing, you know, sort of longtime protocol, did not read out what the President said to her, but she said what she talked to the President about. Basically, what she's saying to Trump is, yeah, I'll work with you, but I'm not going to give you a headline that we're working together if you're not willing to go to Congress and push your Republicans to do this policy that you have announced.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Does she trust him?

[Jonathan Allen]

Oh, I don't think she trusts him at all. I mean, for years he was calling her Pocahontas, and then yesterday he called her on the phone. Right. I mean, this is somebody he has ridiculed at every turn. And I think what she was suggesting yesterday is that she's willing to put that behind them, that she thinks that the policy is good enough, you know, to work on it. But she, but also indicating she does not trust him to follow through on it. You mentioned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that Elizabeth Warren was instrumental in creating. President Trump has tried to dismantle that. That is a watchdog for the American public on things like abuse by lenders. So, you know, I think the liberals are willing to work with him on this if he's willing to actually get it done. But they are there. I mean, they trust him about as far as they could throw him.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

I also want to talk about what's happening overseas, because you mentioned this briefly. Folks are looking at this, going, listen for folks that voted for him. We voted for you because you ran on America first, right? You were going to focus on us and get us out of all of these foreign wars. And instead the President is dabbling in Venezuela, he's dealing with Israel, Gaza, he's threatening Iran, so on and so forth.

[Jonathan Allen]

In my interviews with Trump supporters in recent weeks across the country, the one thing that more of them are disappointed about than anything else is his focus on foreign policy. They want him to focus on the economy at home, they want him to focus on immigration. So we're seeing that right there is a part of his base that for whom that is the top issue, who are very happy with what they're seeing and who see his attention to that as a sign that he cares about what's going on at home, not just around the world to the domestic economy. He has made some efforts to tie the foreign policy to domestic economics. But, you know, for example, putting American oil companies in Venezuela or taking 30 to 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil and making them American, which we saw him do, that basically amounts to maybe $2 billion, $3 billion, depending on the price of oil on a given day. He wants to take Greenland and take their minerals. He's got a minimalist deal with Ukraine, if, you know, so the US Spends money on Ukraine and over time, Ukraine allows the US to capitalize on its minerals. I think, you know, you hear him tie those things through the domestic economy, but certainly much more in a long term sense than in an immediate sense. I mean, the idea that the US Consumer is going to be benefiting from minerals in Greenland, an area that currently belongs to Denmark, anytime in Trump's presidency is hard to fathom.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

John Allen, thank you, sir.

[Jonathan Allen]

Thank you, Yasmin.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

We are going to take a very quick break and when we are back, the Supreme Court weighs state restrictions on transgender student athletes. Stick with us.

[Pandora/Expedia Advertiser]

Pandora makes it easy for you to find your favorite music. Discover new artists and genres by selecting any song or album, and we'll make you a personalized station for free download on the Apple App Store or Google Play and enjoy the soundtrack to your life.

[Jonathan Allen]

CIDP can make your daily routine feel not so routine. The good news? With a self injection for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, you have the option to treat at home. Discover [e-mail] and talk to your doctor. That's cidpselfinjection.com brought to you by Argenics.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With Greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on your kids spending. With real time notifications, kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely. And parents can rest easy knowing their kids are Learning about money with guardrails in place. Sign up for Greenlight [e-mail] podcast.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Welcome back to here's the scoop from NBC News. Today. The Supreme Court dove into one of the most anticipated debates of the term. Can states ban transgender women from competing on female sports teams? The justices heard arguments in two cases from Idaho and West Virginia, which have passed laws that would prohibit trans girls from participating on teams consistent with their gender identity. Federal district courts blocked both of those laws from being enforced. The outcome of these cases is going to determine the fate of those laws and similar measures in 27 other states. The Trump administration has already moved to pull federal funding from schools and institutions that allow trans athletes to participate women's sports. As we know it will die.

[Jonathan Allen]

They'll end.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

It'll end. So will this ruling protect the fairness of women's sports, or will it shut a group of students out of public life? I want to bring in Shruti Swaminathan, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU who has worked closely with the plaintiffs in this case. Hi, Shruti.

[Shruti Swaminathan]

Hi. It's so nice to be here with you.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Great to have you. I want to start at the beginning here. If you could walk me through the cases and what your team is arguing.

[Shruti Swaminathan]

Sure. So there are two cases before the Supreme Court, West Virginia v. BPJ and Little v. Heacox. Both involve the participation of a transgender girl and a transgender woman in sports. BPJ is at the K12 level and Hecox is at the college level. This all started in 2020 in Idaho and 2021 in West Virginia when both states passed laws that categorically bar transgender girls and women from playing on girls and women's sports teams. And our client, Lindsay Hecox, has since decided that, you know, she no longer wants to participate in sports. And so, you know, she filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss her case. This was due to a couple of changed circumstances, including the fact that she just wants to graduate. She is so close to reaching that goal, and she doesn't want anything to sort of impede in that ability for her to do so. And regardless of the outcome of the case, you know, Lindsey will not be participating in sports anymore, but Becky's case is still active and live in front of the court.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

I wanna kind of take folks through the TikTok of it all, because if you can, first help us explain Lindsey's case along with Becky's case as well, who they are, what happened to them, who decided to challenge this in the courts.

[Shruti Swaminathan]

So, you know, Lindsay Hecox is a college student, and when she filed this case, she had the intention of participating on her colle track team. And unfortunately, she was not competitive enough to make the NCAA team at her college in Idaho. And she ended up participating in intramural club sports, club soccer. Idaho's law is so overbroad that it encompasses club sports as well. And Becky is, at the time that we filed the case, she was an 11 year old middle school student seeking to run on her girls cross country team at school. And West Virginia passed HB3 293 in 20 barring her and only her. I think that's important to note. In both cases, the state of Idaho and the state of West Virginia have only identified Lindsay Hickox and Becky Pepper Jackson as athletes to whom the law even applies. So in Lindsay's case, we are challenging the statute as unconstitutional as applied to her under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. And in Becky's case, we also are challenging West Virginia's statute as being discriminatorily and unconstitutionally applied to her under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and Title IX, which is the federal statute that prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs. So both cases raise very similar claims, and both clients are specifically situated in that Lindsay Hecox has, you know, identified as a woman for several years now and has taken medication that allows her to live as the woman that she is. You know, she has taken testosterone suppression and estrogen that allows her to live as the girl that she is. And in Becky's case, Becky has never experienced her endogenous puberty. She started puberty delaying treatment at the start of her puberty and then continued on to hormone treatment as she continued in her medical care. And so in both cases, both athletes do not have the athletic advantage that Idaho and West Virginia claim is sort of the impetus for the laws that they've passed. Right. They claim that these laws reflect real biological differences between men and women with respect to athletic performance. But the largest known biological driver behind sex based differences in athletics is circulating testosterone levels. And those typically diverge between boys and girls starting at puberty. And both laws exclude any consideration of hormones, making it so that transgender girls and women could never participate in girl sports at any age, at any level of competition, regardless of whether, like Lindsay and like Becky. And they have taken steps to mitigate and control for any sex based advantage.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

So last June, in a 6 to 3 ruling, the justices upheld a Tennessee law that banned puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors seeking to transition to match their gender identity. Do you think the outcome of that case is going to have an impact on this one?

[Shruti Swaminathan]

You know, I think it's. I think it's very clear that the past few years have not been good years in terms of the rights of trans folks. You know, there have been attacks at the state level, and with this new administration, we have the entire federal government focused on rolling back rights and recognition of trans people. I mean, you even have President Trump signed an executive order that it's the policy of the United States that trans folks, we simply don't exist. And so that's obviously the context in which all of this is unfolding. This is a follow up case to the Scrametti decision, which, as you said, was decided last year. And in that case, the specific issue was Tennessee's law barring gender affirming medical care for minors. And the state, you know, got its way in that case. The Supreme Court issued a really disappointing ruling on the specific issue of medical care. But the opinion was written in a narrower way. It was addressing the specific issue of medical context. And the court made clear that it wasn't addressing larger questions about what standard scrutiny for discrimination against trans people is more generally applicable. So it was a surprise one week later when the court took these sports cases where there is potentially larger questions baked in about discrimination against trans people more generally. And the question remains, is that discrimination presumptively constitutional or presumptively unconstitutional?

[Yasmin Vesugin]

We've talked about how there could be negative precedent against the argument that you're making, but there have been some positive decisions in favor of LGBTQ rights even in this court. In 2020, we had the landmark decision in Bostock versus Clayton County. You even had conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch write the majority talk about that ruling and whether or not that has any implications in these cases.

[Shruti Swaminathan]

You know, we've had uphill fights before, and we've won them. And even back when Bostock was decided, which, again, like you said, it's a decision saying that discrimination against LGBT people is sex discrimination under Title vii. And a lot of people predicted that we would lose those cases, and we didn't. Right. And so we're ready to make our argument in court. But I think there's, like, two dynamics to look out for here. Right. You know, first is what is going to be the outcome of this specific case. And the other thing at play is how broad a reasoning the court uses to get there. And so I think, you know, there's a false narrative that the people defending the rights of trans Folks have been the ones to propel this sports issue in court and in public opinion. And, you know, I think it's important to highlight that the opposite is really true. Right. You know, why were these laws passed in the first place? And I'm talking in the specific context of sports. You know, they were passed in order to establish a principle in law and in public opinion that trans girls aren't the same as cisgender girls. You know, our job here is to both defend the rights of Becky and of Lindsay to be a kid just like anyone else and have the same middle school and high school and college experience as their peers. But at the same time, our job is to make sure that regardless of what people think about sports, that it's not used to advance a broader attack on the rights of trans people and the victories that we've secured over the last year, you know, five years especially, but especially in 2020. And so, you know, I think some of the tea leaves that we can read from Scremetti are that at the time, six of the justices in Scrometti were unwilling to sign on to this broader decision and broader vision. Right. Kavanaugh and Roberts and Gorsuch, they could have written a separate concurrence in Scrometti, but they didn't. And so what we can glean from that is, at least in that point in time, they wanted to keep stuff narrower. Right. And the question is, are they going to take the same approach here or not?

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Shruti Swaminathan, thank you.

[Shruti Swaminathan]

Thank you so much.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

Our senior Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley attended oral arguments where he says it appears the Supreme Court will side with the states.

[Lawrence Hurley]

Based on oral arguments, the conservative majority seems unlikely to embrace the arguments made by the challenges that the laws violate either the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment or Title 9, the federal law that bars discrimination in education. Although this case had the potential to have big implications for transgender rights in general, some of the comments made by justices, including Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of the conservatives in the majority, indicate it could be quite a narrow ruling that's very limited to sports in the specific context of sports, and the fact that Title IX includes a provision that allows sex classifications based on biology.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

All right, let's get to some headlines. The Trump administration is ending temporary protected status for Somali immigrants. U.S. citizenship and Immigration Services confirmed on social media that Somalis living in the United States under TPS will be required to leave by March 17th. It is just the latest in the administration's crackdown on Somali immigrants, particularly in Minnesota. NBC News senior Homeland Security correspondent Julia.

[Julia Ainslie]

Ainslie has more Temporary protected status shields immigrants from a certain nation from being deported back to their home country because of the conditions there. Think Haiti earthquake 2010. Anyone in the US from Haiti at the time the earthquake struck, not after, is allowed to stay. That way. They don't attract more people to come, but they protect the people who are in the United States from being sent back to a place that cannot support them. So many Somalis came to the United states in the mid-90s during the country's civil war, and they stayed largely as the country has been in a state of unrest ever since. Now we understand the Trump administration will move to revoke it, but it could end up in court, much like the Trump administration's move to revoke temporary protected status for other nationalities, most recently for Venezuelans.

[Yasmin Vesugin]

The Republican led House Oversight Committee says it'll seek to hold former President Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress after he failed to appear before the committee on Tuesday. Clinton had been subpoenaed for a deposition as part of the committee's probe into the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, former secretary Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also subpoenaed and scheduled to appear on Wednesday. But in a letter to committee chair James Comer, the Clinton said they would not be showing up, calling the investigation, quote, partisan politics. In a separate letter to Comer, the Clintons lawyers wrote that the subpoenas were, quote, invalid and legally unenforceable because, among other things, the testimony has no connection to a legislative purpose. In South Korean independent counsel is seeking the death penalty for former President Yoon Suk Yul, accusing him of rebellion. Yoon was removed from office after briefly imposing martial law In December of 2024, plunging South Korea into political turmoil and shaking up its financial markets. He now faces criminal trials over that and other scandals during his time in office. The court is expected to deliver a verdict in February. The US has reached a watershed moment in the fight against cancer. According to the American Cancer Society's annual report, seven in ten people now survive at least five years after diagnosis. That is a major improvement since the 1970s, when only half of those diagnosed lived for five years. The report's lead author cites better treatment options, earlier detection and less smoking as main contributing factors. US Carbon pollution is up after years of declines. A new study from the independent research firm the Rhodium Group showed that the US emitted 2.4% more greenhouse gases last year than the year before. They are attributing that to the explosive growth of data centers, cryptocurrency mining and a cooler winter. Scientists say greenhouse gases are the major cause of worsening global climate change. And before we go, if you've got friends that frequently go mia, they're not answering texts for days or weeks on end. This next one is for you. A new app is now topping the charts in China called Are you dead? I know it's morbid, but here's how it works. So once a day, users are prompted to hit a green button confirming they are in fact alive, still breathing. And if you miss it for a couple of days, the app is actually going to send a message to your emergency contacts to give them a heads up. So as the population here is aging and divorce rates are increasing, there is a loneliness epidemic. So maybe this app could actually work here. I am just hoping that maybe we could change the name. Something like I don't know, what's up buddy? Or you good or even you up? All right, that's gonna do it for us. Here's the scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Vesugin. We'll be back tomorrow with whatever the day may bring. And if you like what you heard, subscribe. Wherever you get your podcasts. We'll see you tomorrow.

[Pandora/Expedia Advertiser]

Packages by Expedia. You were made to occasionally take the hard route to the top of the Eiffel Tower. We were made to easily bundle your trip Expedia Made to travel flight inclusive packages are atoll protected.