Denmark will head to the polls March 24 after Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called a snap parliamentary election, a move widely viewed as an attempt to consolidate rising public support tied to her handling of tensions with President Donald Trump over Greenland.

Frederiksen announced the early vote Wednesday, arguing Denmark needs political clarity at a time of mounting geopolitical pressure. According to Reuters, she said the country faces «a serious foreign policy situation,» adding voters should have a say in how Denmark navigates it.

Her center-left Social Democratic government has seen a lift in opinion polls in recent weeks after taking a firm stance that Greenland is not for sale and that Danish sovereignty is non-negotiable. 

The dispute with Washington has reshaped the domestic political conversation, pushing Arctic security and national sovereignty to the forefront of Danish politics.

Frederiksen, who has led Denmark since mid-2019, has spent much of the past year managing the fallout from Trump’s renewed push to acquire Greenland, the vast Arctic island that is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Tensions escalated sharply last month when Trump threatened to impose new tariffs on Denmark and several other European Union countries.

Trump has argued that the United States needs control of the North Atlantic island for national security reasons, citing increased activity by Russia and China in the Arctic. The region has grown in strategic importance as melting ice opens shipping routes and access to natural resources, intensifying competition among major powers.

The standoff appeared to ease after Trump announced that a framework agreement to strengthen Arctic security had been reached in talks with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. After that announcement, U.S., Danish and Greenlandic officials began technical discussions on implementing the arrangement, focusing on security coordination rather than any change in sovereignty.

Throughout the crisis, Frederiksen and other senior Danish officials repeatedly emphasized that Greenland’s status is not up for negotiation. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference earlier in February, Frederiksen cautioned that she did not believe the crisis had fully passed and suggested Washington could still harbor ambitions to annex the island.

RUSSIA, CHINA SQUEEZE US ARCTIC DEFENSE ZONE AS TRUMP EYES GREENLAND

Danish soldiers land at Nuuk airport in Greenland Jan. 19, 2026.  (Mads Claus Rasmussen/Ritzau Scanpix/via Reuters)

According to The Guardian, Danish commentators have described the prime minister’s polling boost as a «Greenland bounce,» reflecting growing domestic approval of her firm posture toward Washington.

Frederiksen’s decision to call early elections appears aimed at converting that surge into a renewed mandate. Denmark’s next general election had not been scheduled until later this year, but the prime minister argued that the current security climate justifies seeking fresh voter backing.

Greenland, home to roughly 56,000 people, has long been strategically significant due to its location between North America and Europe. The United States maintains a military presence there at Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base. Any suggestion of U.S. acquisition has historically been sensitive in both Copenhagen and Nuuk, Greenland’s capital.

Euronews reported that Frederiksen’s government has stressed cooperation with allies while firmly rejecting any negotiations over Greenland’s sovereignty. European leaders have signaled support for Denmark, reinforcing the view that Arctic stability is increasingly central to NATO and EU planning.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

People protest against Trump’s policy toward Greenland in front of the U.S/. consulate in Nuuk, Greenland, Jan. 17, 2026. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Opposition parties have criticized the timing of the snap election, arguing that Frederiksen is seeking a political advantage during a moment of heightened nationalism. Others, however, have largely backed the government’s line on Greenland, suggesting that the sovereignty issue may transcend traditional party divides.

The March 24 vote will determine whether Frederiksen can strengthen her coalition or voters shift the parliamentary balance. It will also serve as a broader test of how Danes believe their country should manage its relationship with Washington as Arctic security becomes a defining issue of global competition.

Related Article

Sembrar el pánico

Violencia brutal, seña de identidad del CJNG

Criminales “expertos en tecnología”

A federal judge appointed by former President Joe Biden on Thursday again ruled against the Trump administration’s third-country deportation policy, months after the Supreme Court blocked his earlier decision and rebuked him in a rare follow-up order.

The Supreme Court not only stayed Boston-based Judge Brian Murphy’s injunction over the same deportation policy in a 6-3 order last June, but the high court followed up with a second 7-2 order a week later admonishing the judge for flouting its decision. Murphy’s latest ruling is also likely to land before the justices, setting up a fresh test of the judge’s decisions in the high-stakes case.

Murphy, who was confirmed by the Senate along party lines, had issued a sweeping 81-page decision on Thursday finding that the Department of Homeland Security’s process for deporting migrants to third countries (countries that are not specified in the migrants’ removal orders) was unlawful because it violated the migrants’ due process by not giving them enough time to raise fears that they could be tortured in the country they are sent to.

Murphy’s decision came after the judge last year issued a preliminary injunction that also blocked DHS from deporting migrants to third countries under the department’s current protocols. The Supreme Court’s order in June halted that decision, but, pointing to a technicality, Murphy said that a separate subsequent ruling he made on May 21 specifically addressing six migrants bound for South Sudan was still «in full force and effect» despite the high court’s stay.

The judge’s move led the Department of Justice to ask the Supreme Court for clarification, and the high court responded by issuing its follow-up 7-2 opinion saying Murphy could not block DHS from deporting the six migrants.

«Our June 23 order stayed the April 18 preliminary injunction in full. The May 21 remedial order cannot now be used to enforce an injunction that our stay rendered unenforceable,» the Supreme Court’s majority wrote.

In an unusual move, the majority also noted that if the government needed further help to stop Murphy’s interference, it could seek a writ of mandamus, a rare legal tool used by a higher court to force a lower court judge to follow the law.

Department of Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem (Getty Images/Alex Brandon)

The high court said it expected Murphy to «now conform [his] order to our previous stay and cease enforcing the April 18 injunction through the May 21 remedial order.»

Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee who agreed with Murphy’s initial decision to block the deportations, sided with the majority in agreeing that the judge had acted defiantly.

«I do not see how a district court can compel compliance with an order that this Court has stayed,» Kagan wrote in a concurring opinion.

FEDERAL JUDGE RULES AGAINST DHS ON WARRANTLESS IMMIGRATION ARRESTS IN OREGON

Justice Elena Kagan joined the Supreme Court in 2010 after being nominated by former President Barack Obama. (Reuters/Jonathan Ernst)

The DOJ had fumed over Murphy’s attempt to block the deportation of the six migrants. Solicitor General John Sauer described it as a «lawless act of defiance» of the Supreme Court’s authority when seeking clarification from the high court.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«For over two months now, the Executive has labored under an injunction that this Court yesterday deemed unenforceable,» Sauer wrote. «This Court should immediately make clear that the district court’s enforcement order has no effect, and put a swift end to the ongoing irreparable harm to the Executive Branch and its agents, who remain under baseless threat of contempt as they are forced to house dangerous criminal aliens at a military base in the Horn of Africa that now lies on the borders of a regional conflict.»

Murphy said in his ruling Thursday that DHS’s deportation policy was «not fine nor is it legal.» During the prior administration, when Murphy was appointed to the federal bench, Biden sought to undo Trump’s strict immigration policies, leading to nearly 10 million migrant encounters at the southern border. Biden also faced criticism for lax policies that involved releasing millions of migrants into the country during his tenure while they awaited immigration hearings. Border encounters have dropped dramatically since Trump retook office.

Murphy stayed his ruling for 15 days to give the Trump administration time to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, given what the judge acknowledged was the «importance» and «unusual history» of the case.

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

Related Article