Donald Trump, as he plans to commence his second term in the upcoming days, has a plethora of executive orders on his table ready to sign. In pursuance of his commitment to the nation, Trump’s primary focus appears to be a deep revamp of immigration. Concerns arise, however, based on his prior tenure, where he further plans to draw back initiatives of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and is expected to make decisions affecting transgender youth’s life quality and gender-confirming care.
In the span of his initial term, President Trump’s pen drafted as many as 221 executive orders aimed at various issues. These ranged from imposing a travel ban across several countries with a Muslim majority, to establishing measures for crime reduction. But these executive orders, while under the president’s authority, are not absolute in terms of their power.
Executive orders, by their essence, are directives that allow presidents to formulate policy beyond the standard congressional process. According to the Constitution’s Article II, this authority is granted to presidents for enforcing laws related to the executive branch. Moreover, the process for drafting an executive order involves the president requesting a federal agency or the agency itself proposing an order.
There is also another form of presidential orders known as executive actions. These, apart from actual executive orders, include rules, regulations, and memorandums. However, a clear limit is imposed on the extent of authority that presidents can exert through these orders – they should always be rooted in existing law and constitutional authority.
Effectiveness of executive orders is varied, some might not be consequential for the day-to-day lives of the citizens. However, some policies are impactful depending on their nature and the way they are implemented. Executive orders have grown to be critical instruments for presidents, particularly in times of a partisan deadlock in Congress.
Reports suggest that President Trump already has a list of about 100 executive orders that he intends to sign within the first few days of his second term. To put things into perspective, Trump signed 33 in the first 100 days of his initial term in 2017, whereas Biden enacted 42 in the same period in 2021.
What sets executive orders apart from federal laws enacted by Congress is the ease with which they can be reversed. For instance, during the initial 100 days of Biden’s tenure, he had overturned more than 60 of Donald Trump’s executive orders. These included actions related to climate policies and the controversial decision of Trump to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.
Furthermore, Congress possesses the ability to regulate the president’s executive actions. It can pass legislation or withhold essential funding and resources required to put the policy into action. The judiciary can also provide checks and balances on executive actions, making legal challenges possible.
In the inaugural year of his first term, Trump had signed orders that, among others, urged the Justice Department to escalate penalties for crimes perpetrated against law enforcement officers. Orders also aimed to battle drug addiction by creating a commission investigating federal government efforts, and to limit federal funding for cities that hosted undocumented immigrants, commonly referred to as “sanctuary cities”.
All eyes are again on Trump as immigration has been flagged as a key priority area for his second term, with promises of ‘mass deportations’ being made from the first day. However, uncertainty looms over how he plans to execute these orders. One predicted approach could be to proclaim a national emergency, mobilizing the military or National Guard to intensify deportations.
Interpreting Trump’s past decisions, he might resort to using Title 42 public health restrictions just as he did during the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, effectively shutting down the U.S.-Mexico border. Besides, he may also utilize executive orders along with other forms of executive action targeting how the government treats the LGBTQ+ community, notably transgender children.
Trump’s campaign website vaguely suggests limitations to programs promoting the idea of ‘sex and gender transition at any age.’ He might go further, directing the Department of Education to warn states and school districts of ‘severe consequences’ if they hint that a child could be transgender.
Yet, those are but shadows of policies cast and not real, concrete policies to be adopted. They are veiled threats to a marginalized community under the safeguarding of the education system. It is a crystal clear example of executive decision-making power that could potentially skew traditional norms and foster further division and harm.
We should not forget that executive orders are double-edged swords, as they can be both beneficial and detrimental for those who are subject to their application. And while they certainly are powerful tools in the hands of presidents, due process of law and balance of power can play an essential role in mitigating potential consequences.
As citizens, it becomes imperative that we scrutinize not just the final outcome of these policies but the motivations and objectives that lie behind their formation. These decisions shape national dialogue around many socio-political issues and may also affect us directly in ways we may not fully comprehend.
Finally, as we look to the future under a renewed Trump administration, it becomes all the more important for us to be cognizant of the political landscape, understand policymaking’s complexities, and participate constructively in our democratic process.