Transition Live Updates: Confirmation Hearings Will Test Trump’s Grip on Senate G.O.P.

“As we unite our country and usher in this new era of leadership, I ordered all flags to be raised to full-staff at the Texas Capitol and all state buildings for the inauguration of President Trump,” Governor Abbott said in a statement. “While we honor the service of a former President, we must also celebrate the service of an incoming President and the bright future ahead for the United States of America.”

As is customary after a former president’s death, on Dec. 29 President Biden ordered flags at the White House, on all public buildings and grounds, and at all military posts and naval stations, to be lowered for a period of 30 days following Mr. Carter’s death at age 100.

As justification for the order in Texas, the governor’s announcement cited guidance from the United States Code that the flag “should be displayed on all days” including the day of the inauguration.

But the statute also holds that “the flag shall be flown at half-staff 30 days from the death of the President or a former President,” and does not specify that any federal holiday should override the 30-day period.

The flag at Mr. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort had been lowered immediately after Mr. Carter’s death, but was already flying at full staff on Monday with a week to go until Mr. Trump reassumes the presidency. Though Mr. Trump’s residence is not a public building or subject to the order by Mr. Biden, the gesture there on behalf of Mr. Carter appeared to have ended, after Mr. Trump had previously expressed dismay that the mourning period would overlap with his inauguration.

“The Democrats are all ‘giddy’ about our magnificent American Flag potentially being at ‘half-mast’ during my Inauguration,” he wrote on social media earlier this month. “They think it’s so great, and are so happy about it because, in actuality, they don’t love our Country.”

Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.

The effort gets underway at 2 p.m. on Monday with a speech at the State Department focused on what he sees as his successes in the international arena. He plans to say that he strengthened U.S. alliances both in Europe in the face of Russian aggression as well as in the Asian-Pacific amid the rise of China. At the same time, he plans to argue that America’s adversaries — particularly Russia, China and Iran — are all weaker than when he came to office.

“He’s going to ask the question: is America stronger than we were four years ago? And he’s going to answer the question with a definitive yes,” Jake Sullivan, his national security adviser, said in a preview on “State of the Union” on CNN on Sunday. “Our alliances are stronger, as I said before. Our enemies and competitors are weaker. We kept the nation out of war. Every element of American power is stronger today.”

The speech will be the first this week aimed at presenting the best case for Mr. Biden’s presidency as it comes to an end. He will deliver a broader televised farewell address to the nation in prime time on Wednesday evening, much as many presidents have done. He will also deliver speeches this week on his conservation record and at a farewell ceremony for the commander in chief at Joint Base Myers-Henderson Hall.

On foreign policy, Mr. Biden has presided over a tumultuous time and Mr. Trump blamed him for the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, although no U.S. troops are directly involved on the ground in either place. Some critics said the perception of a world aflame and spinning out of Mr. Biden’s control contributed to the erosion of his political popularity at home and ultimately his withdrawal from the election under pressure.

“The fact that Biden is handing the presidency back to his predecessor is in part a reflection of his foreign policy shortcomings,” said Peter Rough, director of the Center on Europe and Eurasia at the Hudson Institute and a former aide to President George W. Bush.

“For most of his time in office, Biden has been on the defensive, first in Ukraine and then in Gaza,” Mr. Rough continued. “The president’s 1990s-era liberal internationalism may have been well intentioned, but it always felt out of step to me with the power politics of the 2020s.”

Still, a new Gallup poll released on Monday showed that America’s standing in Europe has improved strikingly under Mr. Biden. Of 30 NATO allies surveyed, approval of U.S. leadership rose in all but four since 2020, Mr. Trump’s last year in office. Approval ratings rose by double digits in 20 of the 30 countries. In Germany, for instance, approval of U.S. leadership rose from just 6 percent under Mr. Trump to 52 percent under Mr. Biden.

In pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan and extricating America from a the longest war in its history, Mr. Biden finally accomplished what his two predecessors wanted to but did not. But the chaotic nature of the withdrawal did considerable damage to both his and the country’s standing in the world.

Mr. Biden rallied much of the world to stand up to Russia’s unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine and reinvigorated NATO after ties frayed under Mr. Trump, even admitting two new members, Sweden and Finland. He steered tens of billions of dollars worth of American arms to Ukraine that helped thwart Moscow’s attempt to take over the country.

But Mr. Biden was criticized from two different directions; some complained he was too reticent to deliver more powerful weapons for fear of escalating with a nuclear superpower, while others complained that he was investing too much American treasure in someone else’s war. And after its initial stunning success, Ukraine’s defense has stalled and Mr. Trump is now promising to end the war with what are expected to be concessions to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

The war in Gaza that followed the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, was the other dominating crisis of Mr. Biden’s tenure. He stood staunchly by Israel and provided weapons for its all-out assault on Hamas, but eventually grew frustrated with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel who rebuffed American pressure to do more to curb civilian casualties and relieve humanitarian suffering.

Even now, in his final days, Mr. Biden is straining to seal an elusive cease-fire agreement that would end the fighting and result in the release of Israeli hostages held in Gaza, including a few with American citizenship. Mr. Sullivan said Sunday that U.S. negotiators were “very, very close” to a deal, but it was not clear it could be finalized by next Monday when Mr. Trump takes over.

As with Ukraine, Mr. Biden faced criticism from both directions. From one side, he was accused of not doing more to stop the killing of civilians and called “Genocide Joe” at protests. From the other side, he was faulted for putting pressure on Israel to restrain itself in the face of an existential terrorist threat.

MSNBC said on Monday that Ms. Maddow would temporarily return to broadcasting her one-hour show every weeknight at 9 p.m. Eastern for the duration of Mr. Trump’s first 100 days in office.

Through April 30, Alex Wagner, the anchor who filled Ms. Maddow’s time slot from Tuesdays to Fridays, will instead file reports from around the country “on the impacts of Trump’s early policies and promises on the electorate,” the network said.

Ms. Maddow signed a lucrative contract in 2021 that significantly raised her compensation while lowering her on-air commitments. She has since pursued several podcasts and documentaries, although MSNBC viewers regularly saw her hosting coverage of major events like election nights and last summer’s political conventions.

After April 30, Ms. Maddow will return to hosting only on Mondays, with Ms. Wagner taking the time slot for the rest of the week.

MSNBC’s ratings plummeted in the wake of Mr. Trump’s re-election in November. Executives at the network are hopeful that audiences will return as Mr. Trump takes office and viewers seek to dissect his early policy moves. Among other changes is a new fact-checking segment to be hosted by Chris Hayes called, “Here Is What Is True.”

Fox News also announced a programming change on Monday. Will Cain, a conservative pundit who is a weekend host of “Fox & Friends,” will depart his morning role and take over the 4 p.m. weekday hour on the network. That time slot had previously been occupied by a straightforward newscast hosted by Neil Cavuto, a veteran business journalist who signed off from his show in December.

Under the ruling, the Justice Department would be free to release the part of the report about the election case as early as just after midnight Tuesday morning. Mr. Trump’s lawyers could still ask an appeals court or the Supreme Court to stop that part of Mr. Smith’s report from coming out.

Judge Cannon’s order, filed in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla., was the latest twist in a weeklong battle over the release of the two-volume report, which represents Mr. Smith’s final word on the two defunct criminal cases he brought against Mr. Trump.

In one of those cases, overseen by Judge Cannon in Florida, Mr. Trump was charged with illegally holding on to a trove of state secrets after leaving office in 2021 and then conspiring with two of his aides to obstruct the government’s efforts to retrieve the material. In the other case, filed in Federal District Court in Washington, he was accused of three intersecting conspiracies to illegally maintain his grip on power after losing the presidential race.

The Justice Department has already said that Attorney General Merrick B. Garland wants to release the volume about the classified documents case privately to congressional leaders, not to the public, because the matter is still active against two aides to Mr. Trump who were charged with him as co-defendants.

But lawyers for the co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, said that plan was risky and expressed concern that the lawmakers might leak the contents of the volume.

In her order, Judge Cannon agreed with the defense lawyers and barred the Justice Department from showing that section of the report to anyone until the completion of all proceedings in the classified documents case.

“The court is not willing to make that gamble on the basis of generalized interest by members of Congress, at least not without full briefing and a hearing on the subject,” she wrote.

Judge Cannon suggested that much of the hearing on Friday may need to take place behind closed doors to avoid public dissemination of any of the contents of the classified documents volume.

The Justice Department has been fighting on numerous fronts to get Mr. Smith’s report into the public eye even though he formally stepped down from his post as special counsel on Friday.

Prosecutors had already appealed Judge Cannon’s original order blocking the release to a federal appeals court in Atlanta — the same court that had previously overturned one of her other unusual rulings in Mr. Trump’s favor. Prosecutors argued to the appeals court that she had no jurisdiction to issue the delay order in the first place, let alone extend it, but Judge Cannon proceeded anyway.

Still, Judge Cannon, in her order, asserted that she did have proper authority at least over the classified documents section of Mr. Smith’s report. She asserted jurisdiction in the issue because the release of the report could affect the cases of Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira.

After Mr. Trump won the 2024 election, Mr. Smith dropped both cases against him, bowing to a longstanding Justice Department policy that prohibits pursuing criminal prosecutions against sitting presidents.

While Mr. Trump will not stand trial in either case, Justice Department regulations call for special counsels to write final reports when they finish their work. In recent years, attorneys general have released such reports — including for the inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election, the counterinvestigation into that inquiry’s origins and the scrutiny of President Biden’s handling of classified documents — as highly detailed explanations of their findings for public understanding and history.

For more than a week, Mr. Trump’s legal team has been fiercely fighting to stop any part of Mr. Smith’s report from coming out, calling it a “one-sided” and “unlawful” attack on the president-elect. The lawyers have also expressed concern that the report could prove damaging or embarrassing to some unnamed but “anticipated” members of Mr. Trump’s administration.

Judge Cannon dismissed the classified documents case this summer on the grounds that Mr. Garland lacked the authority to appoint Mr. Smith — a ruling that conflicted with decades of higher-court precedent and Justice Department practice. Mr. Trump’s lawyers have used that ruling as another argument for why the report should be blocked from coming out, but the department has also appealed the ruling to the same appeals court in Atlanta.

The election interference case, which was brought before Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the Federal District Court in Washington, is also dead after being significantly slowed by a Supreme Court ruling in July that presidents are presumptively immune from prosecution over their official actions.

The ruling by Judge Cannon on Monday was a significant capitulation in one respect, but an escalation in another.

While she did not modify or rescind her original injunction with respect to the volume of the report concerning the election case, she is no longer trying to block the Justice Department from releasing that part after her freeze expires at the end of Monday.

But she has extended her blocking of the department from showing the classified documents case volume to the top members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees — which has been Mr. Garland’s plan. She ordered the two sides to come to her isolated courthouse on Friday for a hearing on its fate.

In a brief note, Judge Cannon wrote that she was not “persuaded” by the government’s view that because prosecutors have appealed her injunction to an appeals court she has no jurisdiction over the matter.

Citing the possibility that the appeals court could overturn her earlier decision to dismiss the case, she argued that she has a continuing responsibility to protect Mr. Nauta’s and Mr. De Oliveira’s right to a fair trial by making sure the documents report does not come out prematurely and taint any jury pool.

The possibility that a release of the report could infringe on Mr. Nauta’s and Mr. De Oliveira’s rights to a fair trial, she wrote, “clearly activates” her “obligation to preserve the integrity of this proceeding.”

She did not address an earlier suggestion by prosecutors that in the real world, it is “uncertain” whether the case against Mr. Trump’s two co-defendants will “ever proceed.”

That appeared to be a reference to the likelihood that Mr. Trump would swiftly end the remnants of the classified documents case after he takes office, either by pardoning his aides or by the Justice Department’s new politically appointed leaders directing prosecutors to drop the matter.

Arizona attorney general Kris Mayes, a Democrat, wrote a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Sunday seeking access to former special counsel Jack Smith’s files from his aborted prosecution of President-elect Trump for election interference. Mayes is leading her own state prosecution of a number of current and former Trump aides and allies for election interference. In her letter, she writes that her office had request access when Smith’s investigation was active but was rebuffed. But now the federal case has been abandoned.

“Given these changed circumstances, I am revisiting my office’s earlier request,” Mayes wrote, adding, that her “office has one of the only remaining cases that includes charges against national actors. I have held steadfast to prosecuting the grand jury’s indictment because those who tried to subvert democracy in 2020 must be held accountable.”

Mr. Hamm, the founder of Oklahoma-based Continental Resources, has been influential in Mr. Trump’s plans to gut environmental protections and allow unfettered access by energy companies to federal land and waters. He also helped raise money from others in the oil and gas industry, which spent more than $75 million on efforts to elect Mr. Trump.

Among the invited guests to Mr. Hamm’s celebration is Doug Burgum, Mr. Trump’s pick to run the Interior Department. Mr. Burgum’s term as governor of North Dakota ended last month and if he is confirmed, he would help determine the use of public land and federal waters. He is also Mr. Trump’s choice to run a government-wide energy council. Mr. Burgum received an invitation to the celebration from Mr. Hamm’s executive assistant two weeks after Mr. Trump’s victory in the November election.

Rob Lockwood, an adviser to Mr. Burgum, said in a statement that Mr. Burgum would not attend Mr. Hamm’s party and would instead participate in “formal inauguration proceedings” on Jan. 20.

Top sponsors of the Jan. 20 event listed on the invitation include the Domestic Producers Energy Alliance, a lobbying group that Mr. Hamm founded to aggressively fight climate change policies, and Unleash Energy, a conservative group that includes many advisers to Mr. Trump.

“Enjoy a remarkable experience to commemorate this momentous occasion with panoramic views of the White House and a vibrant atmosphere of celebration,” read a typed note from Mr. Hamm to Mr. Burgum accompanying the invitation. “This will be a memorable gathering of friends, supporters, and special guests. We look forward to celebrating this pivotal moment with you!”

The documents were obtained by Fieldnotes, a research group that focuses on the oil and gas industry, through a public records request and were reviewed by The New York Times.

Campaign finance experts said the private event did not appear to violate ethics rules. Administration officials and nominees can join widely attended receptions so long as they only accept the same food and refreshments as offered to other guests.

But many also noted that few others than big donors can get the chance to privately chat up the people who will be influencing America’s energy policy over the next four years.

“This is an invite-only, high-dollar event for folks seeking access to the incoming Trump administration,” said Tyson Slocum, who directs the energy program at Public Citizen, a watchdog group.

Even if Trump officials do not attend, “You are basically getting the ear of the president,” Mr. Slocum said. “You have access to Harold Hamm, who is at the back shoulder of Donald Trump, dictating the priorities of the American oil and gas industry.”

Mr. Hamm and Continental Resources, the largest oil producer in North Dakota’s Bakken field, did not respond to requests for comment.

Others sharing the cost of Mr. Hamm’s party include Liberty Energy, the gas services company founded by Chris Wright, who is Mr. Trump’s pick to lead the Energy Department. Mr. Wright is expected to step down from the company when he is confirmed by the Senate.

Summit Agriculture Group, the parent company of Summit Carbon Solutions LLC, is also an event sponsor. Mr. Hamm is an investor in Summit Carbon Solutions, based in Iowa, which plans to build a $9 billion project to collect carbon emissions from ethanol plants in five states and send it by pipeline to North Dakota, where it would be buried underground. As governor, Mr. Burgum was a strong supporter of the project, which has run into opposition from landowners and local officials in several states.

Summit Agriculture Group is run by Bruce Rastetter, who has donated to Mr. Trump and the Republican Party for years. Other sponsors include Devon Energy, an Oklahoma oil company with a long history of fighting climate regulation. Summit Agriculture Group and Devon Energy did not respond to requests for comment for this article.

The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s main lobbying group, is also a sponsor.

“API regularly sponsors events with policymakers on both sides of the aisle to educate on the critical role of American energy in powering our economy and strengthening national security,” Andrea Woods, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute, said in a statement.

During the 2024 campaign Mr. Trump asked oil and gas executives to raise $1 billion for his White House bid. At a dinner in April at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Mr. Trump promised about 20 oil and gas executives that they would save far more than that amount in avoided taxes and legal fees after he repealed environmental regulations, according to several people who were present and who requested anonymity to discuss a private event.

The fossil fuel industry has reveled in Mr. Trump’s victory. Mr. Trump has promised a swift elimination of President Biden’s limits on pollution from automobile tailpipes, power plant smokestacks and oil and gas wells. He also pledged to boost American liquefied natural gas exports — which are already at record levels — and said he would allow drilling in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and waive environmental regulations for companies that invest at least $1 billion in the United States.

The United States is currently producing more oil than any nation in history, and is the world’s biggest exporter of natural gas. Still, the oil and gas industry is glad to see the Biden administration go, said Thomas J. Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, which supports fossil fuel energy development.

“They’ve been hostile to domestic oil and gas production from day one, right up to the very end, and President Trump has made it clear that he sees the important role that this industry plays,” Mr. Pyle said.

“When I need to be in New York, I will be in New York,” she said. “When I need to be in Palm Beach, I will be in Palm Beach. But my first priority is, you know, to be a mom, to be a first lady, to be a wife.”

Mrs. Trump offered some hints about her likely role in the second Trump White House. She said she would continue her “Be Best” campaign, a program targeting youth mental health issues and social media use, and said she was still hiring staff members for her office — people she said would not have “their own agenda.”

Mrs. Trump did not immediately move in to the White House when her husband was inaugurated in 2017, but she said the second move-in would be more routine.

“This time I have everything,” she said. “I have the plans. I could move in. I already packed. I already selected the, you know, furniture that needs to go in.”

The Fox interview came as Mrs. Trump has increased her public profile after largely going out of sight after Mr. Trump’s 2020 defeat.

Mrs. Trump released a series of videos this fall, ahead of the publication of her memoir, “Melania.” Amazon said earlier this month that its streaming service would release a documentary about Mrs. Trump’s life, which started filming in December. Mrs. Trump will be an executive producer of the film, which is set to play in theaters and on the streaming service in the second half of the year.

“I just feel that people didn’t accept me maybe,” Mrs. Trump told Fox. “They didn’t understand me the way maybe they do now. And I didn’t have much support.”

Some people, she said, may have seen her as “just a wife of the president.”

“But I’m standing on my own two feet, independent,” she added. “I have my own thoughts. I have my own yes and no. I don’t always agree what my husband is saying or doing. And that’s OK.”

Asked whether President Biden and Jill Biden, the first lady, had been welcoming during the transition, Mrs. Trump avoided addressing whether she had interacted with them.

“They’re still living there, and they will be out on January 20,” she said. There are only five hours to move the Bidens out and the Trumps in, she said, “so everything needs to be planned to the minute.”

Mr. Bannon was an architect of Mr. Trump’s presidential election victory in 2016 and served for a time as chief strategist during his first term in the White House. Since his release in October from a four-month stint in federal prison for a contempt conviction, Mr. Bannon has renewed his war of words with Mr. Musk, who poured more than a quarter of a billion dollars into Mr. Trump’s election win in November and has since become a constant presence at his side.

In the interview, published last week, Mr. Bannon said of Mr. Musk: “He’s a truly evil person. Stopping him has become a personal issue for me.”

The insults reflect broader tension on the right in the United States about the direction of the movement that Mr. Trump has championed and fears that Mr. Musk — the world’s richest person and the owner of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter — could use his influence to sideline powerful figures within that movement to promote his own agenda. Mr. Musk does significant business with the federal government as the chief executive of SpaceX, and also runs the automaker Tesla.

Some right-wing personalities who initially welcomed Mr. Musk’s entry into Republican politics now say they feel deceived, raising questions about the durability of their alliance.

Mr. Trump tapped Mr. Musk to colead an effort aimed at slashing the federal bureaucracy, but it is not clear what if any role Mr. Bannon will have in the administration. Before he left office in 2021, Mr. Trump pardoned Mr. Bannon before he faced a trial on charges that he misused money he had helped raise for a group backing Mr. Trump’s border wall.

Mr. Musk has not publicly responded to the statements by Mr. Bannon.

One focus of their dispute has been the use of H-1B visas to bring skilled foreign workers to U.S. companies, a practice decried by some conservatives who oppose immigration. Mr. Musk supports the visas, like many tech leaders who say they help to bring critical workers to their companies. Mr. Bannon said in the interview that the visas prevented Americans from getting jobs.

Mr. Bannon said that Mr. Musk, whom he described as having “the maturity of a child,” had lost the policy debate over the visas. He also questioned whether the tech billionaire should limit his involvement in U.S. politics because he was born and grew up in South Africa during apartheid.

“He should go back to South Africa,” Mr. Bannon was quoted as saying.

“Mr. Kennedy is unqualified to lead the nation’s health department with a budget of over $1.6 trillion and over 80,000 employees,” the public letter states. “He has little to no relevant administrative, policy or health experience or expertise that would prepare him to oversee the work of critical public health agencies.”

Over the past several weeks, Mr. Kennedy has made the rounds on Capitol Hill, paying courtesy calls to senators who will consider his nomination. His confirmation is not assured, with some Republicans, including Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, chairman of the Senate Health Committee, having said that Mr. Kennedy’s vaccine skepticism gives them pause.

The letter published on Monday is only the latest public push by Kennedy opponents. A separate group, the Committee to Protect Health Care, said last week that it had gathered more than 15,000 signatures on a letter opposing Mr. Kennedy.

But Kennedy allies in the medical field are also mobilizing. In December, not long after Mr. Trump announced his nomination, a group of 800 medical professionals released its own letter supporting Mr. Kennedy. It said his nomination “represents an unparalleled chance to restore our nation’s health and renew trust in our public health institutions.”

Tech companies have protested the new rules, saying they threaten their sales and the future prospects of the American tech industry.

The rules put various limitations on the number of A.I. chips that companies can send to different countries, essentially dividing the world into three categories. The United States and 18 of its closest partners — including Britain, Canada, Germany, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan — are exempted from any restrictions and can buy A.I. chips freely.

Countries that are already subject to U.S. arms embargoes, like China and Russia, will continue to face a previously existing ban on A.I. chip purchases.

All other nations — most of the world — will be subject to caps restricting the number of A.I. chips that can be imported, though countries and companies are able to increase that number by entering into special agreements with the U.S. government. The rules could rankle some foreign governments: Even countries that are close trading partners or military allies of the United States, such as Mexico, Switzerland, Poland or Israel, will face restrictions on their ability to purchase larger amounts of American A.I. products.

The rules are aimed at stopping China from obtaining from other countries the technology it needs to produce artificial intelligence, after the United States banned such sales to China in recent years.

But the regulations also have broader goals: having allied countries be the location of choice for companies to build the world’s biggest data centers, in an effort to keep the most advanced A.I. models within the borders of the United States and its partners.

Governments around the world, particularly in the Middle East, have been pumping money into attracting and building enormous data centers, in a bid to become the next center for A.I. development.

Jake Sullivan, President Biden’s national security adviser, told reporters on Sunday that the rule would ensure that the infrastructure for training the most advanced artificial intelligence would be in the United States or in the jurisdiction of close allies, and “that capacity does not get offshored like chips and batteries and other industries that we’ve had to invest hundreds of billion dollars to bring back onshore.”

Mr. Sullivan said the rule would provide “greater clarity to our international partners and to industry,” while countering national security threats from malicious actors that could use “American technologies against us.”

It will be up to the Trump administration to decide whether to keep the new rules or how to enforce them. In a call with reporters on Sunday, Biden administration officials said that the rules had bipartisan support and that they had been in consultations with the incoming administration about them.

Though companies in China have begun to develop their own A.I. chips, the global market for such semiconductors is dominated by U.S. companies, particularly Nvidia. That dominance has given the U.S. government the ability to regulate the flow of A.I. technology worldwide, by restricting U.S. company exports.

Companies have protested those limitations, saying the restrictions could hamper innocuous or even beneficial types of computing, anger U.S. allies and ultimately push global buyers into buying non-American products, like those made by China.

In a statement, Ned Finkle, Nvidia’s vice president for government affairs, called the rule “unprecedented and misguided” and said it “threatens to derail innovation and economic growth worldwide.”

“Rather than mitigate any threat, the new Biden rules would only weaken America’s global competitiveness, undermining the innovation that has kept the U.S. ahead,” he said. Nvidia’s stock dipped more than 2 percent Monday morning.

Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft, said in a statement that the company was confident it could “comply fully with this rule’s high security standards and meet the technology needs of countries and customers around the world that rely on us.”

In a letter to congressional leadership on Sunday that was viewed by The New York Times, Jason Oxman, the president of the Information Technology Industry Council, a group representing tech companies, asked Congress to step in and use its authority to overturn the action if the Trump administration did not.

John Neuffer, the president of the Semiconductor Industry Association, said his group was “deeply disappointed that a policy shift of this magnitude and impact is being rushed out the door days before a presidential transition and without any meaningful input from industry.”

“The stakes are high, and the timing is fraught,” Mr. Neuffer added.

The rules, which run more than 200 pages, also set up a system in which companies that operate data centers, like Microsoft and Google, can apply for special government accreditations.

In return for following certain security standards, these companies can then trade in A.I. chips more freely around the globe. The companies will still have to agree to keep 75 percent of their total A.I. computing power within the United States or allied countries, and to locate no more than 7 percent of their computing power in any single other nation.

The rules also set up the first controls on weights for A.I. models, the parameters unique to each model that determine how artificial intelligence makes its predictions. Companies setting up data centers abroad will be required to adopt security standards to protect this intellectual property and prevent adversaries from gaining access to it.

Governments facing restrictions can raise the number of A.I. chips they can import freely by signing agreements with the U.S. government, in which they would agree to align with U.S. goals for protecting A.I.

Under the guidance of the U.S. government, Microsoft struck an agreement to team up with an Emirati firm, G42, last year, in return for G42’s eliminating Huawei equipment from its systems and taking other steps.

The Biden administration could issue more rules related to chips and A.I. in the coming days, including an executive order to encourage domestic energy generation for data centers, and new rules that aim to keep the most cutting-edge chips out of China, people familiar with the deliberations said.

The latter rule is a response to an incident last year in which U.S. officials discovered that Huawei, a Chinese telecom firm under U.S. sanctions, had been obtaining components for its A.I. chips that were manufactured by a leading Taiwanese chip firm, in violation of U.S. export controls.

The announcements are among a flurry of new regulations that the Biden administration is rushing to issue before the presidential turnover as it tries to close loopholes and cement its legacy on countering China’s technological development. The administration has issued new limits on exports of chip-making equipment to China and other countries, proposed new restrictions on Chinese drones, added new Chinese companies to a military blacklist and hurried to complete new subsidies for U.S. chip manufacturing.

But the A.I. regulations issued Monday appear to be among the most sweeping and consequential of these actions. Artificial intelligence is quickly transforming how scientists carry out research, how companies allocate tasks between their employees and how militaries operate. While A.I. has many beneficial uses, U.S. officials have grown more concerned that it could enable the development of new weapons, help countries surveil dissidents and otherwise upend the global balance of power.

Jimmy Goodrich, a senior adviser for technology analysis at the RAND Corporation, said the rules would create a framework for protecting U.S. security interests while still allowing firms to compete abroad. “They are also forward-looking, trying to preserve U.S. and allied-led supply chains before they are offshored to the highest subsidy bidder,” he said.

The next day, Mr. Trump is scheduled to hold a rally at Capital One Arena in Washington with his supporters. He is expected to visit Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia before the rally, and then to attend a candlelight dinner with supporters. And on Monday, Jan. 20, Mr. Trump, the only person besides Grover Cleveland to be elected to nonconsecutive terms, will be sworn in as the 47th president.

At Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Va., which overlooks the Potomac River, the inaugural committee plans to use the entire sprawling clubhouse, officials said. Mr. Trump’s aides are preparing for hours of music videos to be shown on dozens of televisions placed throughout the three floors of the club.

The event will feature what Mr. Trump likes to see and hear at public events and will include some Trump hallmarks, like a five-hour music playlist. There will be a well-known Elvis impersonator and tribute performer named Leo Days, as well as Christopher Macchio, a tenor whom Mr. Trump has featured at his last two Republican National Conventions and at an October rally in Butler, Pa. Pop-up performances will take place throughout the night, officials said.

The evening will include an extensive fireworks display and, most likely, tents set up outside to accommodate guests in freezing weather. The following day, Mr. Trump will attend a victory rally at Capital One Arena.

The rally underscores how much Mr. Trump feeds off his supporters, but also how much has changed in eight years. In 2017, shortly after a bitterly fought election, a Trump rally in the heart of Washington — a decidedly Democratic-leaning city — would have been unimaginable. But Mr. Trump, who increased his share of the vote in several major cities, made a point in the 2024 campaign of holding rallies in Democratic-leaning places, including New York City, where he filled Madison Square Garden.

One thing that has not changed, however, is Mr. Trump’s preference for using, and showcasing, his properties.

When Mr. Trump first arrived in Washington in January 2017, his initial stop was the hotel — converted from a federal post office building — that he had opened the year before on Pennsylvania Avenue and where several hundred of his supporters were gathered for an official luncheon.

But he no longer has the lease to the hotel, which is owned by the federal government and was a central gathering place for his allies, advisers, administration officials and lobbyists while he was in office. That ownership prompted criticism from Democrats about conflicts of interest. Republicans often said that they found that holding events at his properties was easier than working at other hotels, where some employees and workers were not fans of Mr. Trump.

The Trump Organization sold the lease after Mr. Trump left office in 2021. It was the only place that Mr. Trump would visit in Washington for dinners outside the White House.

Mr. Trump’s son Eric has been pushing to try to reacquire it.

The inaugural committee for Mr. Trump’s second term has raised a staggering amount of money, according to multiple people briefed on the figure. It exceeds $170 million, they said, far outpacing the $107 million that Mr. Trump’s allies raised for the inaugural events in 2017. The current inaugural committee has run out of tickets for events, and some are donating even while knowing that they may not make it into the venues to see Mr. Trump.