The dispute over occupied territories in Ukraine continues to be a sticking point amid negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow as President Donald Trump seeks to help bring an end to the war between the neighboring countries. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told Fox News’ Bret Baier that a peace deal with Moscow could be close following his Sunday meeting with Trump at Mar-a-Lago.

‘Even with one question today, we’ve been very close,’ Zelenskyy told Baier on ‘Special Report.’ ‘I think we have a problem with one question: It’s about territories.’

Key issues about territory remain unresolved in talks that have taken place over months. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently said that the West must acknowledge the fact that Russia holds the advantage on the battlefield.

Zelenskyy has been reluctant to cede territory held by Russian forces since the war began in 2022 over to Moscow. 

Zelenskyy has suggested that Ukraine might be open to withdrawing from the Ukrainian provinces of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, which Russia wants to annex, only if Ukrainian voters give their approval in a referendum. 

‘I think the compromise, if we do a free economic zone that we have, and we have to move some kilometers back. It means that Russia has to make minor steps some kilometers back,’ Zelenskyy said. ‘This free economic zone will have specific rules. Something like this referendum is the way how to accept it or not accept it.’

Putin doesn’t want peace, Zelenskyy said, despite the mounting death toll for Russian forces. 

‘I don’t trust Putin. He doesn’t want success for Ukraine,’ Zelenskyy said. ‘I believe he can say such words to President Trump… but it’s not true really.’

Following his meeting with Trump, Zelenskyy said they were 90% agreed on a draft 20-point plan, despite Moscow showing no signs of budging on its territorial demands. 

The meeting came after Trump spoke with Putin over the phone where they both agreed that a deal must be reached to end Europe’s longest war in 80 years. 

It also came a day after Russia attacked the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv a day earlier. Moscow also claimed that Putin’s home in the Novgorod region was the target of a Ukrainian drone attack overnight, which Ukraine denies. 

Department of Justice officials are facing threats of legal action after the department missed the Epstein Files Transparency Act’s stated deadline to publish all its documents related to Jeffrey Epstein – but the law may lean in the DOJ’s favor.

DOJ officials have continued to review and upload the files more than a week after the congressionally mandated Dec. 19 due date, spurring Democrats and some Republicans to call for a range of consequences, from contempt to civil litigation. The DOJ is, however, defending the drawn-out release process, suggesting that rushing to publish piles of unexamined material would also flout the law.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a recent interview on ‘Meet the Press’ there was ‘well-settled law’ that supported the DOJ missing the transparency bill’s deadline because of a need to meet other legal requirements in the bill, like redacting victim-identifying information.

The bill required the DOJ to withhold information about potential victims and material that could jeopardize open investigations or litigation. Officials could also leave out information ‘in the interest of national defense or foreign policy,’ the bill said, while keeping visible any details that could embarrass politically connected people.

Last week, the DOJ revealed that two of its components, the FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York, had just gathered and submitted more than 1 million additional pages of potentially responsive documents related to Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex trafficking cases for review.

The ‘mass volume of material’ could ‘take a few more weeks’ to sift through, the DOJ said in a statement on social media, adding that the department would ‘continue to fully comply with federal law and President Trump’s direction to release the files.’ 

The DOJ’s concerns about page volume and redaction requirements echo those frequently raised in similar litigation surrounding compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests, where courts have stepped in to balance competing interests of parties in the cases rather than attempting to force compliance on an unrealistic timetable.

The conservative legal watchdog Judicial Watch has seen mixed success over the years in bringing FOIA lawsuits, showcasing the court’s role in mediating such disputes.

Judicial Watch brought several lawsuits against the government over Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal, leading a federal judge at one point to allow the conservative watchdog to move forward with questioning Clinton aides as part of a discovery process as it sought records on the matter. The decision was later reversed at the appellate court level.

In a separate case, the appellate court sided with Judicial Watch by reversing a lower court ruling as part of a longstanding legal battle the watchdog waged with the DOJ over obtaining Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ emails. The D.C. Circuit Court found that the DOJ could not withhold email attachments from Yates’ account and ordered further review on the matter.

In the current controversy over the Epstein files, lawmakers are pressuring the DOJ by threatening a combination of political and legal remedies over the 30-day deadline and over what they view as excessive redactions. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., vowed to bring a resolution up for a vote when the Senate returns from the holidays that would direct the Senate to initiate a lawsuit against the DOJ for failing to comply with the transparency act’s requirements.

‘The law Congress passed is crystal clear: release the Epstein files in full, so Americans can see the truth,’ Schumer said. ‘Instead, the Trump Department of Justice dumped redactions and withheld the evidence — that breaks the law.’

Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who spearheaded the transparency bill, warned that they plan to pursue contempt proceedings against Attorney General Pam Bondi in light of the DOJ missing the deadline and making perceived over-redactions.

A group of mostly Democratic senators also called on the DOJ inspector general to investigate the department’s compliance with the law.

The DOJ has maintained that releasing unreviewed documents would violate the law, saying last week that it had ‘lawyers working around the clock to review and make the legally required redactions.’

The Trump administration announced a $2 billion pledge for United Nations humanitarian aid Monday and warned agencies must ‘adapt, shrink, or die’ under its overhaul, according to a statement from the Department of State.

The new package comes as the administration reins in traditional foreign assistance and pushes humanitarian organizations to meet stricter standards on efficiency, accountability and oversight.

‘Individual U.N. agencies will need to adapt, shrink, or die,’ the statement said after outlining what it called ‘several key benefits for the United States and American taxpayers.’

‘The United States is pledging an initial $2 billion anchor commitment to fund life-saving assistance activities in dozens of countries,’ the State Department said.

The administration also said that the contribution is expected to shield tens of millions of people from hunger, disease, and the devastation of war in 2026 alone, with a new model significantly reducing costs. 

‘Because of enhanced efficiency and hyper-prioritization on life-saving impacts, this new model is expected to save U.S. taxpayers nearly $1.9 billion compared to outdated grant funding approaches,’ the statement said.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the approach is intended to force long-standing reforms across the U.N. system and reduce the U.S. financial burden.

‘This new model will better share the burden of U.N. humanitarian work with other developed countries and will require the U.N. to cut bloat, remove duplication, and commit to powerful new impact, accountability, and oversight mechanisms,’ Rubio said in a post on X.

The pledge is smaller than previous U.S. contributions, which officials said had grown to between $8 billion and $10 billion annually in voluntary humanitarian funding in recent years.

Administration officials said those funding levels were unsustainable and lacked sufficient accountability.

Jeremy Lewin, the State Department’s senior official overseeing foreign assistance, underscored the administration’s position during a press conference in Geneva.

‘The piggy bank is not open to organizations that just want to return to the old system,’ Lewin said in the statement. ‘President Trump has made clear that the system is dead.’

The funding commitment is part of a newly signed Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. and the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

The agreement replaces project-by-project grants with consolidated, flexible pooled funding administered at the country or crisis level.

Tom Fletcher, the U.N.’s top humanitarian official and head of OCHA, welcomed the agreement, calling it a major breakthrough. ‘It’s a very significant landmark contribution,’ Fletcher said, according to the Associated Press.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz also said the deal would deliver more focused, results-driven aid aligned with U.S. foreign policy interests, while the State Department warned future funding will depend on continued reforms.