A federal judge on Tuesday temporarily halted President Trump's effort to temporarily pause federal grant, loan and financial assistance programs, multiple outlets reported.

The big picture: U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan blocked Trump's order minutes before it was to take effect, with an administrative stay that expires Monday.

Zoom in: The judge's order is in response to a complaint filed earlier Tuesday by the National Council of Nonprofits, the American Public Health Association, the Main Street Alliance and SAGE.

• They argued the funding freeze targets grant recipients based on their opinions on issues like climate change or diversity, equity and inclusion.
• Trump's memo "will have a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of grant recipients who depend on the inflow of grant money," the complaint said.

Zoom out: Democratic attorney generals and members of Congress also said they plan to sue over the freeze.

Context: The Office of Management and Budget sent a memo to federal agencies Monday night directing them to "temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance."

• The memo created confusion among federal agencies and state governments, and some states reportedly lost access to a portal used to manage Medicaid spending.
• The White House said in a follow-up memo Tuesday, that "the pause does not apply across-the-board" and is "expressly limited" to funding areas like DEI targeted by Trump's executive orders.

Editor's note: This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the Trump administration's temporary pause on some federal spending as Democrats sounded the alarm about programs like Medicaid going dark.

The big picture: The freeze, which a federal judge halted Tuesday, would not effect programs like Social Security, Medicare, and welfare benefits, Leavitt said.

• Leavitt told reporters the pause was to ensure "every penny that is going out the door is not conflicting with the executive orders and actions that this president has taken."
• However, that left nonprofits and organizations that rely on federal funds like Meals on Wheels scrambling to assess the freeze's impact.

Catch up quick: An Office of Management and Budget memo, sent to the heads of executive departments and agencies gave them until Feb. 10 to submit details on programs, projects or activities subject to the indefinite pause.

• It also instructed agencies to assign a senior political appointee to oversee each federal financial assistance program and ensure it "conforms to Administration priorities."
• Federal Pell Grants and direct student loans will not be impacted by the freeze, Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Education, told Axios in a statement.

Yes, but: While the administrations said assistance "received directly by individuals" is in the clear, Democrats pounced to highlight the various programs affected by the freeze.

• Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) highlighted concerns from a domestic violence center that serves multiple counties, writing on X that "they may have to close their doors" without federal funding.
• Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) posted that several agencies in his region had been "completely cut off."
• Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote that his staff confirmed Medicaid portals were down in all 50 states amid the freeze. Leavitt later posted that the White House was aware of the portal outage and that no payments had been affected.
• Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens said the 18,000 people who rely on housing vouchers "currently do not know how their rent will be paid next month, and workers across various federally funded programs risk losing their pay."

Friction point: Trump's freeze appears to conflict with the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that directs presidents to release all funds appropriated by Congress.

• Leavitt argued the freeze was "certainly within the confines of the law."
• While the law does allow presidents to delay funding under some circumstances, it doesn't allow freezing funds to decide if programs are "consistent with the president's policies," said Samuel Bagenstos, a University of Michigan professor and former General Counsel to the OMB.

What's next: Bobby Kogan, the senior director of Federal Budget Policy at the Center for American Progress who served in the Biden OMB, said to think of the freeze like a government shutdown: "It's bad immediately, and the longer it goes on, the worse it gets."

Go deeper: Democrats prepare for war with Trump over funding freeze

Human-caused climate change made the Los Angeles-area fires more likely and more destructive, according to a study out Tuesday.

Why it matters: The study — from an international group of 32 climate researchers — shows how climate change fits into the myriad factors that made the multiple blazes one of California's most destructive and expensive wildfire disasters on record.

• "Overall the paper finds that climate change has made the Los Angeles fires more likely despite some statistical uncertainty," said Gabi Hegerl, a climate scientist at the University of Edinburgh who wasn't involved in the study, in a statement.

Zoom in: In making their conclusions, World Weather Attribution researchers zeroed in on the high winds; weather whiplash from unusually wet to extremely dry conditions preceding the fires; and long-term trends.

• The scientists found that low rainfall from October through December is now more than twice as likely compared to the climate that existed before humans began burning fossil fuels such as oil, coal and gas for energy.
• But they didn't conclusively tie this to climate change.

They also concluded that the LA fire season is becoming longer, with "highly flammable drought conditions" lasting about 23 more days now than during the preindustrial era.

• This makes for greater overlap between warm and dry conditions and strong Santa Ana offshore winds that can cause fires to spread quickly.

Zoom out: The study isn't the last word on this topic, nor does it come without uncertainties. But its findings are in line with other research.

By the numbers: According to the study, the hot, dry and windy conditions that propelled the flames into communities such as Altadena and Pacific Palisades were about 35%, or 1.35 times, more likely today due to the warming from burning fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal, when compared to the preindustrial climate.

• These conditions, as measured by the Fire Weather Index, would become another 35%, or 1.8 times, more likely to occur in January if global warming reaches 2.6°C (4.68°F) above preindustrial levels.
• This amount of warming is a lower bound for what is expected by the end of the century, as the world is currently on course for upwards of 3°C (5.4°F) of warming.
• The Fire Weather Index takes multiple factors into account, including temperature, humidity, wind speed and the amount of preceding precipitation.

What they're saying: "Climate change set the stage, helping turn the hills around LA tinder-dry," said Roop Singh of the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre in a statement.

• "However, hurricane-force Santa Ana winds, the rapid spread of fires into urban zones, and a strained water system all made the blazes extremely difficult to contain," he said.

The intrigue: Climate change is also at least doubling the chances for below-average October through December rainfall in the LA area, the researchers found,

• In addition, hotter air temperatures are also making the atmosphere more efficient at evaporating moisture from the Earth's surface.
• Plants dry out faster in hotter temperatures, causing them to burn more easily.
• The study found a greater chance that drier, more combustible conditions will now overlap with the peak Santa Ana wind season in December and January.

Yes, but: The study based the rainfall trend analysis on both observational data and climate models. The models didn't show clear trends in rainfall or the fire season's end date — while the observational data did, and other published studies have as well.

• This study, like the dozens of other climate attribution studies that come soon after an extreme weather event, has yet to undergo peer review but is based on proven methods.

How they did it: The researchers used peer-reviewed methods to examine how fire events and risk in Southern California have changed since the preindustrial era.

• They conducted multiple analyses with observations and computer models.

They noted recent research showing that "hydroclimate whiplash" from very wet to drought conditions enables and worsens such wildfire events.

• In addition to this study's methods, the authors took into account peer-reviewed literature showing an increasing risk of wildfires and uptick in the extent of burned land, including in the West and Southwest, as the world warms.

Between the lines: The study notes that El Niño and La Niña, two natural climate cycles in the tropical Pacific Ocean, influence Southern California's seasonal precipitation.

The bottom line: "This is a carefully researched result that should be taken seriously," Hegerl said.

The White House will issue a memo Tuesday offering to pay federal workers who don't want to return to the office through Sept. 30, as long as they resign by Feb. 6, an administration official tells Axios.

Why it matters: It's an acceleration in President Trump's already unprecedented purge of the federal workforce.

What they're saying: "The government-wide email being sent today is to make sure that all federal workers are on board with the new administration's plan to have federal employees in office and adhering to higher standards. We're five years past COVID and just 6 percent of federal employees work full-time in office. That is unacceptable," a senior administration official tells Axios.

• The White House expects 5% to 10% of federal employees to accept the offer, which would potentially mean hundreds of thousands of people.
• The administration projects the buyouts could ultimately save taxpayers up to $100 billion a year.

Zoom out: The offer applies to all full-time federal employees, except for military personnel, the Postal Service, and those working in immigration enforcement or national security.

Between the lines: Many federal workers are already feeling scared about the administration's crackdown on DEI, its return-to-office policy and the effort to reclassify civil servants.

• That unease could increase take-up on this new offer.

State of play: Earlier on Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the president has the authority to fire federal employees.

• While that is true about at-will political appointees, federal workers have more protections.
• Leavitt was defending Trump's firings of at least a dozen agency inspectors general.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with background on the administration's memo.

Newly released guidelines suggest a wide range of federal employees could lose employment protections under President Trump's new Schedule F.

Why it matters: The memo, released Monday by the Office of Personnel and Management (OPM), indicates that the Trump team is looking to reclassify thousands of federal employees and strip them of legal protections from political firings, legal experts say.

• It's "broadly worded; just about anyone in the civil service could be swept up into this category," Alan Lescht, a D.C.-based employment lawyer who represents federal workers, tells Axios.

State of play: OPM's memo sets deadlines for agencies to determine which workers might be subjected to Trump's executive order. And it offers recommendations for who should be considered, including those who:

• Are involved in "important policy-making or policy-determining functions," like directing "an organizational unit," overseeing the success of "specific programs or projects" or "monitoring progress toward organizational goals";
• Have the authority "to bind the agency to a position, policy or course of action" or "to make decisions committed by law to the discretion of the agency head";
• Are involved in agency grant-making, "such as the substantive exercise of discretion in the drafting of funding opportunity announcements, evaluation of grant applications or recommending or selecting grant recipients";
• Advocate for agency or administration policies "before different governmental entities";
• Advocate publicly for agency or administration policies, "including before the news media or on social media";
• Have position descriptions "entailing policy-making, policy-determining or policy-advocating duties."

The fine print: The expanded employee categories are "guideposts," per the memo.

• Positions outside the categories explicitly described can be recommended for reclassification "so long as the agency demonstrates that the position is of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating character."

Agencies have 90 days to conduct a preliminary review of their employees, determine which should be reclassified as "Schedule Policy/Career," per the descriptions above, and send the information to OPM, according to the memo.

• Agencies will have another 120 days to finalize and submit their information.

Catch up quick: Trump last week resurrected parts of his Schedule F executive order from October 2020, rescinded by former President Biden when he took office months later.

• It comes on the heels of Trump's campaign promises to slash the size of the "deep state" federal government and fire "rogue bureaucrats and career politicians."

What they're saying: The executive order and the guidance is a way to make it easier to fire civil servants and turn what had been career jobs into political appointments, said Sharon Parrott, head of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and a former Office of Management and Budget appointee under Obama.

• The moves "will almost surely lead many expert knowledgeable career civil servants to withhold their best advice," Parrott tells Axios.

Lescht says the OPM memo appears to directly contradict the thrust of the longstanding law governing civil servants.

• The lawmakers who passed the Civil Service Act of 1978, he says, likely "never expected that this rule was going to be expanded to obliterate the due process protections of hundreds of thousands of people who have zero to do with making policy."

The memo also directs agency heads to ignore a regulation issued by the Biden administration that created more protections for civil servants facing reclassification — but that's not the way the law works, says Lescht.

The intrigue: The memo prohibits patronage when filling reclassified roles, saying agencies must "hire the candidates with the knowledge, skills, abilities and experience that make them best equipped," and says applicants and career employees don't have to personally support Trump or his policies.

• But workers must "faithfully implement administration policies to the best of their ability. Failure to do so will be grounds for dismissal."
• The fact that the memo explicitly spells out that "patronage remains prohibited" is telling, says Lescht. Of course, patronage is illegal, he says. "I'd say they're protesting a little bit too much."

What we're watching: There's going to be numerous challenges on this, says Lescht.

• The National Treasury Employees Union already filed suit last week over the initial executive order.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed immigrant rights groups' fears that the Trump administration sees all undocumented immigrants as "criminals" and isn't just seeking to deport those who commit violent acts.

Driving the news: In her first White House briefing, Leavitt falsely labeled all 3,500 immigrants arrested for suspicion of being in the country illegally "criminals." Being in the country illegally is a civil violation, not a criminal one, and the individuals who were arrested have not been convicted of a crime.

The big picture: Asked by a reporter how many of the 3,500 immigrants arrested since Trump took office have criminal records, Leavitt said, "all of them because they illegally broke our nation's laws."

• "I know the last administration didn't see it that way, so it's a big culture shift in our nation to view someone who breaks our immigration laws as a criminal, but that's exactly what they are."
• Leavitt declined to say if all the undocumented immigrants had criminal records.

Reality check: There is no law making it a crime to live in the U.S. as an undocumented immigrant. Instead, the law treats it as a civil violation.

• Those detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) away from the U.S.-Mexico border have a right to a hearing with an immigration judge to determine if they can stay in the U.S. or not.
• Less than 0.5% of the 1.8 million cases in immigration courts during the past fiscal year — involving about 8,400 people — included deportation orders for alleged crimes other than entering the U.S. illegally, an Axios review of government data found.

State of play: President Trump said in his inauguration speech that his administration would quickly deport "millions and millions" of "illegal aliens" with criminal records. Those millions don't exist.

• In the past 40 years, federal officials have documented about 425,000 noncitizens with criminal convictions on the ICE's "non-detained docket."
• About 13,100 of those were convicted of homicides and are imprisoned in the U.S. They'll have deportation hearings after serving their sentences.

During the campaign, Trump falsely said undocumented immigrants were responsible for rising crime (when data showed crime was going down).

To deport millions of "criminals," Trump would have to consider all undocumented immigrants as criminals — something it appears to be doing with Leavitt's latest comments.

• Leavitt said "rapists" and "murderers" should be ICE's priority, but that doesn't mean others are off the table.

Yes, but: The federal government, since the Clinton administration, has always prioritized deporting immigrants convicted of violent crimes after they serve their sentences.

• Immigrants convicted of violent crimes can't just immediately be deported and must go through the state or federal court system.
• Very rarely does ICE allow undocumented immigrants with convictions for dangerous felonies to return to the public after serving time. Those immigrants usually go through deportation proceedings after serving their sentences.

Zoom in: Immigrants arrested in homicides accounted for less than 1% of "at-large" arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) over the last six years, an Axios review found.

• At-large arrests are those made in public settings, as opposed to when ICE agents pick up someone who's already behind bars.

Between the lines: Karen Tumlin, director of the immigrant legal advocacy group Justice Action Center, predicted to Axios that the Trump administration would call all undocumented immigrants "criminals" as an excuse to separate families and go after non-violent immigrants.

• The estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. are largely agricultural, construction and service workers, students and others who have no criminal backgrounds, according to legal specialists and an Axios review of federal immigration data.

Study after study has indicated that immigrants — those in the U.S. legally, and those who aren't — commit crimes at lower rates than U.S. citizens.

Further reading: Why Trump won't be deporting "millions" of criminals

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said at her first press briefing that the National Security Council was "looking into" the potential security implications of AI breakthroughs from China's DeepSeek, which have rocked Silicon Valley and Wall Street this week.

Why it matters: DeepSeek's low-cost but highly advanced models have shaken the consensus that the U.S. had a strong lead in the AI race with China. Responding to a question from Axios' Mike Allen, Leavitt said President Trump saw this as a "wake-up call" for the U.S. AI industry, but remained confident "we'll restore American dominance."

• Leavitt said she had personally discussed the matter with the NSC earlier on Tuesday.

Driving the news: DeepSeek's app rocketed to #1 in Apple's app store on Sunday night, surpassing U.S. rival ChatGPT in daily downloads.

• Its emergence also tanked the stock of AI chipmaker Nvidia because the Chinese startup's success suggests fewer highly advanced chips may be needed to develop cutting-edge AI than previously thought.

Between the lines: Beyond the economic effects on America's most valuable tech companies, all of which have invested heavily in AI, it's unclear what precisely the national security ramifications might be.

• Some users have reported that its chatbots are unwilling to discuss human rights abuses in China or events like Tiananmen Square.

What they're saying: In the combative tone that characterized much of her first briefing, Leavitt claimed the Biden administration "sat on its hands and allowed China to rapidly develop this AI program," while Trump had moved quickly to appoint an AI czar and loosen regulations on the AI industry.

Reality check: President Biden imposed a string of executive orders to restrict the access of Chinese firms to top-of-the-line chips and the tools needed to make them, precisely to preserve the U.S. advantages in both semiconductors and AI development.

• DeepSeek had already obtained some of Nvidia's more advanced chips before those restrictions came into force but still says it managed to develop its model with far less money and computing power than its American rivals.
• DeepSeek's breakthroughs suggest America's strategy of withholding technology from China might just be speeding up the evolution of its rival's AI knowhow, Axios' Scott Rosenberg reports.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday defended President Trump's firings of at least a dozen agency inspectors general, saying Supreme Court precedent allows him the broad power to fire federal employees.

The big picture: The legality of the ousters last week has been questioned by Democrats and even by some Republicans.

• The law states a 30-day notice must be given to Congress in writing before firing an inspector general — which did not happen with the Trump dismissals.

What she's saying: Asked about the firings in her first White House press briefing, Leavitt said it's the belief of the White House and the White House Counsel's Office that Trump was within his executive authority to do so.

• "He is the executive of the executive branch, and therefore he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to," she said.
• She indicated the firings were done through a memo sent out by the White House Presidential Personnel Office.

Zoom in: Leavitt said the White House rests the legality of the firings on the Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case that went before the Supreme Court in 2020.

• The court ruled the president can generally remove executive officers but with two exceptions, one which requires Congressional oversight and the other for so-called "inferior" federal officers who don't have policymaking or administrative authority.

Between the lines: During his first term, Trump often clashed with and ousted IGs, prompting Congress to pass a law in 2022 requiring presidents to provide them with 30 days' notice and a "substantial rationale" for such firings.

• Trump defended his actions over the weekend, telling reporters, "Some people thought that some were unfair or some were not doing their job. And it's a very standard thing to do."

Zoom out: Trump continued with more controversial removals this week, firing the acting chair of the National Labor Relations Board, the general counsel of the labor board and the three Democratic members of a top independent intelligence review board.

• He's also wiped nearly all of the government's cybersecurity and surveillance advisers from its roster.

Go deeper: Scoop: Top House Dems plot first big battle with Trump

The U.S. military transferred around 90 Patriot air defense interceptors from storage in Israel to Poland this week in order to deliver them to Ukraine, three sources with knowledge of the operation tell Axios.

Why it matters: Getting more Patriot missiles to Ukraine has been a top priority for the Pentagon to help Kyiv defend against Russia's attacks on its critical infrastructure.

• This is also the most significant delivery of weapons from Israel to Ukraine since the Russian invasion almost three years ago.

Catch up quick: Last April, the Israeli Air Force officially decommissioned the Patriot air defense system, more than 30 years after it was first given to Israel during the first Gulf War.

• The system became less relevant as Israel developed its own air defense systems, and most Patriot batteries were used for training or left in storage.

Behind the scenes: The sources tell Axios that after the IDF announced the decommissioning, Ukrainian officials approached the U.S. and Israel with an idea: Israel would give those missiles back to the U.S. to be refurbished and sent on to Ukraine

• For several months, Israel dragged its feet out of concern Russia would retaliate, perhaps by supplying sophisticated weapons to Iran.
• A Ukrainian official tells Axios Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to take his calls on that issue for weeks.
• But in late September, Netanyahu finally approved the idea, an Israeli official says.

Friction point: At the time, Netanyahu wanted to speak with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in order to get his approval for ultra-Orthodox Israelis to make an annual pilgrimage to the city of Uman in Ukraine, where a famous Rabbi is buried.

• Zelensky wouldn't take his call until Netanyahu approved the Patriot deal, the Ukrainian official says.
• A spokesperson for Netanyahu told Axios the prime minister didn't object to the decommissioning of the Patriot system and its return to the U.S. and denied any connection between this and the pilgrimage.
• The Pentagon declined to comment for this story, as did a spokesperson for U.S. European Command.

Between the lines: A senior Israeli official told me Israel informed Russia in advance of the move and stressed it was "only returning the Patriot system to the U.S." and not supplying weapons to Ukraine.

• The official said Israel told Russia it was a similar move to the one the U.S. made two years ago when it transferred artillery shells from emergency storage in Israel to Ukraine.
• A spokesperson for the Israeli prime minister's office confirmed a Patriot system had been returned to the U.S., adding "it is not known to us whether it was delivered to Ukraine."

State of play: In recent days, U.S. Air Force C-17 planes arrived at an air base in southern Israel and departed for Rzeszów in Eastern Poland, a hub for moving weapons into Ukraine.

• The sources said the flight transferred roughly 90 patriot interceptors that can be used by Ukraine with its current patriot batteries.
• The flights carried around 90 interceptors, which Ukraine can use with its current batteries. Additional equipment, like radars and other gear, will first be transferred to the U.S. to be refurbished.

What they're saying: Zelensky and Netanyahu spoke Tuesday, and Zelensky tweeted that they had discussed the release of the hostages as part of the Gaza ceasefire deal.

• "We also discussed maintaining close contact with partners, particularly the United States and President Trump. We addressed current bilateral matters and agreed to maintain close contact in the near future," Zelensky added.

Go deeper:

• Trump says he wants to meet Putin soon to discuss a Ukraine peace deal
• Trump threatens tariffs if Russia doesn't end Ukraine war

Senate Democrats are expected to block a bill sanctioning the ICC on Tuesday, a show of Democratic unity after a week of internal dissent.

Why it matters: If Democrats follow this, this stonewalling is their first concrete action since Trump's inauguration to thwart the GOP agenda.

• Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) told Axios on Tuesday that Democrats and Republicans were unable to reach a deal on the ICC bill, and that the caucus plans to block the bill on the floor Tuesday.
• It will also give them leverage to change the ICC bill, which could help Democrats in Trump states avoid a controversial vote.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt took on a combative tone with the media at her first press briefing Tuesday, vowing to hold them accountable for telling the truth.

Why it matters: Tuesday's press briefing offered the first glimpse of how the new Trump administration plans to shape its relationship to the media as it presses forward with revamping the federal government.

The big picture: Leavitt said the new Trump White House would prioritize nontraditional media outlets in the media briefing room.

• These "new media" outlets — like podcasters, independent journalists and social media influencers — will now be able to apply for White House press credentials.
• Leavitt also lauded the changes as in line with the Trump administration's openness, calling Trump the "most transparent and accessible president in American history."

Between the lines: Leavitt's tone echoed Trump's longtime hostility towards many legacy media outlets.

• "We know for a fact that there have been lies that have been pushed by many legacy media outlets about this president," Leavitt said.
• Instead, Leavitt committed to "telling the truth from this podium every single day," and said the White House would "call out" media outlets for pushing any perceived misinformation.

Go deeper: Trump ramps up legal threats against news outlets

Southern California continues to reel from the devastating wildfires that ripped through Los Angeles County earlier this month, prompting questions about whether it will be ready to host the 2028 Olympics as planned.

Why it matters: It could take several years for the Los Angeles area to recover from the blazes, creating a potential clash of timing and resources needed to prepare for the Games.

State of play: Organizers of the L.A. Games have pitched the Games as a "no build" feat, instead taking advantage of existing venues across the city, and some temporary builds.

• While none of the recent wildfires damaged the existing venues, some were in areas where the flames drew near.

Zoom in: The Palisades Fire, the largest blaze, ripped through much of the Pacific Palisades area between Malibu and Santa Monica, where the 2028 Games are slated to host golfing. The Riviera Country Club where golf events will be held was evacuated due to the fire.

• The UCLA campus, set to become the Olympic Village, was just outside the Palisades Fire's evacuation and warning zones.
• The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, near the site of the Eaton Fire and within the fire's evacuation zone, is set to receive an up to $85 million renovation ahead of hosting soccer events at the 2028 Games.
• The fires also damaged L.A. County's sewer, power and transportation systems throughout the city, as well as public infrastructure like streetlights, all of which will need to be repaired before millions of visitors descend on the city.

Between the lines: Rebuilding entire neighborhoods while preparing to host a 17-day global sporting event that could draw 15 million people to the city and its surrounding area is a tall order.

• But it's still possible for L.A. County to prepare for the Games and simultaneously rebuild, Jadrian Wooten, an associate professor at Virginia Tech who focuses on the economics of sports, told Axios.
• "Most of the heavy organizational work for the Games doesn't kick in until about a year before the event," he added.

However, construction for some of the temporary venues could end up "competing for resources with other folks as you're trying to rebuild damaged area of the cities," Victor Matheson, a College of the Holy Cross professor who specializes in sports economics, told Axios.

• This might not stop the Games from happening, but it could increase the costs of building temporary facilities, Matheson added.

Caveat: The recent wildfires highlighted the intense risk of large-scale urban wildfires, which are becoming all the more frequent due to climate change.

• So even as L.A. rushes to rebuild, if it doesn't take measures to make itself more resilient in the future — like developing urban water systems equipped to fight massive fires and creating buffer zones — it could remain just as vulnerable to future conflagrations.
• While the fires had "a relatively minor impact on the Games" this time around, "that may not necessarily be true in the coming years," Wooten told Axios.

The big picture: The region's officials remain adamant that Los Angeles will be able to accomplish everything in time.

• California Gov. Gavin Newsom told NBC's "Meet the Press" this month that the region would be able to rebuild and prepare to host the Olympics — as well as the 2026 World Cup and the 2027 Super Bowl.
• "There is no reason to believe that the fires will adversely impact or delay preparations for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, which are already well underway," Paul Krekorian, executive director of L.A.'s Office of Major Events, said in a statement.
• LA28 did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.

Go deeper:

• How Los Angeles is preparing for the 2028 Olympics
• Scoop: Trump pledges to make L.A. Olympics "the greatest games"

The Trump administration has directed agencies to suspend all federal grants and loans starting at close of business Tuesday.

Why it matters: The new administration is showing signs — in its unilateral actions and legislative strategy — that it is more serious about fiscal austerity than the last time President Trump was in office.

• That implies a very different fiscal policy for Trump 2.0, with pain ahead for federal funding recipients as well as downward pressure on inflation and interest rates.

Driving the news: The new directive is an audacious and legally dubious move, instructing agencies to "temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance, and other relevant agency activities" that could be affected by executive orders.

• Payments to individuals — including Social Security and Medicare — are exempted from the order.
• There is great uncertainty about how widely it will be applied, how long it will last, and whether it will be upheld by the courts. Legal scholars are skeptical.
• In effect, the administration is seeking to suspend billions in spending that was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by President Biden with a two-page memo from the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Yes, but: Whatever happens next with this specific order, it's only the latest sign that this administration is dead-set on slashing federal outlays — and willing to tolerate any political backlash it may cause.

• Congressional Republicans are looking to spending cuts, particularly for Medicaid and Biden-era climate initiatives, to help offset the fiscal cost of tax-cutting plans.
• Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has set a goal of a budget deficit of 3% of GDP, achieved through spending reductions. That implies hundreds of billions of dollars a year in cutbacks.
• Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has pivoted its emphasis somewhat in recent weeks toward internal operations of agencies, but it has set reducing spending as a major goal.

Flashback: In Trump's previous term, his administration offered big cutbacks in its budget proposals — but didn't achieve them in practice.

• Discretionary federal spending was 13% higher in 2019, on the eve of the pandemic, than it was in 2016 before he took office. It was little changed as a percentage of GDP.

Between the lines: While meaningful spending reductions would be good for the government's medium-term fiscal trajectory, they would also impede growth in the near term.

• It would, all else equal, exert a downward tug on inflation and justify lower interest rates from the Fed to offset that drag.
• Kevin Warsh, a potential Fed chair nominee, recently accused Fed officials of "cherry-picking" by fretting about the inflationary impact of tariffs while failing to factor in the possibility that spending cuts would "materially reduce inflationary pressures."

Rising auto repossessions and a growing rate of minimum credit card payments offer signs consumers may be getting stretched.

Why it matters: Those figures complicate the notion that the consumer is relatively healthy, a warning sign for the broader economy.

By the numbers: Two new reports out this past week show some cracks in the consumer's finances.

• The number of credit card holders making only minimum payments on their bills has jumped to a 12-year high, a study by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve found.
• The level of cardholders only making minimum payments rose to 10.75% in the third quarter of 2024, the study found, continuing an upward trend from 2021.
• The number of 30+ day delinquencies also rose during this period, up to 3.52%. That's double the delinquency rate of 1.57% from the pandemic low in the second quarter of 2021.

The number of car repossession assignments also suggests that people are experiencing more difficulty paying their regular bills.

• The rate of vehicle repossession assignments at the end of 2022 surpassed pre-pandemic levels, according to a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau report released Thursday.
• In the month of December 2022, 0.75% of all outstanding vehicle loans were assigned to repossession – a 22.5% increase from December 2019.
• "Supply chain shocks and higher interest rates drove up costs to purchase and finance a car," said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra in the report, suggesting cars are becoming harder to afford for more people.
• The researchers tracked repossession assignments rather than delinquencies, with the assignments occurring "when lenders indicate to a repossession agent or a repossession forwarder ... that a vehicle is eligible to be repossessed."
• The data doesn't capture the total number of delinquencies, which is likely larger; or the number of carried-out repossessions, which is likely smaller.

The big picture: Consumers kept the U.S. economy chugging along in 2024, but they're clearly also feeling strain.

• Retail sales increased by 0.4% in December, slowing from the 0.8% jump in November. For the year retail sales rose 4%, down from 5% the year prior.
• The health of the U.S. economy is largely dependent on consumers, who account for about two-thirds of all economic activity.

Reality check: It's not all bad news.

• The percentage of credit card card holders paying their credit card balances in full is still well above pre-pandemic levels (34.29% in the third quarter of 2024), suggesting a shrinking middle ground for consumers.
• New car prices have actually been coming down in real terms, though one reason that Americans are paying more for new cars is that they're increasingly opting for larger vehicles.

The bottom line: Consumer spending data and confidence surveys aren't telling the whole story, especially as soaring food and energy prices continue to hurt wallets.

President Trump fired acting chair of the National Labor Relations Board, Democrat Gwynne Wilcox late Monday night, she told Axios. He also fired the general counsel of the labor board, Jennifer Abruzzo, a strong advocate for unionization.

The big picture: Together the dismissals signal a broad purge at the nation's labor regulator, which had been an exceptionally strong ally to workers and unions over the past four years.

• Wilcox was the NLRB's first Black woman board member.

Where it stands: Under the national labor law, board members can only be fired for neglect of duty or malfeasance. Wilcox had served as acting board chair just for a few days at the end of the Biden administration — and it had been expected she would be replaced and resume her duties as board member.

• She said she was looking into the possibility for challenging her removal.
• The White House didn't immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.

Zoom in: Wilcox said "she just got a letter from the White House," and was still processing the news. "My term ends in August 2028, I believe that I should still be able to be a board member and contribute to this country."

• The board is now left with just two members —one Democratic and one Republican —  not enough to reach any decisions until Trump appoints new board members.
• Wilcox said that in the letter Trump sent Monday night, he wrote that the NLRB hasn't fulfilled its responsibilities to the American people, and he believes he has the right to remove a board member — despite the labor law that says they can only be removed for neglect.

Editor's note: This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) is retiring, opening up a battleground Senate seat in the 2026 midterms.

Why it matters: It's a stunning announcement for a senator who led Democrats' Senate campaigns two cycles in a row. And it's an opening for Republicans in a state President Trump won in November.

• The Detroit News broke the news Tuesday morning.

What he's saying: "I always thought there would be a time that I would step aside and pass the reins for the next generation," Peters told reporter Melissa Nann Burke.

• "I also never saw service in Congress as something you do your whole life," said Peters. He has been a senator since 2015.

Zoom out: Michigan is ripe with rising Democratic stars, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

• Buttigieg is already "taking a serious look" at running, a source close to him told Axios.

The other side: But there's also likely to be much interest among Republicans, who narrowly lost the 2024 race for former Sen. Debbie Stabenow's open seat.

• "Gary Peters is reading the room," NRSC Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said in a statement. "Michigan is better off without him. We're committed to giving them a fighter that will stand with President Trump to restore the economic prosperity and security of our country."

Editor's note: The story has been updated with additional reporting.

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is "taking a serious look" at running for the Michigan senate seat left open by the surprise retirement of Sen. Gary Peters, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: Buttigieg would bring his national fundraising network to what is expected to be one of the most expensive Senate races in the country.

• "Pete is exploring all of his options on how he can be helpful and continue to serve," said a person close to Buttigieg.
• "He's honored to be mentioned for this and he's taking a serious look."

Zoom in: Buttigieg rocketed to the top of the Democratic politics with his long-shot bid to become the party's nominee in 2020, ultimately winning the Iowa caucuses.

• The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, had announced his plans to move to Michigan and raise his two young children in his husband's home state.
• He was expected to consider a bid for governor.

Zoom out: In the 2024 election, Buttigieg helped former President Biden raise money, and he moonlighted as one the campaign's top surrogates and fundraisers.

• Many donors interpreted his enthusiasm as a clear sign that he planned to run statewide in 2026 or for president in 2028.

The Trump administration temporarily paused federal grant, loan and other financial assistance programs, effective 5 p.m. ET Tuesday.

Why it matters: The suspension will provide the administration with time to review agency programs and determine the best uses of funding for those programs consistent with the law and Trump's priorities, says a White House Office of Management and Budget memo, via Reuters.

Driving the news: Agencies have until Feb. 10 to submit detailed information on any programs, projects or activities subject to the pause.

• The memo says that "to the extent permissible under applicable law, Federal agencies must temporarily pause [bold in original] all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance, and other relevant agency activities that may be implicated by the executive orders, including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal."
• The pause "does not include assistance provided directly to individuals," the memo states.

Between the lines: The memo created confusion across Washington.

• It may impact at least tens of billions of dollars in payments, Brian Riedl, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a center-right think tank, told the Washington Post.
• "The funding delays are going to prove very difficult for grantees under the impression the money is coming, and have rent and salary payments dependent upon it," Riedl said. "It seems like a very big deal."

The other side: Top Democratic congressional budget appropriation lawmakers, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington and Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, said in a letter to OMB: "The scope of what you are ordering is breathtaking, unprecedented, and will have devastating consequences across the country.

Go deeper: Tracking Trump's executive orders: What he's signed so far

Fewer than half of U.S. adults in a new poll trust health recommendations from President Trump and his picks to lead federal health policy, but Republicans are about as likely to trust them as they are their own doctors.

Why it matters: Democrats, independents and Republicans have all lost trust in medical professionals and government health agencies over the past 18 months.

• But there is still a deep partisan divide over how Americans view health information and the people and institutions who share health-related messages.
• The split emerged during the pandemic and has become more entrenched in the almost five years since.

By the numbers: Less than half of the respondents surveyed this month trust President Trump (42%) and Health and Human Services Secretary-designate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (43%) at least a fair amount to make the right recommendations on health issues.

• But among Republicans, similar shares say they trust Trump (84%) and Kennedy (81%) as say they trust their own doctors (84%).
• 85% of respondents said they trust their doctor at least a fair amount to make the right health recommendations. That's still the vast majority, but it's down from 93% in KFF's June 2023 poll.
• 61% of adults in the poll, released by KFF on Tuesday, said they trust the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make good health suggestions, and 53% said they trust the Food and Drug Administration. That's down from 66% and 65%, respectively, in 2023.

Zoom in: Public sentiments toward vaccines also appear to be shifting, especially among Republican parents, the KFF poll shows.

• 82% of parents with kids under age 18 said they typically keep their child up to date with recommended vaccines. The figure, while still high, is down eight percentage points from 2023, KFF noted.
• Among Republican parents, about one-quarter (26%) say they have skipped or delayed some vaccines for their kids, compared with 13% of Republican parents in 2023.

Reality check: There's still broad support for public school vaccine requirements that allow for religious and health exceptions: 83% of the public overall agree with such requirements, and three-quarters of Republicans do, too.

The markets have started pricing in an AI future that's going to be cheaper and more accessible than they had previously assumed.

Why it matters: The less money that companies need to spend on the AI equivalent of picks and shovels — Nvidia chips and the electricity needed to power them — the more profitable they will be.

Follow the money: What looked like a broad-based rout early on Monday turned out to be much more selective by market close.

• Each index generally fell in direct proportion to the weighting of Nvidia. The Dow, which Nvidia joined in November with a relatively small weight, went up.
• While Nvidia lost $600 billion of market value in a single day, for instance, Apple gained more than $100 billion.

What they're saying: "If you still believe that AI is going to be big, this news out of China should only make you feel better," Siebert chief investment officer Mark Malek wrote on Monday.

• His argument is that DeepSeek's technological breakthrough will only serve to multiply the amount of performance that companies can get per dollar invested in AI.

The big picture: The market's theory of AI — at least up until the end of last week — was that, broadly, bigger is always better.

• Companies would see their share prices rise just on an announcement that they had bought a large number of Nvidia chips, even if they were extremely vague as to what they intended to do with them.
• Similarly, energy companies have been soaring on the grounds that there's no such thing as too much electricity when it comes to powering the AI revolution.

Reality check: DeepSeek has now shown it's possible to produce a state-of-the-art AI that needs fewer and less-powerful chips, less energy, and much less up-front investment.

• That seems bad for Nvidia, which has an effective monopoly on AI chips, and it's also bad for power companies who were counting on surging demand from data centers.

Where it stands: Last week, the markets believed that without billions of dollars in funding, it was impossible for rivals to compete with OpenAI. This week, they're not so sure.

• The markets were also pricing in massive compute costs for the biggest consumers of AI. Google, Meta, Amazon and Microsoft are expected to spend over $300 billion between them on capital expenditures this year.
• You can be sure that all four of them are revisiting those assumptions this week, asking if they can get the same bang for many fewer bucks.
• If some of the $500 billion earmarked for Stargate, for instance, can be redirected to other purposes that could fund a lot of very profitable opportunities.

Between the lines: The biggest market trend of recent years has been linked to the concept of "positive returns to scale." This is the idea that the bigger you get, the harder it becomes for anybody to compete with you, and the more your margins grow.

• That helps explain the enormous sums that investors have poured into AI companies in recent years.
• If AI is the future of business, however, and if powerful AI tools are available at low cost to any company on the planet, then, as Axios' Dan Primack wrote, Silicon Valley's enormous investment in foundational AI models may never see any returns at all.

The bottom line: What's bad for the companies looking to sell AI products is likely to be good for the companies looking to buy them.

• And there are many more of the latter than there are of the former.

Editor's Note: This story has been corrected to indicate that Nvidia is a component of the Dow.