
Gregory Bull/AP Photo
Melanie Mendoza of Venezuela learns that her 1 p.m. appointment was canceled on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) One app, as she and her family wait at the border crossing in Tijuana, Mexico, on January 20, 2025.
Donald Trump is president, and he’s letting everyone know it with a flood of executive orders. Some of these “actions” are just plans to make plans; others are really important, though sometimes not in the way you think. Others are bait for legal challenges.

At the Prospect, we are dedicated to contextualizing and explaining, clearly and succinctly, what Trump is doing and who really benefits. On Tuesday, we began compiling a rolling tally of the most important executive orders and their meaning. We continue that work today. Keep checking back for updates throughout the day.
In addition to pardoning the January 6th putschists, President Trump has also pardoned Ross Ulbricht, the founder of the website Silk Road, who went by the name “Dread Pirate Roberts.” Silk Road was an anonymous site where people could buy and sell anything, typically illegal drugs. As Henry Farrell writes, as is usual for such criminal networks, Silk Road was infested with all manner of scams and frauds.
In 2013, Ulbricht was tracked down by the FBI, arrested, and charged with money laundering, narcotics trafficking, computer hacking, and under a “continuing criminal enterprise” statute often reserved for crime bosses. Eventually, he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
During his trial, chat transcripts were published in which Ulbricht had allegedly attempted to arrange the contract murders of six different people, paying about $730,000 in Bitcoin to do so. It later turned out that one of these was a DEA operation and the other five were scams, but Ulbricht showed no remorse whatsoever about what he seemingly thought were real killings. “In my eyes, FriendlyChemist [a Silk Road user who was attempting to blackmail Ulbricht] is a liability and I wouldn’t mind if he was executed,” Dread Pirate Roberts wrote in one message.
The violent nature of his crimes reportedly put Trump off from pardoning him in his first term. But Ulbricht—a drug-dealing would-be contract murderer—has become a cause célèbre in the crypto community, and crypto has brought Trump around with massive donations. Indeed, Trump himself recently released a meme coin that shows every sign of being a “rug pull” scam. In addition, Trump promised the Libertarian Party at its national convention last May that he would pardon Ulbricht, and he followed through there, even though they did run a candidate against him in 2024.
Drug buyers, be careful out there. –Ryan Cooper
There can be no doubt at this point that the executive order “ending the Green New Deal” is an attempt to pick a fight about impoundment. Trump’s Office of Management and Budget has followed this up with a memorandum informing agency heads to “immediately pause disbursement” of funds from the Inflation Reduction Act or Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that conflict with current administration policy.
This is illegal under federal statute and the Constitution, which gives Congress the exclusive power of the purse. The Impoundment Control Act specifies that the executive branch cannot make its own decisions on funding appropriated by Congress and signed into law by the president, and the courts have upheld this on numerous occasions, as Erwin Chemerinsky explains today. This in part was why Trump was impeached in his first term, for threatening to withhold funding appropriated by Congress for Ukraine.
A president can propose rescissions in a special message to Congress, but Congress must approve the rescissions if the president wants to withhold funding for more than 45 days. And this is not a special message, it merely withholds disbursement. Trump and his allies signaled that they were going to do this (we wrote about it last July), to force the Supreme Court to decide on impoundment again. They are clearly confident of a favorable ruling. If the Court complied, this would have the effect of disbanding Congress, if the president can simply pick and choose which of its laws to obey.
Democrats are apparently mounting a united front against this action. Russ Vought, an enthusiastic proponent of impoundment and Trump’s nominee for OMB, refused to comply with the Impoundment Control Act in his confirmation hearing today. “If the law is that it’s a 15 mile-an-hour speed limit, you can’t just say, ‘well I think that’s irresponsible and I’m gonna challenge it, therefore I don’t have to follow it.’ The impoundment law is the law,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) said.
This will be a titanic fight in the courts. –David Dayen
Trump’s executive order on refugees is a profound abdication of the nation’s responsibility to take in the world’s most vulnerable people, and an escalation of the anti-migrant discourse that plagued his campaign.
The executive order, “Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program” (USRAP), is not actually a realignment at all. Instead, it’s a full suspension of the program, which has existed since the 1980 Refugee Act and offers resettlement to 100,000 refugees from across the globe.
Trump claims that the United States “lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants … into its communities in a manner that” protects the “safety and security” of Americans, but evidence clearly shows that the USRAP is actually crucial to national security. In a 2018 memo to Trump, then-Secretary of Defense Gen. James Mattis argued that the ability to resettle refugees who have assisted U.S. troops during combat is essential to maintaining the military’s function. “A failure to honor our commitments to those who have supported the U.S. in combat would undermine our military efforts abroad to protect the Homeland,” Mattis wrote.
Advocates at #AfghanEvac, a coalition working to resettle Afghan allies who aided the U.S. before the Taliban’s takeover in 2021, say that Trump’s executive order is placing 2,000 people in limbo, and could affect thousands more in the coming months. Those 2,000 people, some of whom are family of U.S. service members, have already been vetted by the U.S. and are waiting for resettlement. Now, their dangerous wait will continue indefinitely.
I could also mention the fact that refugees in the U.S. work at higher rates than non-refugees, or the fact that they open new businesses at higher rates, or that they have reinvigorated neighborhoods in cities like St. Louis, Columbus, and Cleveland. But I think the moral case here is more important. We have a duty to be members of the global community, to take in some of the most oppressed and targeted among us—especially but not only when their oppression is a direct result of our foreign wars. This executive order is strategically, economically, and—most importantly—morally bankrupt. –Emma Janssen
Trump’s executive order on trade and tariffs, which I wrote about yesterday, is only a request to several government agencies on policy options. But Trump, bring impulsive and contradictory, has already jumped the gun on his own order by declaring plans to impose 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico by February 1.
“We’re thinking in terms of 25 percent on Mexico and Canada, because they’re allowing vast numbers of people” across the border, Trump said in response to questions from reporters in the Oval Office on Monday night. “I think we’ll do it Feb. 1.”
But Canada and Mexico are not remotely comparable. And tariffs would be very damaging to U.S. automakers’ supply chains.
Some observers have interpreted Trump’s threats as prologue to some bargaining with the two nations, in effect a renegotiation of the USMCA deal, which is up for review in 2026. But it’s hard to imagine what could be renegotiated by February 1, which is next Saturday.
The abrupt imposition of 25 percent tariffs would raise consumer prices on a variety of goods, at a time when Trump promises to reduce inflation. The United States gets half of its imported oil from Canada, which sends other crucial commodities to the U.S., such as potash, used in fertilizer, and uranium. And of course, Canada would retaliate.
Trump may not want a full-blown trade war with two of our most important trading partners during his first month in office. But if he is not careful, he could get one. As always, the best weapon against Trump is Trump. –Robert Kuttner
So the DOGE executive order is, fittingly, weird.
Remember that the Department of Government Efficiency was supposed to be about cutting federal spending. But the purpose is now “modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” During the transition, Trump and Elon Musk were quite explicit that DOGE was an advisory commission outside of the government. But now DOGE is officially a renaming of the U.S. Digital Service, which was established during the Obama years to improve technology throughout the government.
This is mainly a way to dodge legal challenges. Within minutes of Trump taking office, lawsuits were filed against DOGE for violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which requires balanced participation, public meetings, and applicability to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. So instead, Trump just tucked DOGE within USDS. It’s not an advisory committee, but a “temporary organization” that will presumably do all the recommending of spending cuts but without the advisory committee requirements. There will be “DOGE teams” inside federal agencies consisting of “special government employees,” a temp designation unencumbered by many strictures on federal employees, which Trump abused in his first term. An unnamed “administrator” reporting to the chief of staff will also likely be an SGE.
The U.S. Digital Service right now is part of the Office of Management and Budget; Trump could hide that elsewhere and evade transparency. But at the very least, the DOGE teams housed in federal agencies should be subject to FOIA. So chasing it inside the government had some benefit.
At the same time, Musk is taking full advantage of the USDS designation. There’s talk in the order of a “Software Modernization Initiative” for the government, and improving interoperability between networks and systems. I guarantee you Musk or one of his friends will get the contract for that. And there’s a directive to agencies to give DOGE “full and prompt access to all unclassified agency records, software systems, and IT systems.”
So the world’s richest man, known for going on his social media platform and lying relentlessly about the activities of others, is going to get full access to every single record the government has, the better to propagandize through half-truths and selective disclosure. It’ll be a veritable department of misinformation. –David Dayen
Trump’s executive order suspending all approval for offshore wind turbines declares war on one key renewable-energy industry. The order further directs agencies to explore the feasibility of revoking existing permits. Trump is also looking into ending subsidies for wind power projects under Biden’s several industrial-policy laws.
But this order, like others, runs into Republican and industry opposition. Wind power now provides about 10 percent of all U.S. electricity. Many projects are up and running, with contractual commitments.
Several Republican-led states have extensive wind resources and have invested in wind power, as have numerous utility companies. Wind power is a major source of energy in such red states as Iowa, Oklahoma, and even Texas. Wind energy projects are also under way in other Republican-led states including Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota.
Where federal land or federal permitting is involved, Trump goes well beyond offshore wind. As part of his order, Trump issued a moratorium on the Lava Ridge Wind Project, on federal land in Idaho, which had already received permits from the Bureau of Land Management under Biden. Ironically, the perverse use of environmental impact reports could even restrict wind turbines on private property.
According to the Associated Press, the order was drafted at Trump’s request by a New Jersey congressman and vocal critic of offshore wind, Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew (himself a former Democrat). Van Drew confirmed to the AP that he wrote and forwarded the draft order to Doug Burgum, Trump’s nominee for interior secretary. At his confirmation, Burgum partly contradicted his boss by testifying that he would commit to continuing with offshore wind leases that have been issued.
Like so much in the Trump program, his energy policy is riddled with contradictions. We await the pushback from Republican governors. –Robert Kuttner
Perhaps the most ominous of President Trump’s initial batch of executive orders is one purporting to end the “weaponization of the federal government.” The Biden administration engaged “in a systematic campaign against its perceived political opponents,” it alleges, mentioning federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. It orders the attorney general and director of national intelligence to “take appropriate action to review the activities of all departments and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority,” and write a report on what they find.
What does this mean? The most obvious references are to the January 6th putschists, for whom Trump has already granted either pardons or clemency, and to Trump himself for the alleged “witch hunt” against him for his serial crimes. But the order also specifically mentions the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. These and other agencies carried out wholly merited—indeed, long-overdue—investigations, regulations, and lawsuits against many companies during the Biden years, including ones like Tesla, Meta, and Amazon that are owned by pro-Trump oligarchs.
As a rule, Republican lies about Democrats turn out to be confessions of past behavior or plans for the future. So while this order does not directly threaten punishment of anyone in particular, it’s not much of a stretch to think that will be the next step. I suspect that names on Trump’s developing enemies list will include government officials who attempted to follow the law and impose any accountability on Trump or his billionaire allies. –Ryan Cooper
An oddly worded executive order directs the Treasury secretary and other officials to withdraw the U.S. from what the order calls the OECD “Global Tax Deal.” It is unusual for presidents to use slang in executive orders, but then this is Trump. The order presumably refers to an agreement called the global minimum tax (GMT).
The GMT was agreed to in 2021 after extensive negotiations under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). It is intended mainly to reduce corporate tax-shifting to very low-tax jurisdictions, which costs nations with reasonable rates a lot of revenue.
The GMT commits signatory nations to a minimum corporate tax rate of 15 percent. Some 135 nations have agreed to the GMT, including the U.S., though U.S. participation was never formally ratified.
In 2022, as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. complied with the spirit of the GMT by including in the IRA a 15 percent minimum tax on corporations with profits over $1 billion. This provision is a very small offset to the 2017 Trump-sponsored Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which cut the corporate income tax rate from 35 to 21 percent, reducing revenue by $919 billion over ten years. The 2022 measure is projected to raise $222 billion over ten years.
The 2022 law is on the books until Congress changes it, and can’t be rescinded by an executive order. But this certainly shows that it’s in the crosshairs on the next tax deal. And it signals a willingness to fight for multinationals that want to engage in continued tax evasion. Without U.S. cooperation, expect slippage on the global minimum tax, and free rein for the oligarchy to find wider pockets to park their cash. –Robert Kuttner
Donald Trump signed an executive order to designate Latin American drug cartels as terrorist groups, a decision with various implications in areas from immigration to trade.
The order does not name specific cartels, which will be left up to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. But it will almost certainly include the Mexican drug cartels, along with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and Salvadoran gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13). The justification for this move is to combat the inflow of drugs such as fentanyl, which has led to cascading epidemics and deaths above the scale of the opioid crisis. Cartels play a key role in drug smuggling across the southern border and are also involved in helping immigrants get across the border.
The terrorist designation is a controversial move, one that previous presidents (including Trump himself, during his first term) shied away from for a number of reasons. Cartels effectively control swaths of land in the neighboring country of Mexico. In the most extreme case, deeming them terrorist groups could lead to direct U.S. military confrontation without congressional approval, which would threaten to undermine the sovereignty of one of our closest allies and major trading partners. Mexico could respond against the U.S. with trading sanctions. President Trump’s immigration plans, such as reviving “Remain in Mexico” policy, also require bilateral cooperation from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.
Another implication of this order would be for the immigration process. Some immigrants who cross the southern border looking to claim asylum legally or illegally are forced to pay migrant smugglers affiliated with the cartels. In such a case, those payments to a terrorist group could certainly terminate their asylum case, or worse, open them to legal action. –Luke Goldstein
The executive orders from Trump, with several exceptions, fall into three buckets: rooting out and punishing domestic enemies inside the government, expanding American fossil fuel energy, and closing the southern border. For the last two, he has actually declared an emergency, and a lot of focus has been on the absurdity of the energy “emergency” at a time when U.S. energy production is at an all-time high. But while most people won’t say it, the border “emergency” is out of step with reality too.
Illegal immigration is actually down by substantial numbers over the last year, and Trump enters office with fewer border-crossers than at any point in the Biden administration, and below the average level of Trump’s first term. Proclaiming an emergency based on the dying embers in your brain is not enough; you actually have to demonstrate the scope of the crisis, and not just through random Fox News anecdotes. Much of this is due to a Biden executive order around asylum, but more so to cooperation with Mexico and a softer job market, which historically has been the dominant driver of immigration to the U.S.
But Trump disrupted the orderly process for immigration, creating the emergency he wants to dragoon the military into managing. He terminated the CBP One border app that was making asylum far more orderly. He wants to restore the “Remain in Mexico” policy to force asylum seekers to wait, but that requires cooperation with a Mexican government that doesn’t want this to happen. All this will only force desperate migrants to cross, providing images of crisis that are wholly self-created.
Trump wants to deploy the military for this “emergency” (a demand he had to buttress with a second executive order justifying its use), resume border wall construction (also buttressed with a second order), and build detention facilities as way stations for eventual deportation. It seems the latter two are the real goal, and I’m sure there are lots of suppliers of wall materials and private prison companies that are pleased by the news.
The humanitarian parole policies that let migrants from four countries into the U.S. will be terminated as well, and that’s where you see the human toll. We are damaging this country’s historical role as a vibrant location for human flourishing. But given that many Democrats are fully committed to collaboration on these points, I don’t suspect this will end soon, or well. –David Dayen
The new president’s executive order “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” is obviously in line with the evil genius of his campaign against Kamala Harris, promising that Trump would be for “you,” the presumptively cisgender audience member, while Harris would only represent “they/them,” because she once filled out a questionnaire saying that she favored transition medical care for federal prisoners.
The order starts by stating that by speaking of gender rather than, or in addition to, sex, something “corrosive” happens to women and to “the validity of the entire American system.” Therefore, the administration offers that U.S. government policy shall henceforth be that there are two sexes, male and female. It sounds deeply anti-modernist, imbued with a general fear of that which is chosen by oneself as core to one’s identity, although I suppose that the immediate context is the effort to conjure anxieties about sexual violence and vulnerability in the shifting, nonobjective life of gender.
Most concretely, in Section 3, it directs the heads of the relevant federal agencies to stop issuing or revising passports, visas, and Global Entry cards to conform with the holder’s perceived gender, and to instead revert to sex assigned at birth. It directs the director of the Office of Personnel Management to do the same for all federal employees. These changes might seem small but are in fact very significant, deeply violating thousands of people’s sense of identity and often leaving people with official documents that are so far from representing who they are and how they appear in public as to make the documents useless. Inaccurate official documents can make moments at which they must be produced occasions for possible abuse and terrible anxiety. (I have been thinking about these issues for a long time but was alerted to the importance of this piece of the puzzle by Erin Reed, aka “Erin in the Morning.”)
In Section 4, “Privacy in Intimate Spaces,” it denies transgender federal prisoners access to incarceration in spaces appropriate to their gender—in its words, keeping “males” out of “women’s prisons.” It also deprives federal prisoners access to “any medical procedure, treatment, or drug” related to gender transition, a policy that seems likely to result in forced detransitioning for those who receive hormone therapies on a regular basis.
The Orwellian Section 5, “Protecting Rights,” promises to defend the “freedom to express the binary nature of sex” by directing federal agencies to prioritize “investigations and litigation” in service of binary gender. As we all fear who and what might be investigated under a Trump B-side FBI, we should also follow closely who and what will be targeted for their openness to transgender and nonbinary gender expression.
The order dissolves the White House Gender Policy Council and ends with directives to the Department of Education to rescind a long list of advisory documents, e.g., on “Supporting LGBTQI+ Youth and Families in School” and “Supporting Intersex Students,” which just left me sad.
Within 120 days, each federal agency will need to submit an update on its progress along these lines, so I guess executive administrative agencies will last at least that long and have at least that important role to fulfill. The president has asked, too, for proposed legislation within 30 days.
As a cisgender woman and a feminist, I feel safer already. –Felicia Kornbluh