MILAN (AP) — Zach Werenski and his U.S. teammates tried not to look ahead at a potential gold-medal game against Canada at the Olympics. After each went unbeaten in group play, there was no way the North American rivals could meet before the final, but there was work left to do.

After routing Slovakia 6-2 in the semifinals on Friday night, the much-anticipated but never guaranteed U.S.-Canada showdown for gold is on.

“It’s the matchup everyone wanted,” Werenski said after his three-assist performance against Slovakia. “Now that it’s finally here, we can kind of shift our focus to Canada.”

The two top seeds in the tournament, who went in as the favorites, will meet Sunday. It comes a year after the U.S. and Canada played two memorable games against each other at the 4 Nations Face-Off.

“It’s the final that we wanted and the team that we wanted to play,” winger Matt Boldy said. “It’s exciting for the fans and for hockey and everything like that.’’

Jack Hughes #86 of Team United States celebrates after scoring a goal with Matt Boldy #12 and Brady Tkachuk #7 of Team United States in the second period during the Men’s Semifinals Playoff match between the United States and Slovakia on day fourteen of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic games at Milano Santagiulia Ice Hockey Arena on Feb. 20, 2026, in Milan, Italy. (Jamie Squire/Getty Images/TNS)

That NHL-run event ended a drought of nearly a decade without an international tournament featuring the best hockey players in the world. Three fights in the first nine seconds in the first meeting put the 4 Nations in the spotlight, and their epic final won by Canada in overtime only built the anticipation for the Olympics.

“Now that it’s all set in stone, everything happens for a reason,” said Brady Tkachuk, who along with brother Matthew and J.T. Miller were involved in the 4 Nations fisticuffs. “We’ll be looking forward to this one. You guys have been talking about it for a while. Now you get to enjoy it.”

After Canada did its part by rallying to beat Finland earlier in the day, the U.S. had no trouble against the Slovaks, who made an improbable run and were simply overmatched. They’ll face the Finns for bronze on Saturday night, looking for just the second hockey medal in the country’s history after getting the first with a third-place finish in Beijing in 2022.

The U.S. is playing for gold after the semifinals were a much easier go than the quarterfinals against Sweden, when overtime was needed to survive a scare. Dylan Larkin, Tage Thompson, Jack Hughes and Jack Eichel scored the four goals on 23 shots that chased Samuel Hlavaj out of Slovakia’s net past the midway point of the second period.

Thompson, one of just a handful of newcomers who did not play at the 4 Nations, exited later in the second after blocking a shot and did not return. Coach Mike Sullivan said Thompson “was held out for precautionary reasons more than anything.”

“We’ll see how he recovers, but I anticipate him being ready for game time,” Sullivan said.

Hughes got his second goal of the game just after a power play expired, and Brady Tkachuk scored on a breakaway with just over nine minutes left to provide some more breathing room.

“That was definitely one of our strongest games, for sure,” said Quinn Hughes, who along with brother Jack have been the best U.S. players in Milan. “For the most part, we played really well. A little bit looser there in the third, but it’s a 5-0 game and you want to get out safe and feel good for the next game.”

Goaltender Connor Hellebuyck did his job as his teammates outshot Slovakia by a substantial margin. Everything he has done at the Olympics has validated Sullivan’s decision to go with Hellebuyck as the U.S. starter over Jake Oettinger and Jeremy Swayman.

The U.S. last reached the final in 2010, when it lost to Canada in overtime on Sidney Crosby’s famous golden goal. Crosby’s status is uncertain this time after getting injured in the quarterfinals Wednesday and not playing Friday against Finland.

The last U.S. men’s hockey gold came in 1980 with the “Miracle on Ice” in Lake Placid.

“It definitely motivates us,” Werenski said. “We’ve talked about. We’re well aware of it. I don’t think it’s pressure. It’s fun. It’s exciting.”

Related Articles

Lindsey Vonn has more surgery after Olympic crash

‘Hotdog’ in the halfpipe! Alex Ferreira finally wins his Olympic gold

US sets up gold-medal game against Canada at the Olympics by cruising past Slovakia

Bagpipers play at Olympic curling in homage to sport’s Scottish heritage — but they’re Italian

Organizers of the Winter Games made clean energy a priority. Here’s how they did it

Rudy Gobert picked up another flagrant foul Friday against Dallas. After an official review, the referees determined Gobert delivered unnecessary contact to the head and neck area of Marvin Bagley III as the two jostled for position in the final minute of the first half.

It was a flagrant-1, meaning Gobert was able to resume play in the game. But it’s another flagrant point on Gobert’s season-long ledger, meaning the center will again be suspended by the NBA. He will miss Sunday’s game against Philadelphia.

It’s the second game Gobert has missed this season due to an excess of flagrant foul points.

Any future flagrant fouls accrued over Minnesota’s final 24 regular season contests will result in an automatic two-game suspension for the Frenchman.

The flagrant foul point system does reset at the start of the postseason.

Related Articles

Mike Conley wanted to stay in Minnesota with his family … and his brothers

‘Full out sprint’: It’s go time for the Timberwolves in the ultra-competitive West

Mike Conley re-signs with Timberwolves, will practice Wednesday

Randle has 41 points and the Timberwolves dominate the Blazers 133-109

NBA fines Hawks’ Mouhamed Gueye and Timberwolves’ Naz Reid $35,000 each

By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER and ERIC TUCKER

WASHINGTON (AP) — A lawyer picked by judges to serve as the top federal prosecutor for a Virginia office that pursued cases against foes of President Donald Trump was swiftly fired Friday by the Justice Department in the latest clash over the appointments of powerful U.S. attorneys.

Related Articles

Trump seethes over Supreme Court justices who opposed him on tariffs, especially those he appointed

Trump administration to stand by tough Biden-era mandates to replace lead pipes

Texas man was fatally shot by a federal immigration agent last year during a stop, new records show

US audit finds gaps in the FAA’s oversight of United Airlines maintenance

Judge weighs Washington Post’s demand for government to return devices seized from reporter’s home

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the firing of James Hundley on social media shortly after he was unanimously chosen by judges to replace former Trump lawyer Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. While the law says that the district court may choose U.S. attorneys when an initial appointment expires, the Trump administration has insisted that the power lies only in the hands of the executive branch.

“EDVA judges do not pick our US Attorney. POTUS does. James Hundley, you’re fired!” Blanche said in a post on X.

Hundley, who has handled criminal and civil cases for more than 30 years, didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment Friday evening.

The firing of Hundley is the latest reflection of tumult in one of the Justice Department’s most elite prosecution offices, which since September has been mired in upheaval following the resignation of a veteran prosecutor amid Trump administration pressure to prosecute two of the president’s biggest political foes, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

That prosecutor, Erik Siebert, was effectively forced out and swiftly replaced by Halligan, a White House aide who secured indictments against Comey and James but was later deemed by a judge to have been unlawfully appointed. The cases were dismissed, but the Justice Department has appealed that decision.

Halligan resigned from the position last month after judges in the district signaled continued skepticism over the legitimacy of her appointment.

U.S. attorneys, the top federal prosecutors in regional Justice Department offices around the country, typically require Senate confirmation but the law does permit attorneys general to make temporary appointments for limited time periods. In several instances, though, the Justice Department has attempted to leave its temporary appointees in place in ways that have invited court challenges and drawn resistance from judges who have found the appointments unlawful.

Last week, a lawyer appointed by judges to be the U.S. attorney for northern New York was fired by the Justice Department after spending less than a day in the job. Judges in the district appointed Kinsella after declining to keep the Trump administration’s pick, John Sarcone, in place after his 120-day term elapsed.

By MARK SHERMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s vision of the Supreme Court, in which his three appointees are personally loyal to him, collided with the court’s view of itself Friday when six justices voted to strike down Trump’s signature economic policy — global tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law.

Related Articles

Justice Department swiftly fires lawyer chosen as top federal prosecutor for Virginia office

Trump administration to stand by tough Biden-era mandates to replace lead pipes

Texas man was fatally shot by a federal immigration agent last year during a stop, new records show

US audit finds gaps in the FAA’s oversight of United Airlines maintenance

Judge weighs Washington Post’s demand for government to return devices seized from reporter’s home

The outcome led Trump to launch an unusually stark personal attack on the justices, with special rancor reserved for the two Trump appointees who defied him.

The case represented a challenge of Trump’s many untested, yet forcefully stated imperatives on everything from trade to immigration policy and the court’s ability to maintain its independence and, at times, act as a check on presidential authority.

“The Supreme Court’s ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing and I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country,” Trump said in the White House briefing room several hours after the court issued its decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts.

Trump said he expected as much from the three Democratic appointees on the court. “But you can’t knock their loyalty,” he said. “It’s one thing you can do with some of our people.”

Asked specifically about Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, who were part of the majority, Trump said, “I think it’s an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth, the two of them.”

Vice President JD Vance, whose wife, Usha, spent a year as a law clerk to Roberts, echoed the president’s criticism, though he didn’t make it personal. “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple,” Vance wrote on X.

Legal opposition to the tariffs crossed political lines, with a key challenge coming from the libertarian-leaning Liberty Justice Center and support from pro-business groups like the Chamber of Commerce.

Trump has had a checkered history with the court dating back to the start of his first White House term in 2017, though he won his biggest court battle in 2024, a presidential immunity ruling that prevented him from being prosecuted over efforts to undo his 2020 election loss.

In the first year of his second term, he won repeated emergency appeals that allowed him to implement major aspects of his immigration crackdown and other key parts of his agenda.

Presidential criticism of Supreme Court decisions has its own long history. President Thomas Jefferson was critical of the court’s landmark Marbury v. Madison case, which established the concept of judicial review of congressional and executive action. President Franklin Roosevelt, frustrated about decisions he thought blunted parts of the New Deal, talked about older justices as infirm and sought to expand the court, a failed effort.

In 2010, President Barack Obama used his State of the Union speech, with several members of the court in attendance, to take aim at the court’s just-announced Citizens United decision that helped open the floodgates to independent spending in federal elections. Justice Samuel Alito, who hasn’t attended the annual address since, mouthed the words “not true” in response from his seat.

Trump, though, crossed a line in the way he assailed the justices who voted against him, Ed Whelan, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a former law clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia, wrote in an email.

“It’s entirely fine for a president to criticize a Supreme Court ruling that goes against him. But it’s demagogic for President Trump to contend that the justices who voted against him did so because of lack of courage,” Whelan wrote.

Some presidents also have criticized justices they appointed for decisions they’ve made.

Following the seminal Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower told friends that appointing Chief Justice Earl Warren had been his biggest mistake, according to biographer Stephen E. Ambrose.

Objecting to a dissenting vote in an antitrust case, President Theodore Roosevelt once allegedly said of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, wounded in action during the Civil War, that he ”could carve out of a banana a judge with more backbone.”

But these remarks were conveyed in private, not at a livestreamed presidential appearance in the White House briefing room.

On a personal level, Trump has had a sometimes tense relationship with Roberts, who has twice issued public rebukes of the president over attacks on federal judges.

Trump didn’t mention Roberts by name on Friday, but he seemed to be assailing the chief justice when he said he lost the case because the justices “want to be politically correct,” “catering to a group of people in D.C.”

Trump used similar language when he criticized Roberts’ vote in 2012 that upheld Obamacare.

Similar to the timing following the Citizens United ruling, the president and some members of the court, dressed in their black robes, are likely to be in the same room Tuesday when Trump delivers his State of the Union address.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once nodded off during a presidential speech in the House of Representatives, attributing her drowsiness to some fine California wine. No justice is likely to be napping Tuesday night.