Resolved: On balance, in the United States, the benefits of presidential executive orders outweigh the harms

I. Introduction

A. Framing the Debate: The Resolution on Executive Orders

This resolution encapsulates a fundamental tension within the American system of governance. Presidential Executive Orders (EOs) are often presented as indispensable tools for efficient administration and decisive leadership, particularly in times of crisis or legislative stagnation.1 Conversely, they are frequently criticized as instruments that allow presidents to bypass the deliberative processes of Congress, potentially leading to executive overreach, policy instability, and an erosion of the separation of powers integral to the constitutional framework.2 Understanding the arguments surrounding the utility and legitimacy of EOs is therefore crucial for evaluating the balance between their perceived benefits and harms.

B. Defining the Scope: Purpose and Structure of the Report

The purpose of this post is to provide a neutral, comprehensive, and balanced backgrounder specifically tailored for participants in a debate concerning the aforementioned resolution. It aims to equip debaters with a thorough understanding of U.S. presidential EOs by examining their definition, legal underpinnings, general advantages and disadvantages, and various frameworks through which they can be evaluated. A significant portion of the analysis will focus on the specific use of EOs during the Trump administration, providing concrete examples relevant to contemporary discussions of executive power. The structure will proceed as follows: first, a definition of EOs and their characteristics; second, an explanation of the President’s role within the constitutional system of checks and balances; third, an exploration of the generally cited benefits and harms associated with EOs; fourth, a case study examining the use of EOs by President Trump; fifth, a discussion of different analytical lenses (legal, policy, ethical) for evaluating EOs; and finally, a synthesis of the core tensions inherent in the debate.

II. The Nature of Presidential Executive Orders

A. Definition and Characteristics

A presidential executive order in the United States is formally understood as a signed, written, and published directive issued by the President.6 Its primary function is to manage the operations of the federal government’s executive branch.6 These directives are numbered consecutively, allowing for specific referencing, and are officially published in the Federal Register, the daily journal of the federal government.6 Typically, EOs are directed towards government officials and agencies, guiding their actions and enforcing policies.11

While not legislation in the sense of laws passed by Congress, EOs can possess the force and effect of law provided they are issued pursuant to legitimate constitutional or statutory authority vested in the President.1 They do not require approval from Congress to be issued.1

It is important to distinguish EOs from other forms of presidential directives, although the lines can sometimes blur. Proclamations, also signed and numbered, are often directed towards the public, communicating information on holidays, commemorations, or trade matters, and are generally considered more ceremonial unless based on specific legal authority.5 Presidential memoranda can carry similar weight and direct agency action but are not always required to be published in the Federal Register, unless the President determines they have “general applicability and legal effect”.5 Administrative orders typically handle more routine internal management matters and are not numbered.6 Despite these distinctions, multiple analyses concur that the substantive difference, particularly between EOs and memoranda, is often more a matter of form than legal substance; the critical factor determining legal effect is the underlying authority for the directive, not its title.11 This suggests that an evaluation focused solely on documents explicitly labeled “Executive Order” might overlook functionally equivalent exercises of unilateral presidential power issued under different names. The core issue often lies in the scope and basis of the President’s directive power itself, regardless of the specific instrument used.

B. Constitutional and Statutory Foundations

The authority for presidential EOs is not explicitly granted or defined within the U.S. Constitution.5 Instead, the power to issue such directives is understood as an inherent aspect of the presidential office, derived primarily from Article II of the Constitution.11 Key clauses underpinning this authority include the Vesting Clause, which states that “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America” (Article II, Section 1); the President’s role as “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy” (Article II, Section 2); and the Take Care Clause, which mandates that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, Section 3).4

Crucially, for an EO to have legal effect, it must be rooted in one of these Article II powers or stem from an express or implied delegation of authority granted to the President by Congress through statute.3 Congress can grant this authority proactively before an order is issued, or in some cases, ratify an EO after its issuance through subsequent legislation or, rarely, through implied acquiescence.11

This dual sourcing of authority—from the Constitution directly and from congressional delegation—creates a spectrum for assessing the legal strength and legitimacy of EOs. This concept was famously articulated by Justice Robert Jackson in his concurring opinion in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952). EOs issued pursuant to explicit or implicit congressional authorization represent the zenith of presidential authority, benefiting from the combined powers of both branches.3 Conversely, EOs issued in defiance of the expressed or implied will of Congress stand at the “lowest ebb” of presidential power and are most vulnerable to legal challenge.11 Between these poles lies a “zone of twilight” where the President acts without clear congressional approval or disapproval, relying on independent constitutional powers; the validity of EOs in this zone often depends on specific circumstances, historical practice, and potential congressional acquiescence.3

C. Scope, Limitations, and Enforcement

The primary scope of EOs involves managing the internal operations of the federal government, directing the actions of federal agencies and officials, setting administrative policy priorities, and guiding the implementation of existing laws.1 While EOs generally govern the executive branch, they can indirectly affect private individuals and entities, particularly those who contract with the federal government or receive federal funds.4 However, an EO cannot unilaterally impose new legal obligations directly on private parties without a basis in statute.4

Significant limitations constrain the power of EOs. Fundamentally, an EO cannot override the Constitution or contradict a federal statute duly enacted by Congress.4 The President cannot use an EO to perform functions exclusively granted to Congress, such as appropriating funds from the Treasury (the “power of the purse”) or creating entirely new laws independent of existing legislation.1 Furthermore, EOs are subject to judicial review; courts can assess their legality and constitutionality, potentially striking them down if they exceed the President’s authority or violate legal requirements.1

A defining characteristic of EOs is their potential impermanence.11 Unlike statutes, which require congressional action to repeal, EOs remain in effect only until they are canceled, revoked, found unlawful by a court, or expire according to their own terms.6 A sitting president possesses the authority to revoke or modify any EO, whether issued by themselves or by a predecessor.6 Additionally, Congress can pass new legislation to nullify or alter the effect of an EO that was based on authority Congress had previously delegated to the President, although such legislation is itself subject to a potential presidential veto.4 This inherent lack of permanence is often cited as a major drawback, contributing to policy instability and uncertainty across administrations.1 However, this same characteristic can be viewed from another perspective: the ease with which EOs can be reversed allows subsequent administrations, potentially reflecting a different electoral mandate, to quickly correct or change policies implemented unilaterally by their predecessors.19 This capacity for rapid reversal, while disruptive, might offer a form of democratic responsiveness not always possible with more entrenched laws or regulations.

III. The Presidency and the Constitutional Framework

A. The President’s Role and Executive Power (Article II Duties)

Article II of the Constitution establishes the President as the head of the executive branch, assigning roles such as Head of State, leader of the federal government, and Commander in Chief of the armed forces.4 Central to the President’s function, and directly relevant to the authority to issue EOs, is the constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”.4 This clause is widely interpreted as granting the President the power and responsibility to manage the executive bureaucracy and implement federal policy, often through directives like EOs.4

The President’s power also includes nominating principal officers of the U.S., including Cabinet members and federal judges (subject to Senate confirmation), who then operate within the executive or judicial branches.36 EOs serve as a primary mechanism for the President to direct the actions of these appointed officials and the agencies they lead. In foreign affairs, the President holds significant power, including the authority to make treaties (with Senate consent), receive ambassadors, and formally recognize foreign governments.3 EOs are frequently employed tools in the conduct of foreign policy and national security matters.24

The precise scope of the “Take Care” clause, however, remains a subject of ongoing debate and is central to evaluating the legitimacy of many EOs. One view holds that the clause primarily obligates the President to execute laws as enacted by Congress, limiting executive discretion. A contrasting view interprets the clause more broadly, suggesting it grants the President significant latitude in interpreting statutes and determining how best to implement them, potentially allowing for EOs that shape policy in ways not explicitly detailed or perhaps even envisioned by Congress.4 This interpretive divergence fuels disagreements over whether specific EOs represent a faithful execution of the law or constitute an improper encroachment into the legislative sphere.4

B. Executive Orders within the System of Checks and Balances

The U.S. Constitution establishes a system of separation of powers, dividing governmental authority among three distinct branches: the Legislative Branch (Congress), responsible for making laws; the Executive Branch (President), responsible for enforcing laws; and the Judicial Branch (Courts), responsible for interpreting laws.4 This structure is designed to prevent the concentration of power in any single entity and thereby protect liberty.49 Integral to this design is a system of checks and balances, where each branch possesses powers that can constrain the actions of the others.40

Executive power, including the authority to issue EOs, is subject to several checks. Congress holds significant power: it enacts the laws that EOs generally cannot contradict, controls all federal spending through the appropriations process (the “power of the purse”), must confirm key presidential appointments, can override presidential vetoes with a supermajority, possesses the power of impeachment and removal, conducts oversight of executive actions, and can pass new laws to supersede EOs that are based on delegated authority.3 The Judicial Branch provides another crucial check by reviewing the legality and constitutionality of EOs and associated agency actions, with the power to invalidate those that exceed authority or violate the law.1

Despite these checks, the extensive use of EOs is often criticized for potentially disrupting the constitutional balance. Critics argue that relying heavily on EOs allows presidents to bypass the legislative process, avoiding the debate, compromise, and public scrutiny inherent in congressional lawmaking, thereby concentrating excessive policymaking power within the executive branch and weakening the separation of powers.1

The practical effectiveness of these checks, however, can be significantly influenced by the prevailing political landscape. Notably, when the same political party controls both Congress and the presidency, the legislative branch’s willingness to actively check executive actions, such as potentially controversial EOs, may diminish.35 Partisan loyalty can override institutional prerogatives, making legislative oversight, funding denials, or statutory overrides less likely.35 In such scenarios of unified government, the judiciary often emerges as the primary institutional check on potential executive overreach through EOs, although judicial processes can be lengthy and their outcomes uncertain.38 This highlights the interplay between formal constitutional structures and informal political dynamics in shaping the real-world constraints on executive power.

IV. Weighing the Arguments: General Benefits and Harms

Evaluating the resolution requires a careful consideration of the generally asserted benefits and drawbacks associated with the use of presidential executive orders.

A. Asserted Benefits of Executive Orders (Pros)

Proponents of executive orders often highlight several key advantages they offer within the U.S. system of governance:

1. Efficiency and Speed: Perhaps the most frequently cited benefit is the ability of EOs to facilitate swift government action.1 Unlike the legislative process, which can be protracted and subject to delays, EOs allow presidents to respond rapidly to pressing issues or implement policy changes without waiting for congressional consensus. They are described as an “expedient tool” for policymaking, particularly valuable in the initial days of an administration to set direction.19
2. Addressing Emergencies: EOs are seen as crucial instruments for responding to national emergencies, such as natural disasters, economic crises, public health threats, or national security situations.1 In many cases, declaring an emergency via EO can activate specific statutory powers granted by Congress for such circumstances, enabling a rapid mobilization of resources and authority.27 Historical examples, though sometimes controversial, include Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War and Franklin D. Roosevelt’s actions during the Great Depression and World War II.12
3. Policy Implementation and Clarification: Congress often passes legislation that establishes broad goals but leaves implementation details unspecified. EOs serve as a mechanism for the President, as chief executive, to provide concrete instructions to federal agencies on how to interpret and enforce these laws consistently and uniformly.1 They allow the President to define administrative priorities and direct agency focus, such as prioritizing certain types of law enforcement or setting standards for federal contractors.5
4. Overcoming Legislative Gridlock: In periods of divided government or when Congress faces partisan deadlock, EOs provide a way for presidents to advance their policy agendas when legislative action is stalled.1 A notable example is President Obama’s use of an EO to raise the minimum wage for employees of federal contractors after Congress declined to pass broader minimum wage legislation.64
5. Advancing Civil Rights and Social Policy: Throughout history, presidents have utilized EOs to enact significant social reforms, particularly concerning civil rights. Examples include the Emancipation Proclamation 8, President Truman’s order desegregating the armed forces 12, President Johnson’s order imposing non-discrimination requirements on federal contractors 20, and President Biden’s order promoting voter registration efforts by federal agencies.20

It is worth noting that the argument favoring EOs for their efficiency often carries an implicit assumption about the desirability of the policy being implemented. While speed can be crucial in a genuine crisis, the same efficiency that allows for rapid response also permits the swift implementation of potentially ill-conceived or harmful policies without the tempering effect of legislative debate and compromise.2 Thus, the value placed on efficiency must be weighed against considerations of deliberation, consensus-building, and the potential consequences of the policy itself.

B. Criticisms and Asserted Harms of Executive Orders (Cons)

Conversely, the use of executive orders faces significant criticism, centering on potential negative consequences for the constitutional order and policy outcomes:

1. Bypassing the Legislative Process: A primary objection is that EOs allow presidents to circumvent the constitutionally prescribed lawmaking process, which involves deliberation, debate, and compromise within Congress.1 Critics view this as a form of “executive lawmaking” that undermines democratic accountability and the principle of separation of powers.13
2. Executive Overreach: There is a persistent concern that presidents may use EOs to exceed the powers granted to them by the Constitution or statute, unilaterally making policy in areas where congressional action is necessary or where they lack clear authority.1 Examples often cited include President Truman’s seizure of steel mills (struck down by the Supreme Court) 3, President Clinton’s order regarding strike-breakers (struck down by an appeals court) 4, and President Biden’s initial student loan forgiveness plan (struck down by the Supreme Court).7
3. Policy Instability: Because EOs can be easily amended or revoked by subsequent presidents, policies enacted through this mechanism tend to be less durable than statutes or formal regulations.1 This can lead to significant policy volatility and uncertainty from one administration to the next, hindering long-term planning and potentially creating a polarized environment where major policies oscillate based on election outcomes.2
4. Lack of Transparency and Deliberation: While EOs themselves are published, the internal executive branch process for drafting and vetting them is often less transparent and involves less public input compared to the legislative or formal rulemaking processes.5 This can allow presidents to advance controversial measures with less initial public scrutiny.13
5. Potential for Abuse and Harm: History demonstrates that EOs, even if deemed legally permissible at the time, can be used to implement policies that are later widely condemned as harmful, unjust, or discriminatory.2 The internment of Japanese Americans during World War II via EO 9066 is a stark example.12
6. Weakening of Congress: An over-reliance on unilateral executive action may diminish Congress’s own role and incentive to legislate, potentially leading to an atrophy of its institutional capacity and further skewing the balance of power toward the executive.2

The argument that EOs improperly bypass the legislature often presumes that the legislature is capable and willing to act on important issues. However, in an environment characterized by deep partisan polarization and frequent congressional gridlock, some view EOs not as an evasion of a functioning process, but as a necessary, albeit imperfect, tool for governance when the legislative branch itself is unable to effectively address national problems.1 This perspective shifts the focus from merely criticizing the bypass to examining the underlying causes and consequences of legislative dysfunction itself, suggesting that EO use might sometimes be a symptom, rather than solely the cause, of broader institutional challenges.

V. Case Study: Executive Orders Under the Trump Administration

The presidency of Donald Trump provides a significant and recent case study for examining the use, impact, and controversy surrounding executive orders.

A. Overview of President Trump’s Approach to Executive Orders

President Trump utilized executive orders prolifically, particularly during the initial phases of both his first and second terms, as a primary means to enact rapid policy changes, signal administrative priorities, and attempt to fulfill campaign pledges.1 His EOs frequently targeted areas such as deregulation across various sectors (environmental, financial, general administrative), immigration enforcement and border security, international trade relations (imposing tariffs), rolling back policies implemented by the previous Obama and Biden administrations, and attempting to reshape the structure and composition of the federal workforce, notably through efforts to curtail diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and alter civil service classifications.1

This assertive use of executive authority consistently generated substantial public debate, media attention, and, critically, numerous legal challenges from states, advocacy groups, affected individuals, and even targeted businesses or law firms.1 These challenges frequently questioned the limits of presidential power, the legality of the orders under existing statutes, and their constitutionality.

B. Arguments and Examples of Perceived Benefits/Positive Outcomes (Trump EOs)

Supporters of President Trump’s executive actions pointed to several areas where they believed the EOs yielded positive results or addressed important national priorities:

1. Deregulation and Economic Stimulus: A core theme was reducing the regulatory burden on businesses, which proponents argued would stimulate economic growth, unleash prosperity, and curb government overreach.1 EOs implemented policies like the “10-out, 1-in” requirement for new regulations (a more aggressive version of his first term’s “2-out, 1-in”), mandated reviews of existing regulations for potential repeal, and prioritized domestic energy production by easing restrictions.1 Examples: EO 14192 (“Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation”) 61; EO 14219 (calling for review of regulations for constitutionality) 81; various EOs promoting oil, gas, and coal production.23
2. Enhanced Border Security and Immigration Enforcement: Numerous EOs focused on strengthening control of the U.S. southern border, increasing deportations of undocumented immigrants, restricting access to asylum, ending policies perceived as “catch-and-release,” penalizing “sanctuary” jurisdictions, and controversially attempting to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents.42 The administration framed these actions as necessary for national security, public safety, and upholding immigration laws.62 Examples: EOs declaring a national emergency or “invasion” at the border 42; expansion of expedited removal authority 42; the EO attempting to end birthright citizenship.22
3. Restoring Meritocracy and Combating DEI: President Trump issued EOs aimed at dismantling DEI programs within the federal government and discouraging their use by federal contractors, grantees, and educational institutions.23 The stated rationale was that such programs often constitute unlawful discrimination or preferences based on race or sex, thereby undermining merit-based principles and equality of opportunity.23 Examples: EO 14173 (“Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”) 34; the rescission of EO 11246 (which mandated affirmative action for federal contractors).79
4. Improving Government Efficiency and Accountability: Several EOs sought to streamline federal operations, enhance transparency, reform procurement processes, and increase the accountability of federal agencies and employees.22 Examples: Establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) 22; EO 14145 (“Restoring Accountability to Policy Influencing Positions Within the Federal Government,” related to Schedule F) 22; EO promoting use of commercial solutions in federal contracts 23; EOs requiring transparency in healthcare pricing or foreign funding at universities.34
5. Reforming Education: EOs reflected a long-standing conservative goal of reducing federal influence over education, aiming to dismantle the Department of Education, return authority to state and local levels, expand school choice options, and counter perceived ideological biases in educational institutions.45 Example: EO directing the Secretary of Education to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.65

C. Arguments and Examples of Perceived Harms/Negative Outcomes (Trump EOs)

Critics of President Trump’s executive orders raised numerous concerns about their legality, impact, and implications for American governance:

1. Widespread Legal and Constitutional Challenges: A defining feature of Trump’s EOs was the sheer volume of litigation they provoked. Opponents frequently argued that the orders exceeded statutory or constitutional authority, violated procedural requirements, or infringed upon fundamental rights such as free speech, due process, and equal protection.1 Many EOs were temporarily or permanently blocked by courts. Examples: Legal battles over the initial travel bans 28; judicial blocks on the birthright citizenship EO 22 and attempts to withhold funds from sanctuary cities 22; lawsuits challenging DEI rollbacks 72 and funding freezes/impoundments.31
2. Negative Impacts on Immigrants and Asylum Seekers: Critics contended that Trump’s immigration EOs inflicted significant harm, leading to family separations, severely restricting access to asylum and other humanitarian protections, creating widespread fear and chaos within immigrant communities, expanding immigration detention, and violating domestic and international legal norms.42 Examples: Policies leading to family separation 70; reinstatement of the “Remain in Mexico” policy 42; EOs severely limiting asylum eligibility at the southern border 42; actions targeting sanctuary jurisdictions.22
3. Undermining Civil Rights and Equality: The administration’s actions rolling back DEI initiatives, rescinding protections for LGBTQ+ individuals, and altering the enforcement focus of civil rights laws were widely condemned by civil rights groups as discriminatory and harmful to progress toward equality.20 Examples: EO ending federal DEI programs and discouraging them elsewhere 74; rescission of guidance related to school discipline and transgender students 78; EOs targeting funding for gender-affirming care 34; directives to deprioritize disparate impact analysis in civil rights enforcement.23
4. Economic Disruption and Costs: Unilateral trade actions, particularly the imposition of tariffs on goods from China, Canada, Mexico, and other countries via executive authority, were criticized for increasing costs for American consumers and businesses, disrupting supply chains, creating market uncertainty, and potentially triggering recessions.3 While deregulation was intended to boost the economy, critics argued it risked weakening vital consumer, environmental, and worker safety protections.1 Funding freezes ordered by EO also created significant uncertainty and stalled projects across various sectors.35
5. Damage to Democratic Institutions and Norms: A recurring criticism was that Trump’s EOs and related actions represented an assault on democratic institutions and norms. This included perceived attacks on the independence of the judiciary, efforts to politicize the nonpartisan civil service (e.g., through Schedule F), the targeting of specific law firms or individuals seen as political opponents, attempts to exert control over independent regulatory agencies, and a general disregard for established legal processes and checks and balances.2 Examples: EOs imposing sanctions on law firms representing administration opponents 65; EO seeking to bring independent agencies under White House control 48; EO 14145 related to Schedule F aimed at reclassifying civil servants 22; public attacks on judges ruling against administration policies.30
6. Environmental Degradation: EOs rolling back environmental regulations, prioritizing fossil fuel extraction (including on public lands near national parks), and withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement on climate change were heavily criticized by environmental groups for exacerbating climate change and harming natural resources.45 Examples: EO declaring a national energy emergency to fast-track drilling permits 63; withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.75
7. Erosion of Data Collection and Transparency: Actions stemming from EOs led to concerns about the reduction or elimination of crucial government data collection efforts across various domains (e.g., public health, environment, economy, education), potentially hindering evidence-based policymaking and public accountability.93 Example: Planned cessation of greenhouse gas emissions reporting by industrial facilities 109; cutbacks affecting National Weather Service data gathering 109; potential impact of DOGE on data access and analysis.22

A significant factor contributing to the controversy surrounding many Trump administration EOs was not solely their policy objectives, but the manner of their implementation. They were often issued abruptly, employed broad and sometimes ambiguous language, appeared to challenge established legal interpretations or norms, and explicitly targeted specific groups, industries, or even individual firms.30 This approach frequently led to immediate legal challenges and fueled accusations that the administration was politicizing executive power and disregarding the rule of law, raising ethical concerns distinct from standard policy disagreements.30

D. Table: Summary of Key Trump Administration Executive Orders, Arguments, and Outcomes

The following table summarizes several notable executive orders or policy areas heavily influenced by EOs during the Trump administration, outlining the administration’s rationale, arguments for and against their impact, and their general status or outcome based on available information.

Note: This table provides illustrative examples and summaries. The legal status and full impact of many EOs may still be evolving or subject to further litigation or administrative action.

VI. Frameworks for Evaluation

Evaluating whether the benefits of executive orders outweigh the harms requires applying consistent analytical frameworks. Three key perspectives—legal/constitutional, policy, and ethical—provide structured ways to assess EOs.

A. Legal and Constitutional Perspectives

This framework focuses on the legality and constitutional validity of an executive order. Key questions include:

1. Source and Scope of Authority: Does the EO derive its authority from a legitimate source, either the President’s inherent powers under Article II of the Constitution or a valid delegation of power from Congress?3 Is the authority claimed explicit or merely implied? Does the action taken fall within the scope of that authority?
2. Consistency with Existing Law: Does the EO contradict, attempt to override, or effectively amend a statute passed by Congress?3 An EO cannot lawfully supplant a federal statute.49
3. Infringement of Constitutional Rights: Does the substance or application of the EO violate individual rights protected by the Constitution, such as freedom of speech (First Amendment), due process (Fifth Amendment), or equal protection (Fourteenth Amendment, applied to the federal government via the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause)?11 Challenges to Trump administration EOs frequently invoked these grounds.28
4. Separation of Powers (Youngstown Framework): Does the EO improperly encroach upon the powers reserved for the legislative or judicial branches? Justice Jackson’s framework in Youngstown remains a key analytical tool.3 Courts assess whether the President is acting (1) with congressional authorization (maximum power), (2) in the face of congressional silence (the “zone of twilight,” where validity depends on context), or (3) contrary to Congress’s expressed or implied will (minimum power, high likelihood of invalidity).3
5. Non-Delegation Doctrine: If the EO relies on authority delegated by Congress, did Congress improperly delegate its core legislative power to the President without providing an “intelligible principle” to guide executive action?7 While challenges on this ground are rare, the Supreme Court has occasionally invalidated actions based on overly broad delegations, as in the Panama Refining Co. case.7
6. Vagueness: Is the language of the EO so unclear or ambiguous that individuals cannot understand what conduct is required or prohibited, potentially violating the Due Process Clause?7

While the Youngstown framework provides a valuable structure, its application is not always straightforward. Determining congressional intent, especially from silence or inaction, can be highly interpretive.12 Courts often review EOs on a case-by-case basis, resulting in few universally applicable “bright-line” rules.5 Moreover, recent Supreme Court jurisprudence emphasizing the concept of “exclusive” presidential powers, particularly concerning the execution of laws and removal of officers, may complicate the traditional Youngstown analysis by potentially strengthening presidential claims even in the face of congressional opposition in certain domains.51 This evolving legal landscape adds complexity to assessing the constitutional boundaries of EOs.

B. Policy Perspectives

This framework evaluates executive orders based on their practical effects and consequences, moving beyond strict legality to consider real-world outcomes. Key considerations include:

1. Effectiveness and Goal Achievement: Does the EO actually accomplish its stated objectives?1 Is it the most efficient or appropriate policy tool for achieving those goals compared to legislation or regulation? For instance, assessments of Trump’s EOs questioned whether deregulation truly delivered promised economic benefits or whether border policies achieved sustainable reductions in unauthorized migration.86
2. Intended and Unintended Consequences: What are the broader ripple effects of the EO across different sectors and populations? This involves analyzing impacts on the economy, environment, public health, social equity, international relations, and specific demographic groups.1 For example, analyses of Trump’s tariffs focused on increased consumer costs and harm to manufacturers 69, while critiques of DEI rollbacks highlighted potential negative impacts on minority groups and federal contractors.45
3. Efficiency vs. Deliberation Trade-off: Does the speed afforded by an EO come at the expense of thorough analysis, stakeholder consultation, and consideration of potential downsides that might be identified through more deliberative legislative or regulatory processes?1
4. Policy Stability: Does the reliance on easily reversible EOs contribute to policy instability, making long-term planning difficult for businesses, individuals, and government agencies?1
5. Resource Allocation: Do the implementation, defense, or subsequent reversal of EOs consume significant government resources (personnel time, funding) that could be directed elsewhere?41

Evaluating an EO from a policy perspective necessitates looking beyond its legal validity. An order might be technically lawful but fail to achieve its goals, prove impractical to implement, or generate substantial negative unintended consequences.16 Effective policy analysis requires examining how the EO interacts with existing systems, how agencies interpret and enforce it, and what its tangible effects are on the ground.

C. Ethical Perspectives

This framework evaluates executive orders based on principles of fairness, justice, democratic accountability, and respect for fundamental norms. Key ethical questions include:

1. Democratic Accountability: Does the use of EOs, particularly for major policy shifts, circumvent the role of elected legislators in Congress, thereby weakening the connection between policy decisions and the will of the people as expressed through their representatives?1 Conversely, does the ability of a new president to quickly reverse a predecessor’s EOs enhance accountability by allowing election results to translate more directly into policy changes?
2. Fairness, Equity, and Due Process: Does the EO treat all individuals and groups equitably? Does it disproportionately harm vulnerable populations? Does it respect principles of procedural fairness and due process?20 Ethical debates surrounding Trump’s EOs often centered on the fairness of immigration policies (treatment of asylum seekers, family separations) 68, the equity implications of DEI rollbacks 72, and the justice of attempting to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children.42
3. Respect for the Rule of Law and Norms: Does the EO adhere not just to the letter but also to the spirit of the law and established constitutional norms? Does it appear to weaponize executive power for political retribution or to target specific opponents?20 The targeting of specific law firms by Trump administration EOs raised significant rule-of-law concerns 65, as did the use of emergency declarations for arguably non-emergency policy objectives.38
4. Transparency and Justification: Was the process transparent? Is the rationale for the EO clearly articulated and publicly defensible?5
5. Public Interest vs. Partisan Advantage: Is the EO primarily motivated by a good-faith effort to serve the broader public interest, or does it appear driven by partisan political calculations, rewarding allies, or punishing opponents?4

Ethical evaluation often involves navigating conflicts between competing values. For instance, an EO issued during a genuine emergency might prioritize public safety and rapid response, potentially justifying the bypass of slower, more deliberative processes.56 However, this prioritization comes at the potential cost of reduced democratic accountability. Similarly, EOs addressing contentious social issues invariably invoke competing ethical frameworks—such as pitting arguments for equity and inclusion against those emphasizing individual meritocracy and colorblindness in the context of DEI policies 23, or balancing national security concerns against humanitarian obligations in immigration debates.68 Acknowledging these underlying value conflicts is essential for a nuanced ethical assessment.

VII. Synthesis and Conclusion

A. Recapping the Core Tensions

The debate over whether the benefits of presidential executive orders outweigh the harms hinges on several fundamental tensions inherent in their use within the American political system:

• Efficiency and Decisiveness vs. Deliberation and Accountability: EOs offer a path for swift action, bypassing potential legislative gridlock, but this speed comes at the cost of the deliberation, compromise, and broader representation found in the congressional process.1
• Flexibility and Responsiveness vs. Stability and Predictability: The ease with which EOs can be issued and reversed allows presidents to adapt quickly to changing circumstances or electoral mandates, but also leads to policy instability and uncertainty across administrations.1
• Presidential Leadership and Initiative vs. Executive Overreach and Abuse: EOs empower presidents to lead, set priorities, and implement their vision, particularly when facing congressional opposition, but this same power carries the inherent risk of exceeding constitutional or statutory limits and encroaching on the powers of other branches.1

Ultimately, determining where the “balance” lies in the context of the debate resolution depends significantly on the specific circumstances surrounding an EO, the nature of the policy it enacts, and the weight assigned to competing values like speed, stability, accountability, and adherence to process.

B. The Enduring Debate Over Executive Power

The controversy surrounding executive orders is not merely about a specific type of presidential document; it is a manifestation of a larger, enduring constitutional dialogue regarding the appropriate scope and limits of presidential power within the U.S. system of separated powers.2 The frequency, scope, and public perception of EOs often shift based on the political climate, the partisan alignment between the White House and Congress, and the specific policy challenges facing the nation at any given time.3

Presidents across different eras and parties have utilized EOs to navigate crises, manage the bureaucracy, and pursue policy objectives, often pushing the perceived boundaries of their authority. The Trump administration’s assertive use of EOs brought these long-standing debates into sharp focus, highlighting the potential for EOs to effect dramatic policy shifts rapidly but also their vulnerability to legal challenge and reversal.

Evaluating the resolution—whether, on balance, the benefits outweigh the harms—requires a comprehensive and nuanced approach. Debaters must move beyond simplistic assertions and engage with the complexities of EO authority, considering the legal precedents, analyzing the policy consequences (both intended and unintended), and weighing the ethical implications concerning democratic principles, fairness, and the rule of law. The historical record, including the recent examples from the Trump administration, provides ample evidence for constructing arguments on both sides of this critical question about the exercise of power in American democracy.

Works cited

1. Executive Orders: The Good, the Bad and the Impact on Business – The Woodard Report, accessed May 2, 2025, https://report.woodard.com/articles/executive-orders-the-good-the-bad-and-the-impact-on-businesses-fpwr
2. Presidential Executive Order Overload and Their Harmful Impacts – Democratic Erosion, accessed May 2, 2025, https://democratic-erosion.org/2022/02/14/presidential-executive-order-overload-and-their-harmful-impacts/
3. On the Expansion of Executive Power: An Overview | Cato at Liberty Blog, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cato.org/blog/expansion-executive-power-overview
4. Executive Orders | The Heritage Foundation, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.heritage.org/political-process/heritage-explains/executive-orders
5. Cato Handbook on Executive Orders and Presidential Directives, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cato.org/white-paper/cato-handbook-executive-orders-presidential-directives
6. What Is an Executive Order? – American Bar Association, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/publications/teaching-legal-docs/what-is-an-executive-order-/
7. Executive Orders and Their Limits – What Businesses Need To Know – Lathrop GPM, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.lathropgpm.com/insights/executive-orders-and-their-limits-what-businesses-need-to-know/
8. Executive order – Wikipedia, accessed May 2, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
9. FAQ’s About Executive Orders | National Archives, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/about.html
10. Executive Orders – Bureau of Justice Assistance, accessed May 2, 2025, https://bja.ojp.gov/program/it/privacy-civil-liberties/authorities/executive-orders
11. Executive Orders: An Introduction – CRS Reports, accessed May 2, 2025, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46738
12. Executive Orders: An Introduction | Congress.gov, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46738
13. Executive Orders: Issuance and Revocation – Every CRS Report, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20100325_RS20846_c05343b145007f26ba2caf8477c0ad55fcafd16c.pdf
14. Executive Orders: Issuance, Modification, and Revocation – Every CRS Report, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20140416_RS20846_5061281a4a4b0e15da9d33695a6a93403b91bca0.pdf
15. Executive Orders and Proclamations – FAS Project on Government Secrecy, accessed May 2, 2025, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/95-772.pdf
16. Executive Orders, Actions, Agency Regulations, and Congressional Legislation – How They Differ and Why It Matters – Lathrop GPM, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.lathropgpm.com/insights/executive-orders-actions-agency-regulations-and-congressional-legislation-how-they-differ-and-why-it-matters/
17. Executive Orders 101: What are they and how do Presidents use them? | Constitution Center, accessed May 2, 2025, https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/executive-orders-101-what-are-they-and-how-do-presidents-use-them
18. Executive Orders: An Introduction, accessed May 2, 2025, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R46738.pdf
19. Executive Orders and Presidential Transitions – Congress.gov, accessed May 2, 2025, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12724
20. What Is an Executive Order and How Does it Work? – ACLU, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/what-is-an-executive-order-and-how-does-it-work
21. Faculty Q&A: Understanding Executive Orders, Evolving Impact – Texas Christian University, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.tcu.edu/news/2025/faculty-q-a-understanding-executive-orders-evolving-impact.php
22. What Are Executive Orders and How Do They Work? – Campaign Legal Center, accessed May 2, 2025, https://campaignlegal.org/update/what-are-executive-orders-and-how-do-they-work
23. President Donald Trump Executive Order Tracker | Blank Rome Government Relations LLC, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.blankromegr.com/publications/president-donald-trump-executive-order-tracker
24. Defining the president’s constitutional powers to issue executive orders, accessed May 2, 2025, https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/defining-the-presidents-constitutional-powers-to-issue-executive-orders
25. Presidents and the U.S. Constitution: The Executive’s Role in Interpreting the Supreme Law of the Land – UNH Scholars Repository, accessed May 2, 2025, https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1558&context=honors
26. What Are Executive Orders? What Are Their Limits? – FindLaw, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/what-are-executive-orders-what-are-their-limits/
27. The power of presidential executive orders and their limits | PBS News, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-power-of-presidential-executive-orders-and-their-limits
28. Executive Orders – American Bar Association, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/teacher_portal/educational_resources/executive_orders/
29. What is an Executive Order and What Legal Weight Does it Carry? | ACS, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.acslaw.org/inbrief/what-is-an-executive-order-and-what-legal-weight-does-it-carry/
30. Separation of Powers: The Judicial Branch’s Fight Against Trump – Democratic Erosion, accessed May 2, 2025, https://democratic-erosion.org/2025/02/14/separation-of-powers-the-judicial-branchs-fight-against-trump/
31. UC Law SF Experts Examine Legal Limits of Trump’s Sweeping Executive Orders, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.uclawsf.edu/2025/02/28/experts-examine-legal-limits-of-trumps-sweeping-executive-orders/
32. Judicial Review of Executive Orders, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.fjc.gov/history/administration/judicial-review-executive-orders
33. Navigating Executive Actions: How to Assess Their Impact and Legality, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.orrick.com/en/Insights/2025/02/Navigating-Executive-Actions-How-to-Assess-Their-Impact-and-Legality
34. Summary of executive orders on employee benefits, employer policy – WTW, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/insights/2025/03/summary-of-executive-orders-on-employee-benefits-and-employer-policy
35. Balance of Power: Congress and the Presidency – Karsh Institute of Democracy, accessed May 2, 2025, https://karshinstitute.virginia.edu/news/balance-power-congress-and-presidency
36. Keeping the Balance: What a President Can Do and Cannot Do – Truman Library, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/three-branches/what-president-can-do-cannot-do
37. Background on Unlawful Impoundment in President Trump’s Executive Orders, accessed May 2, 2025, https://democrats-appropriations.house.gov/news/fact-sheets/background-unlawful-impoundment-president-trumps-executive-orders
38. Restoring checks on executive power – CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/restoring-checks-on-executive-power/
39. Branches of the U.S. government | USAGov, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.usa.gov/branches-of-government
40. Checks and Balances – Ben’s Guide, accessed May 2, 2025, https://bensguide.gpo.gov/j-check-balance
41. Four Realities about Executive Actions; Moving Beyond the Rhetoric of Immigration Reform, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/four-realities-about-executive-actions-moving-beyond-the-rhetoric-of-immigration-reform/
42. After Day One: A High-Level Analysis of Trump’s First Executive Actions, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/after-day-one-high-level-analysis-trumps-first-executive-actions
43. Reviewing Presidential Orders | The University of Chicago Law Review, accessed May 2, 2025, https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/reviewing-presidential-orders
44. Campbell Forum Examines Recent Executive Orders and the Separation of Powers, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.maxwell.syr.edu/news/article/campbell-forum-examines-recent-executive-orders-and-the-separation-of-powers
45. CBCF Executive Order Tracker: Impacts on Black America, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cbcfinc.org/policy-research/cbcf-executive-order-tracker-impacts-on-black-america/
46. Initial Rescissions Of Harmful Executive Orders And Actions – The White House, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/initial-rescissions-of-harmful-executive-orders-and-actions/
47. The President’s Enforcement Power – University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository, accessed May 2, 2025, https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1626&context=articles
48. The Case for Congressional Regulatory Review – Cato Institute, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/case-congressional-regulatory-review
49. Intro.7.2 Separation of Powers Under the Constitution, accessed May 2, 2025, https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/intro.7-2/ALDE_00000031/
50. Appointment and Confirmation of Executive Branch Leadership: An Overview – CRS Reports, accessed May 2, 2025, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44083/6
51. Separation of Powers Supreme Court Cases, accessed May 2, 2025, https://supreme.justia.com/cases-by-topic/separation-of-powers/
52. ArtII.S2.C2.2.2 Legal Basis for Executive Agreements – Constitution Annotated, accessed May 2, 2025, https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-2-2/ALDE_00001149/
53. Project 2025 Would Destroy the U.S. System of Checks and Balances and Create an Imperial Presidency – Center for American Progress, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/project-2025-would-destroy-the-u-s-system-of-checks-and-balances-and-create-an-imperial-presidency/
54. Congressional Limitation of Executive Orders – House.gov, accessed May 2, 2025, https://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju63865.000/hju63865_0f.htm
55. Executive Orders and Separation of Powers – Connecticut General Assembly, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0579.htm
56. Legislative Oversight of Emergency Executive Powers – National Conference of State Legislatures, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.ncsl.org/about-state-legislatures/legislative-oversight-of-emergency-executive-powers
57. Separation of parties or powers? Congress seems unwilling to oversee a rampant executive., accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/democracy-governance/separation-parties-or-powers-congress-seems
58. Limiting Executive Overreach – Project On Government Oversight (POGO), accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.pogo.org/issue/limiting-executive-overreach
59. Arguments against strong executive appointment and removal power – Ballotpedia, accessed May 2, 2025, https://ballotpedia.org/Arguments_against_strong_executive_appointment_and_removal_power
60. Emergency Powers: A System Vulnerable to Executive Abuse | Brennan Center for Justice, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/emergency-powers-system-vulnerable-executive-abuse
61. Trump Deregulatory Review Redux Plus, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.theregreview.org/2025/03/04/block-trump-deregulatory-review-redux-plus/
62. Why Do Presidents Use Executive Orders? – Plural Policy, accessed May 2, 2025, https://pluralpolicy.com/blog/why-do-presidents-use-executive-orders/
63. Demystifying President Trump’s “National Energy Emergency” and the Scope of Emergency Authority – Climate Law Blog – Columbia Law School Blogs, accessed May 2, 2025, https://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/2025/02/14/demystifying-president-trumps-national-energy-emergency-and-the-scope-of-emergency-authority/
64. Calling the Shots: The President, Executive Orders, and Public Policy – Brookings Institution, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/chapter-one_-calling-the-shots-9780815729020.pdf
65. Tracking the Trump Administration’s Harmful Executive Actions | Congressman Steve Cohen, accessed May 2, 2025, https://cohen.house.gov/TrumpAdminTracker
66. Cato Institute Analysis: Key Actions in President Trump’s First 100 Days, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cato.org/news-releases/cato-institute-analysis-key-actions-president-trumps-first-100-days
67. President Trump in the Era of Exclusive Powers – Harvard Law Review, accessed May 2, 2025, https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2025/04/president-trump-in-the-era-of-exclusive-powers/
68. Trump’s Day 1 Executive Orders: Unconstitutional, Illegal, and Cruel – NILC, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.nilc.org/articles/analysis-of-trump-day-1-executive-orders-unconstitutional-illegal-and-cruel/
69. 100 Days of the Trump Administration’s Foreign Policy: Global Chaos, American Weakness, and Human Suffering, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/100-days-of-the-trump-administrations-foreign-policy-global-chaos-american-weakness-and-human-suffering/
70. Leading with Cruelty: Eight Impacts of Trump’s First Day Executive Orders, accessed May 2, 2025, https://immigrantjustice.org/staff/blog/leading-cruelty-eight-impacts-trumps-first-day-executive-orders
71. Trump’s Rash Immigration Actions Place Cruelty and Spectacle Above Security, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trumps-rash-immigration-actions-place-cruelty-and-spectacle-above-security/
72. What are the economic and legal implications of President Trump’s DEI and LGBTQIA executive orders? – Brookings Institution, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-are-the-economic-and-legal-implications-of-president-trumps-dei-and-lgbtqia-executive-orders/
73. The Pros and Cons of Governance by Executive Order – Gasparian Spivey Immigration, accessed May 2, 2025, https://gsimmigrationlaw.com/what-we-think/the-pros-and-cons-of-governance-by-executive-order
74. How Trump’s policies and Project 2025 proposals match up after first 100 days – CBS News, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-project-2025-first-100-days/
75. Overview of Trump’s Executive Actions and Considerations for Potential Litigation – Skadden, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/executive-briefing/overview-of-trumps-executive-actions
76. Trump 2.0, First Two Months in Review: A Summary of Immigration-Related Actions, accessed May 2, 2025, https://ogletree.com/insights-resources/blog-posts/trump-2-0-first-two-months-in-review-a-summary-of-immigration-related-actions/
77. The Legal Landscape » Congressional Black Caucus Foundation » Advancing the Global Black Community by Developing Leaders Informing Policy and Educating the Public, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cbcfinc.org/policy-research/cbcf-executive-order-tracker-impacts-on-black-america/the-legal-landscape/
78. Trump’s 2025 Executive Orders – Holland & Knight, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.hklaw.com/en/general-pages/trumps-2025-executive-orders-chart
79. An executive order explainer: Why the courts will have the final say on Trump’s anti-DEI actions – Brookings Institution, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/an-executive-order-explainer-why-the-courts-will-have-the-final-say-on-trumps-anti-dei-actions/
80. Trump’s Executive Orders: Policy Shifts and Impacts – The National Law Review, accessed May 2, 2025, https://natlawreview.com/article/trump-20-executive-orders-shock-and-awe
81. The Tax Implications of Trump’s Recent Executive Actions | Insights | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/03/the-tax-implications-of-trump-recent-executive-actions
82. Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Empowers Parents, States, and Communities to Improve Education Outcomes – ] – The White House, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-empowers-parents-states-and-communities-to-improve-education-outcomes/
83. Analysis: Trump’s New “10-Out, 1-In” Executive Order — Part Three, accessed May 2, 2025, https://progressivereform.org/cpr-blog/analysis-trumps-new-10-out-1-in-executive-order-part-three/
84. The Economic Effects of President Trump’s Tariffs – Penn Wharton Budget Model, accessed May 2, 2025, https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2025/4/10/economic-effects-of-president-trumps-tariffs
85. Five Ways President Trump’s Executive Orders Could Harm National Parks, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.npca.org/articles/6614-five-ways-president-trump-s-executive-orders-could-harm-national-parks
86. Forum Analysis: President Trump’s Executive Actions on Border Security, accessed May 2, 2025, https://immigrationforum.org/article/u-s-southern-border-president-trumps-executive-actions-on-border-security/
87. How Will Trump Impact the Economy? – NerdWallet, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/finance/trump-economy
88. The good, the bad, and the ugly in Trump’s new regulation executive order, accessed May 2, 2025, https://cei.org/blog/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-in-trumps-new-regulation-executive-order/
89. A New Civil Service “Policy/Career” Schedule: Issues for Lawmakers – Every CRS Report, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/LSB11262.html
90. Project 2025, Explained | American Civil Liberties Union, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/project-2025-explained
91. Brookings scholars analyze Trump’s order to dismantle the Department of Education, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/brookings-scholars-analyze-trumps-order-to-dismantle-the-department-of-education/
92. Federal Funding and Impacts of Executive Orders and Policies, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.claconnect.com/en/resources/articles/25/federal-funding-executive-orders-and-policies
93. Executive Order Analysis Tracker – NETWORK Advocates for Catholic Social Justice, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.networkadvocates.org/issues/executive-order-analysis/
94. Explainer: Trump’s Executive Order on Controlling Independent Agencies – Common Cause, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.commoncause.org/resources/explainer-trumps-executive-order-on-ensuring-accountability-for-all-agencies/
95. President Trump Issues Executive Order Aimed at Eliminating Disparate Impact Liability Under Anti-Discrimination Laws | Law and the Workplace, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.lawandtheworkplace.com/2025/04/president-trump-issues-executive-order-aimed-at-eliminating-disparate-impact-liability-under-anti-discrimination-laws/
96. Trump Executive Orders and Implications for Cities and Public Agencies, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.bhfs.com/insights/alerts-articles/2025/trump-executive-orders-and-implications-for-cities-and-public-agencies
97. President Trump Issues Executive Order Targeting Policies and Practices Designed to Ensure Equal Opportunity | Insights & Resources | Goodwin, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/01/alerts-otherindustries-president-trump-issues-executive-order
98. What Higher Education Needs to Know about the Trump Executive Orders – Gibson Dunn, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.gibsondunn.com/what-higher-education-needs-to-know-about-the-trump-executive-orders/
99. Trump’s executive order threatens to undermine American elections – Brookings Institution, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/executive-order-threatens-to-undermine-american-elections/
100. Law Firm Executive Orders Create A Legal Ethics Minefield – Buchalter, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.buchalter.com/publication/law-firm-executive-orders-create-a-legal-ethics-minefield/
101. Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” Regulatory Initiative – The White House, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/ensuring-lawful-governance-and-implementing-the-presidents-department-of-government-efficiency-regulatory-initiative/
102. Executive Order Tracker | Littler, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/executive-order-tracker
103. New Executive Order on Regulatory and Enforcement Review: Topics to Watch in Corporate Enforcement – Gibson Dunn, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.gibsondunn.com/new-executive-order-on-regulatory-and-enforcement-review-topics-to-watch-in-corporate-enforcement/
104. Overview of President Trump’s Executive Actions on Global Health – KFF, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/overview-of-president-trumps-executive-actions-on-global-health/
105. Executive Order Tracker | Littler Mendelson P.C., accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/executive-order-tracker
106. Executive Order on Ensuring Democratic Accountability in Agency Rulemaking, accessed May 2, 2025, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-ensuring-democratic-accountability-agency-rulemaking/
107. EO on Accreditation Opens the Door for Rampant Corruption and Political Interference, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.aaup.org/news/eo-accreditation-opens-door-rampant-corruption-and-political-interference
108. Report to the President on the America First Trade Policy Executive Summary, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/report-to-the-president-on-the-america-first-trade-policy-executive-summary/
109. Trump’s War on Measurement Means Losing Data on Drug Use, Maternal Mortality, Climate Change and More – ProPublica, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-doge-data-collection-hhs-epa-cdc-maternal-mortality
110. The President’s Executive Order on Elections | Brennan Center for Justice, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/presidents-executive-order-elections-explained
111. An In-House Compliance Guide for Responding to President Trump’s Executive Order on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement – Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.hinshawlaw.com/newsroom-updates-hinshaw-alert-in-house-compliance-guide-trump-executive-order-foreign-corrupt-practices-act.html
112. A World Imagined: Nostalgia and Liberal Order | Cato Institute, accessed May 2, 2025, https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/world-imagined-nostalgia-liberal-order
113. Ethics Pledges and Other Executive Branch Appointee Restrictions Since 1993 – CRS Reports, accessed May 2, 2025, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44974/3