PARIS — One of French President Emmanuel Macron’s top political allies is under fire over respect for the rule of law after he fired a high-ranking official at the country’s most powerful constitutional body. The head of France’s Constitutional Council, Richard Ferrand, one of the president’s closest confidants, dismissed the institution’s secretary general, Aurélie Bretonneau, just a year after she was appointed.  In an internal email sent late on March 23 and seen by POLITICO, Bretonneau said Ferrand had “informed [her] that he has proposed to the President of the Republic that [she] step down from [her] position due to differences of opinion on the conduct of the institution.” The move triggered strong reactions from top French political officials and legal scholars. Aurélien Rousseau, a former health minister in Macron’s government and now a center-left MP, said on X that the move was “worrying” and highlighted the “flippancy with which our institutions are treated.” Green MEP David Cormand posted: “It is a problem that a member of a particular clan has been appointed to head our country’s highest constitutional body,” adding that such actions undermine French democracy and institutions. Ferrand’s appointment by Macron last year was criticized as an attempt to politicize the independent institution, which has the power to rule on whether legislation passed by the National Assembly is in accordance with the constitution. Ferrand, a former president of the National Assembly, has limited legal training and was one of Macron’s earliest supporters. The Constitutional Council rules on legal challenges and oversees elections. Its members don’t need to be trained judges or lawyers.  Four people within the institution confirmed to POLITICO that Ferrand had decided to fire Bretonneau. “Differences of opinion” between Ferrand and Bretonneau had emerged in recent months, particularly “on the role of the law”, said two of the officials, who were granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue. According to one of the officials, the disagreements between Ferrand and Bretonneau reached their peak near the end of last year when, amid a spiralling budgetary crisis, the government contemplated the possibility of passing fiscal legislation via executive action. Bretonneau sent out an internal memo arguing that a budget passed by the government through executive action could not include amendments on what had already been drafted, a ruling that would have tied the government’s hands during a period of tense negotiations with opposition parties. She also argued that the Constitutional Council did not have the authority to review the legislation. Her conclusions reportedly upset Ferrand. Ferrand did not respond to POLITICO’s request for comment on Monday. Bretonneau also declined to comment. “Aurélie Bretonneau is not the type of person to compromise on the defense of the rule of law, the rigour of legal reasoning or the independence of the institution,” a senior civil servant told POLITICO. “If that’s what bothered her, it’s a major problem.” Bretonneau’s appointment had been directly approved by Ferrand.

Viktor Orbán’s block on a loan for Ukraine is not the United States’ issue, said Washington’s ambassador to the EU, days after Donald Trump endorsed the Hungarian prime minister’s reelection campaign. “This is an internal EU issue, this isn’t a United States issue; they need to resolve the issue of how they’re going to finance Ukraine to the extent to which they’re gonna finance it,” Andrew Puzder told POLITICO in an interview. The U.S. has stepped up pressure on Europe to increase its financial aid to Ukraine since Donald Trump returned to office. All EU countries agreed on a €90 billion loan to Ukraine, but Orbán changed his mind after Russian oil stopped flowing through the Druzhba pipeline. Despite Trump’s close ties to Orbán, Puzder said it’s up to the EU to find a way to finance Kyiv. “Whether that loan goes through and the condition in which it goes through is something for the EU to resolve internally, and I have every confidence that they will resolve it,” Puzder said. He added that the U.S. is “happy” to sell more weapons to Ukraine that Kyiv could pay for with the EU loan. Trump on Saturday endorsed Orbán ahead of the April 12 election, in a video streamed at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Budapest. “He’s a fantastic guy, and it’s such an honor to endorse him. I endorsed him last time he won, and he did a fantastic job for his country,” Trump said. Asked if accusations that Hungary’s foreign minister informed Moscow about internal EU talks would change Washington’s stance toward Orbán, Puzder said that’s “obviously a decision that the president has to make,” but that Trump “likes” the Hungarian prime minister. “They’ve been supportive of each other, and that’s certainly the president’s call.” Puzder declined to comment on the allegations but said he has “very good relationships” with Hungary’s representatives in Brussels. “I think Hungary has been very friendly to the United States, and we do share views on certain issues with Hungary,” he said, citing migration as a key point of convergence. He said the EU is now adopting the Hungarian model by hardening its migration policy.  “I think a lot of the dust that’s been thrown in the air with respect to Hungary and its relationship with the European Union will settle down after the election. No matter which party wins, I think a lot of this will settle once the election’s over,” Puzder added.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music After Hungary was accused of leaking sensitive EU discussions to the Kremlin, the spotlight is now shifting to Germany. Zoya Sheftalovich is joined by Ian Wishart to unpack mounting concerns in Brussels over the far-right AfD’s access to confidential EU documents — and whether Europe’s open systems are creating new vulnerabilities. The duo also discuss Denmark’s election, where Mette Frederiksen is fighting for another term in a tight race, and break down a razor-thin result in Slovenia — plus what Giorgia Meloni’s referendum defeat means for her authority at home. And finally — Europe’s quirkiest contest returns. The “Eurovision of trees” is about to crown its winner, and we want your pick. Which tree do you like the most? Which one gets your vote? Send us your choice on our WhatsApp: +32 491 05 06 29.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Nach dem Wahldebakel der SPD in Rheinland-Pfalz steht die Koalition mit dem Rücken zur Wand. Friedrich Merz, Bärbel Bas und Lars Klingbeil haben sich auf eine Flucht nach vorn verständigt: den Weg der schmerzhaften Reformen. Gordon Repinski präsentiert das inoffizielle „Inspirationspapier“ von POLITICO mit radikalen Vorschlägen für Deutschland – vom Rentenrealismus über eine echte Steuerreform bis hin zur mutigen Zusammenlegung von Ministerien. Ist Schwarz-Rot bereit, den eigenen Funktionären und den Wählern echte Kompromisse abzuverlangen? Während die Sozialdemokratie weiter wankt, blickt SPD-Spitzenkandidat Armin Willingmann in Sachsen-Anhalt auf die nächste Schicksalswahl. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview spricht er über die „bedingt hilfreiche“ Performance aus Berlin, warum er rollende Köpfe an der Parteispitze derzeit für kontraproduktiv hält und wie er die Arbeiter im Osten mit einer Politik für die Mitte zurückgewinnen will. Bei den Liberalen ist die nächste Krisenstufe gezündet: Nach dem Verschwinden aus den Umfragen im Südwesten soll im Mai die komplette Parteispitze neu gewählt werden. Rixa Fürsen analysiert das personelle Vakuum: Kann Christian Dürr seinen Posten halten oder schlägt jetzt die Stunde von Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann und dem NRW-Landeschef Henning Höne? Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht der PKV: Hätten Sie’s gedacht? Vom jährlichen 15,5-Milliarden-Euro-Mehrumsatz der Privatversicherten profitiert das gesamte Gesundheitswesen. Denn neben den Haus- und Fachärzten kommen die höheren Honorare auch den zahnärztlichen Praxen zugute, dem Arzneimittelbereich oder Therapeutinnen. So stützt die PKV die medizinische Versorgung in Deutschland zugunsten aller – auch der gesetzlich Versicherten. Mehr auf pkv.de**

PARIS — Former French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe’s reelection as mayor of Le Havre is positioning him as the leading candidate to take on the far right in next year’s presidential election. The contest was an important test for the center-right politician, as he had conditioned his bid for the Elysée on securing another term leading the industrial port city, which in the past tended to lean left. A poll released ahead of the vote showed Philippe in real danger of losing to a Communist challenger — an outcome that would have scuttled his plans to run for president. But Philippe shut down skeptics by winning the runoff by more than six points. Then a Toluna Harris Interactive survey conducted online just after polls closed in the nationwide municipal elections showed Philippe on track for a second-place finish in the first round of the 2027 presidential contest, though still trailing National Rally President Jordan Bardella by 17 points. Philippe looks primed to come out the other end of this make-or-break moment stronger. Building momentum now could help separate Philippe from the rest of a very crowded field of candidates in the race for the Elysée, though there’s still more than a year to go. “Everything sort of starts today,” Nathalie Loiseau, a MEP from Philippe’s Horizons party and one of its heavyweights, told POLITICO. “There are reasons to hope.” Philippe, who was the first of the center-right contenders to declare his presidential bid, is already rolling out campaign events, with April 12 bookmarked for a large-scale rally in Paris, according to two party officials — though Loiseau declined to confirm the event. “Le Havre’s people know that there is reason for hope when all people of good will come together … and reject the extremes and their simplistic solutions,” Philippe said in his victory speech Sunday from Le Havre. The politician’s strong performance in the first round and his comfortable win in the runoff drew a sigh of relief from his allies on Sunday — and led some of his most prominent rivals to publicly acknowledge his front-runner status. Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin, himself a presidential hopeful, called on Philippe to unite centrists behind him. “He now needs to unite people [around him], for us to have an only candidate,” Darmanin said on France 2 last week. A person close to Darmanin told POLITICO that Philippe’s performance was “a bucket of cold water” for the justice minister’s presidential aspirations. EXPERIENCE VS. YOUTH France’s 2027 presidential race looks likely to be the most consequential in a decade, with the far-right National Rally consistently polling more than 15 percentage points ahead of other parties. Despite failing to pick up high-profile targets like Marseille, Nîmes and Toulon, the far right celebrated its performance Sunday. Bardella told supporters in Paris the far right had achieved the “biggest breakthrough of its history,” while his mentor Marine Le Pen said the National Rally had scored “dozens” of regional victories. The National Rally’s biggest win on Sunday came on the French Riviera, where one of its allies won Nice, France’s fifth-most-populous city. However, political watchers were quick to note that the victory was more attributable to local rightwing baron-turned-far-right-ally Eric Ciotti than to Bardella. Loiseau argued there was no National Rally “wave” in these local elections, flagging the party’s failure to achieve a decisive breakthrough in large and midsize cities. But she said the far right’s slow and steady rise, including in rural areas that used to be strongholds of moderate politics, shouldn’t be underestimated. Bardella is the National Rally’s most likely candidate next year unless Marine Le Pen successfully appeals the five-year election ban she was handed as the result of an embezzlement conviction. Bardella’s popularity has risen steadily, but he has never personally won election for local or national government. Philippe’s allies are hoping his credentials as prime minister during Emmanuel Macron’s first term and extensive background in politics will give him a decisive edge should he qualify to run against the National Rally in the 2027 runoff. Bardella’s opponents see his lack of executive-level experience as a key weakness in a presidential contest, especially as Europe is embroiled in two major international conflicts. “Edouard Philippe was a prime minister during a major crisis, which was Covid. He has an international stature,” said Loiseau. “You can imagine him facing Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin. This isn’t necessarily true of everyone who is either an official candidate or would like to be a candidate.”

Danes head to the polls on Tuesday, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen having called early parliamentary elections after her ruling Social Democrats received a big boost from U.S. President Donald Trump. Frederiksen could have waited until October 2026 to call the vote, but moved early after standing up to Trump’s aggressive threats to annex Greenland earlier this year. Her defiance generated a surge of support for the party just months after it suffered a historic defeat in local elections last October.  But foreign policy won’t carry the day in this election. Voters are focused on domestic issues, while Denmark’s fracturing coalition government — with two other party leaders challenging the prime minister — has turned Tuesday’s vote into a cliffhanger.  WHAT WILL DECIDE THE VOTE?  While Denmark may have come together to resist the pressure from the White House, voters are most concerned about what’s happening at home. Ahead of the vote Danish parties debated a plethora of divisive issues, none of which proved decisive. A poll published by Epinion on Monday suggested almost one in five Danes still didn’t know who they’d vote for.   Everything suggests that Frederiksen’s center-left party, the Social Democrats, will prevail in the vote. Her big talking point has been the revival of a wealth tax that hasn’t been enforced in Denmark for 30 years, and whose reinstatement would thrill left-wing voters. But her main challenger, Deputy Prime Minister Troels Lund Poulsen, leader of the center-right Venstre party, argues the measure will prompt the richest Danes to emigrate, weakening the country’s competitiveness.  Politicians have also debated whether to reinstate the country’s “Great Prayer Day” holiday that Frederiksen’s government abolished in 2024, or to step up efforts to clean polluted drinking water, improve animal welfare, lift the ban on nuclear power, increase defense spending, and tighten migration rules.   RED OR BLUE?  Denmark’s political spectrum has long been divided between a red bloc of left-leaning parties and a blue bloc on the right. In 2022, however, Frederiksen broke with tradition by forming a broad centrist government. The current coalition brings together her Social Democrats with the conservative Venstre party and the liberal Moderates led by former Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen.  Polls suggest the red and blue blocs are running almost even, with Rasmussen’s Moderates poised to play kingmaker. Support for the red bloc currently translates into 83 seats, while the blue bloc would get 80 — with 90 seats needed for a parliamentary majority. With Frederiksen and Poulsen heading in different directions politically, a repeat of the current coalition government appears unlikely.   That means Rasmussen will likely decide which direction the country goes in if the elections transpire as forecast. Frederiksen has warned that if Rasmussen doesn’t decide to work with her, “then we will, with a very high possibility, get a right-wing government in Denmark.”  Rasmussen has removed himself from contention to become the next prime minister, and has offered instead to mediate the formation of the incoming government. COCAINE-GATE  In the leadup to the vote, the blue bloc’s largest party, the Liberal Alliance, sparked a media frenzy after leader Alex Vanopslagh — a candidate for PM — admitted to using cocaine during his early days as party leader in the mid-2010s. Some 42 percent of Danes said the 34-year-old politician’s drug use had left them less able to see him as the country’s leader.   The parties in the blue bloc have thrown their support behind Venstre’s Poulsen. But with the Liberal Alliance primed to win the most votes on the right, Vanopslagh is insisting the party should be the one to lead if Denmark ends up with a conservative government.  Liberal Alliance leader Alex Vanopslagh arrives for a debate in Copenhagen on Feb. 26, 2026. | Ida Marie Odgaard/Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images At the same time, he says, he won’t stand in Poulsen’s way. “It won’t be me who ends up derailing a right-wing alliance after the election,” Vanopslagh said on Sunday.  GREENLAND IN THE SPOTLIGHT  For all the domestic focus, Greenland still has a key role to play in Denmark’s election — just not the one you might expect. Greenland and Denmark’s other autonomous territory, the Faroe Islands, each hold two seats in the country’s parliament, and those could prove decisive given how tight the race is.   That could prove a major obstacle for a right-leaning government. According to Lasse Lindegaard, Greenland correspondent at public broadcaster DR, those who represent the islands would be highly unlikely “to back a government that includes or relies on support from the [far-right] Danish People’s Party,” whose leader Morten Messerschmidt has dismissed the idea of Greenland’s independence as “immature and absurd.”  Then there’s the Faroe Islands, which will hold their own parliamentary election just two days after Denmark. Politicians in both self-governing territories are questioning whether to scrap the requirement that they send representatives to the Danish parliament.  “We should enter negotiations with Denmark on an equal partnership — and at that point, we would no longer need our seats in the Danish parliament,” said Beinir Johannesen, leader of the Fólkaflokkurin party and a likely contender for prime minister of the Faroe Islands. THE LOGISTICS  Polls in Denmark open at 8 a.m. on Tuesday and close at 8 p.m. The country uses a proportional representation system, meaning the number of seats that parties win is proportional to their share of the national vote. Exit polls will be published shortly after the polls close, but given how close the race is a definitive outcome may not be clear until late Tuesday evening after all votes have been counted, or even early Wednesday morning.   Then comes the hard part: forming a government. With the two sides so closely matched, the process will almost certainly take weeks. Denmark’s next government is certain to be a coalition, but whether it commands majority or minority support in the parliament remains to be seen. The latter scenario has been the norm in Denmark for decades, but often produces weak prime ministers who must constantly seek the support of other parties under the threat of no-confidence motions. 

LONDON — Keir Starmer’s keeping Britain out of the war in Iran — but he can’t duck the conflict’s grave economic consequences. In a sign of growing fears about the impact of the war on Britain, the prime minister chaired a rare meeting of the government’s emergency COBRA committee Monday night, joined by senior ministers and Governor of the Bank of England Andrew Bailey. Starmer’s top finance minister, Rachel Reeves, will update the House of Commons on the economic picture Tuesday, as an already-unpopular administration worries that chaos in the Middle East is shredding plans to lower the cost of living and get the British economy growing. For Starmer’s government — headed for potentially brutal local elections in May — the crisis in the Gulf risks a nightmare combination of a rise in energy prices, interest rates, inflation and the cost of government borrowing that threatens to undermine everything he’s done since winning office. Economists are now warning that even if Donald Trump’s promise of a “complete and total resolution of hostilities” with Iran were to bear fruit, the effects on the British economy could still last for months. Already there are signs of a split within Starmer’s party over how to respond. Labour MPs want the government to think seriously about action to protect households — but Starmer and Reeves have long talked up the need for fiscal responsibility, and economics are warning that there’s little room for maneuver. Fuel prices displayed at a Shell garage in Southam, Warwickshire on March 23, 2026. | Jacob King/PA Images via Getty Images Jim O’Neill, a former Treasury minister who served as an adviser to Reeves, told POLITICO the government should “not get sucked into reacting to every external shock” and “concentrate on boosting our underlying growth trend.” WHY THE UK IS SO HARD HIT Just before the outbreak of war, there was reason for Starmer and Reeves to feel quietly optimistic about the long-stagnant British economy. The Bank of England had expected inflation to fall back sustainably toward its two percent target for the first time in five years, giving the central bank the space to carry on cutting interest rates.  With the Iran war in full flow, it was forced to rewrite those forecasts at the Monetary Policy Committee’s meeting last week — and now sees inflation at around 3.5 percent by the summer. The U.K. is a big net importer of energy and also needs constant imports of foreign capital to fund its budget and current account deficits. That’s made it one of first targets in the financial markets’ crosshairs. The government’s cost of borrowing has risen by more than half a percentage point over the last month. That threatens both the real economy and Reeves’ painstakingly-negotiated budget arithmetic. Higher inflation means higher interest rates and a higher bill for servicing the government’s debt: fiscal watchdog the Office for Budget Responsibility estimates a one-point increase in inflation would add £7.3 billion to debt servicing costs in 2026-2027 alone. The effect on businesses and home owners is also likely to be chilling. Britain’s banks are already repricing their most popular mortgages, which are tied to the two-year gilt rate. Hundreds of mortgage products were pulled in a hurry after the MPC meeting last week, something that will hit the housing market and depress Reeves’ intake from both stamp duty and capital gains. Duncan Weldon, an economist and author, said: “Even if this were to stop tomorrow, the inflation numbers and growth numbers are going to look materially worse throughout 2026. “If this continues for longer… it’s an awful lot more challenging and you end up with a much tougher budget this autumn than the government would have been hoping to unveil.” DECISION TIME The U.K.’s economic plight presents an acute political headache for Starmer, as he faces a mismatch between his own party’s expectations about the government’s ability to help people and his own scarce resources. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has promised to keep looking at different options for some form of assistance to bill-payers hit by an energy price shock. A pain point is looming in July, when a regulated cap on energy costs is due to expire and bills could jump significantly. One left-leaning Labour MP, granted anonymity to speak frankly, said: “They [ministers] need to be treating this like a financial crisis. They need plans for multiple scenarios with clear triggers for government support.” A second MP from the 2024 intake said “it’s right that a Labour government steps in, particularly to help the most vulnerable.” Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves at the first cabinet meeting of the new year at No. 10 Downing St. on Jan. 6, 2026 in London, England. | Pool photo by Richard Pohle via Getty Images This demand for action is being felt in the upper echelons of the party too, as Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy recently argued Reeves’ fiscal rules — seen as crucial in the Treasury to reassure the markets — may need to be reconsidered if prices continue to rise and a major support package is needed.  One Labour official said there are clear disagreements with Labour over how to go about drawing up help and warned “the fiscal approach is going to be a massive dividing line at any leadership election.” The same official pointed to recent comments by former Starmer deputy — and likely leadership contender — Angela Rayner about the OBR, with Rayner accusing the watchdog of ignoring the “social benefit” of government spending. Despite the pressure, ministers have so far restricted themselves to criticizing petrol retailers for alleged profiteering, and have been flirting with new powers for markets watchdog the Competition and Markets Authority. The government said Reeves would on Tuesday set out steps to “help protect working people from unfair price rises,” including a new “anti-profiteering framework” to “root out price gouging.” But Starmer signaled strongly in an appearance before a Commons committee Monday evening that he was not about to unveil any wide-ranging bailout package, telling MPs he was “acutely aware” of what it had cost when then-Prime Minister Liz Truss launched her own universal energy price guarantee in 2022.  O’Neill backed this approach, saying: “I don’t think they should do much… They can’t afford it anyhow. The nation can’t keep shielding people from external shocks.” Weldon predicted, however, that as the May elections approach and the energy cap deadline draws nearer, the pressure will prove too much and ministers could be forced to step in. The furlough scheme rolled out during the pandemic to project jobs and Truss’s 2022 intervention helped create “the expectation that the government should be helping households,” he said. “But it’s incredibly difficult. Britain’s growth has been blown off-course an awful lot in the last 15 years by these sorts of shocks.” Geoffrey Smith, Dan Bloom, Andrew McDonald and Sam Francis contributed to this report.

ROME — Italian right-wing Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s crushing defeat in Monday’s referendum on judicial reform has shattered her aura of political invincibility, and her opponents now reckon she can be toppled in a general election expected next year. The failed referendum is the the first major misstep of her premiership, and comes just as she seemed in complete control in Rome and Brussels, leading Italy’s most stable administration in years. Her loss is immediately energizing Italy’s fragmented opposition, making the country’s torpid politics suddenly look competitive again. Meloni’s bid to overhaul the judiciary — which she accused of being politicized and of left-wing bias — was roundly rejected, with 54 percent voting “no” to her reforms. An unexpectedly high turnout of 59 percent is also likely to alarm Meloni, underscoring how the vote snowballed into a broader vote of confidence in her and her government. She lost heavily in Italy’s three biggest cities: In the provinces of Rome, the “no” vote was 57 percent, Milan 54 percent and Naples 71 percent. In Naples, about 50 prosecutors and judges gathered to open champagne and sing Bella Ciao, the World War II anti-fascist partisan anthem. Activists, students and trade unionists spontaneously marched to Rome’s Piazza del Popolo chanting “resign, resign.”  In a video posted on social media, Meloni put a brave face on the result. “The Italians have decided and we will respect that decision,” she said. She admitted feeling some “bitterness for the lost opportunity … but we will go on as we always have with responsibility, determination and respect for Italy and its people.” In truth, however, the referendum will be widely viewed as a sign that she is politically vulnerable, after all. It knocks her off course just as she was setting her sights on major electoral reforms that would further cement her grip on power. One of her main goals has been to shift to a fixed-term prime ministership, which would be elected by direct suffrage rather than being hostage to rotating governments. Those ambitions look far more fragile now. The opposition groups that have struggled to dent Meloni’s dominance immediately scented blood. After months on the defensive, they pointed to Monday’s result as proof that the prime minister can be beaten and that a coordinated campaign can mobilize voters against her. Matteo Renzi, former prime minister and leader of the centrist Italia Viva party, predicted Meloni would now be a “lame duck,” telling reporters that “even her own followers will now start to doubt her.” When he lost a referendum in 2016 he resigned as prime minister. “Let’s see what Meloni will do after this clamorous defeat,” he said.  Elly Schlein, leader of the opposition Democratic Party, said: “We will beat [Meloni] in the next general election, I’m sure of that. I think that from today’s vote, from this extraordinary democratic participation, an unexpected participation in some ways, a clear political message is being sent to Meloni and this government, who must now listen to the country and its real priorities.”  Former Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, leader of the populist 5Star Movement heralded “a new spring and a new political season.” Angelo Bonelli , leader of the Greens and Left Alliance, told reporters the result was “an important signal for us because it shows that there is a majority in the country opposed to the government.” ‘PARALLEL MAFIA’ The referendum itself centered on changes to how judges and prosecutors are governed and disciplined, including separating their career paths and reshaping their oversight bodies. The government framed the reforms as a long-overdue opportunity to fix a system where politicized legal “factions” impede the government’s ability to implement core policies on issues such as migration and security. Justice Minister Carlo Nordio called prosecutors a “parallel mafia,” while his chief of staff compared parts of the judiciary to “an execution squad.”   A voter is given a ballot at a polling station in Rome, Italy, on March 22, 2026. | Riccardo De Luca/Anadolu via Getty Images Meloni’s opponents viewed the defeated reforms differently, casting them as an attempt to weaken a fiercely independent judiciary and concentrate power. That framing helped turn a technical vote into a broader political contest, one that opposition parties were able to rally around. It was a clash with a long and bitter political history. The Mani Pulite (Clean Hands) investigations of the 1990s, which wiped out an entire political class, left a legacy of mistrust between politicians and the judiciary. The right, in particular, accused judges of running a left-wing vendetta against them. Under Meloni’s rule that tension has repeatedly resurfaced, with her government clashing with courts, saying judges are thwarting initiatives to fight migration and criminality. Meloni herself stepped late into the campaign, after initially keeping some distance, betting that her personal involvement could shift the outcome. She called the referendum an “historic opportunity to change Italy.” In combative form this month, she had called on Italians not squander their opportunity to shake up the judges. If they let things continue as they are now, she warned: “We will find ourselves with even more powerful factions, even more negligent judges, even more surreal sentences, immigrants, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers being freed and putting your security at risk.” It was to no avail, and Meloni was hardly helped by the timing of the vote. Her ally U.S. President Donald Trump is highly unpopular in Italy and the war in Iran has triggered intense fears among Italians that they will have to pay more for power and fuel. The main upshot is that Italy’s political clock is ticking again. REGAINING THE INITIATIVE For Meloni, the temptation will be to regain the initiative quickly. That could even mean trying to press for early elections before economic pressures mount and key EU recovery funds wind down later this year. The logic of holding elections before economic conditions deteriorate further would be to prevent a slow bleeding away of support, said Roberto D’Alimonte, professor of political science at the Luiss University in Rome. But Italy’s President Sergio Mattarella has the ultimate say about when to dissolve parliament and parliamentarians, whose pensions depend on the legislature lasting until February, could help him prevent elections by forming alternative majorities. D’Alimonte said Meloni’s “standing is now damaged.” “There is no doubt she comes out of this much weaker. The defeat changes the perception of her. She has lost her clout with voters and to some extent in Europe. Until now she was a winner and now she has shown she can lose,” he added. She must now weigh whether to identify scapegoats who can take the fall — potentially Justice Minister Nordio, a technocrat with no political support base of his own.  Meloni is expected to move quickly to regain control of the agenda. She is due to travel to Algeria on Wednesday to advance energy cooperation, a trip that may also serve to pivot the political conversation back to economic and foreign policy aims. But the immediate impact of the vote is clear: A prime minister who entered the referendum from a position of strength but now faces a more uncertain political landscape, against an opposition newly convinced she can be beaten.

Party leader Christian Dürr and the executive board of Germany’s pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) resigned on Monday following a pair of crushing election defeats — with Dürr vowing to return. The FDP flopped in two state elections this month in Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate, failing to clear the 5 percent threshold for representation and being forced to exit both regional parliaments. The party had previously been part of Germany’s federal governing coalition from 2021 to 2024. “Things cannot continue as they are. And today, the FDP federal executive board has taken responsibility for that,” Dürr said at a press conference Monday evening. For all his contrition, Dürr told journalists that he and Secretary-General Nicole Büttner will both run for re-election at a party conference in May, where a new leader will be chosen. “I have already read in some media reports that the FDP leadership and I are giving up. I have no intention of giving up,” Dürr said. At a Monday party meeting Dürr offered to submit to a confidence vote by the party’s executive board, but the board declined. A new 40-member board will also be elected at the May conference. Dürr was elected to the FDP leadership in May 2025, succeeding long-time leader and former federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner. Germany holds five state elections in 2026, with Saxony-Anhalt, Berlin and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania going to the polls in September.

HOUSTON — The Trump administration reached a nearly $1 billion agreement with French energy giant TotalEnergies on Monday to cancel its offshore wind leases off the coasts of New York and North Carolina. The announcement marks the latest blow by the Trump administration against the U.S. offshore wind industry, particularly in the Northeast, after it faced a series of recent legal losses. “The era of taxpayers subsidizing unreliable, unaffordable and unsecured energy is officially over,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told reporters at the CERAWeek by S&P Global conference in Houston. As part of the agreement, the Interior Department would terminate the leases for TotalEnergies’ Attentive Energy and Carolina Long Bay projects, worth $928 million, the department said. The lease sales occurred during the Biden administration. TotalEnergies committed to invest the value of those leases into oil and natural gas production in the United States, after which the United States will reimburse the company dollar-for-dollar for the amount they paid for the offshore wind leases, the department said. The company is poised to redirect the funds toward the Rio Grande LNG plant in Texas and the development of upstream conventional oil in the Gulf of Mexico and of shale gas production, according to the Interior Department. Burgum and TotalEnergies signed the agreements Monday from the conference. President Donald Trump has often attacked the U.S. offshore wind sector as unreliable and expensive. He’s repeatedly said he plans to have “no windmills built in the United States” under his tenure. Still, the settlement would suggest a new tack by the administration to target the sector. The Trump administration previously issued stop-work orders for offshore wind projects currently under construction on the East Coast, but judges lifted all five orders earlier this year. “Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” TotalEnergies Chair and CEO Patrick Pouyanné said in a statement. Pouyanné previously said the company would halt development of the Attentive Energy project, off the New Jersey and New York coasts, following Trump’s return to the White House. Both the Attentive Energy and Carolina Long Bay projects were in the early stages of development. Pouyanné told reporters that the company continues to invest in solar, onshore wind and batteries. The deal is a major blow for New York’s offshore wind targets, although proposed projects in the lease area controlled by TotalEnergies and its partners never secured final contracts with the state. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) called the prospect of a deal “not helpful” last week. Attentive Energy dropped out of a bidding process for deals with New York in October 2024, even before Trump’s election. The state concluded that process last month with no awards amid the federal uncertainty and officials have struggled to determine next steps for the industry writ large. Hochul has pivoted to an “all of the above” energy strategy in the face of Trump’s opposition to offshore wind — including nuclear and fossil fuels. Further delays to the development of the technology off New York’s coast will likely further the state’s reliance on repowering fossil fuel plants to serve the New York City region. The deal also leaves New Jersey without any workable offshore wind projects at a time when Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill is already searching for more clean energy to combat a regional power crunch. The project was supposed to provide more than 1,300 megawatts of power. Sherrill’s predecessor, Phil Murphy, had lofty ambitions for the industry that were all for naught. His administration approved a series of offshore wind projects that all ran into financial or permitting challenges. The state approved Attentive Energy’s project in early 2024 as part of an attempted reset of the industry, which was already facing woe. The new affront could also prove problematic to permitting reform discussions on the Hill, as Democratic lawmakers have linked progress on those negotiations to whether or not the administration continues its attacks on renewable energy. ClearView Energy Partners said in a note last week the deal could also “re-raise concerns about the durability of federal approvals and therefore further erode, but not eliminate, the thin opportunity for bipartisan permitting reform on Capitol Hill.” So far, Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is staying the course on permitting talks, despite reports of the settlement agreement last week — a development he derided as “just more selling out the public for the fossil fuel industry.” His office did not immediately provide further comment Monday. Some Moderate New York Republicans last week also criticized the reported settlement. Marie French and Ry Rivard contributed to this report.