Executive Orders and Actions Updates

• This proclamation states that it applies to all Venezuelan citizens in the U.S. aged 14 years or older who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents and who are “members” of the Tren de Aragua criminal organization, which was recently designated a “foreign terrorist organization.”  

• The president’s proclamation invokes the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which has only been invoked during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. This act can be invoked against foreign nationals who are citizens of countries that the U.S. has declared war on or of countries the president determines are involved in an “invasion or predatory incursion” of the United States.  

• This act has only been invoked against nationals of countries at war with the United States. It has never been invoked against a non-governmental actor, such as the Tren de Aragua organization, or on the basis of alleged membership in an organization. During World War II, the act was used to detain German, Japanese, and Italian foreign nationals present in the U.S. 

• The proclamation effectively impacts every person in the United States even though its stated impact is limited to certain Venezuelan nationals who are members of Tren de Aragua. This act allows the president to deport foreign nationals without the usual judicial and administrative processes involved in deportations. And because the administration has failed to clearly explain how it is determining people’s identities or alleged gang membership, it effectively means any person can mistakenly be detained and deported. In this instance, there are multiple reports that Venezuelan nationals with no criminal affiliations were deported and imprisoned in El Salvador, where they may have no access to courts. 

• These grants were allocated by Congress to provide low-cost loans to businesses and developers to incentivize climate initiatives, such as installing solar panels. The $20 billion were allocated to eight nonprofit organizations who were charged with distributing the funds to local credit unions and “green banks” as loans and grants.  
• If the grants’ termination is upheld, the decision will negatively impact businesses and contractors who have operated in reliance on the disbursement of these funds. Likewise, this termination along with other changes could severely impact related industries and contractors, such as solar panel installers.  

• The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cut $660 million from its Local Food for Schools and Child Care Cooperative Agreement Program. This program helped schools and child care centers purchase nutritious food from local farmers. The cuts will impact child nutrition and local farmers.  
• The USDA cut $440 million from the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program (LFPA). This program assisted food banks in purchasing food products from local farmers. It will impact food bank stocks and smaller farmers, who were contracting through the program. 

• This order directs the Secretary of Education to revise eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (PSLF).  

• The PSLF is designed to encourage university graduates to work in public service by providing student loan forgiveness after working fulltime for ten years for a nonprofit, government, or similar qualified employers.  

• The order seeks to disqualify eligibility for applicants working for employers whose work includes “illegal immigration, human smuggling, child trafficking, pervasive damage to public property, and disruption of the public order, which threaten the security and stability of the United States.”
• Based on the language of the order and accompanying statements, it seems the administration is trying to exclude loan forgiveness primarily for nonprofits and local governments whose work includes immigration, services for transgender people, racial and gender equity, and public mobilization.

• Many of the layoffs occurred within the Department’s Office of Civil Rights, which enforces civil rights compliance in schools and universities and investigates civil rights complaints. As a result, many of its regional offices have closed. This office has received a record number of complaints in recent years and was already severely understaffed.  

• With fewer people overseeing the Department’s student financial aid programs, it may be more difficult for students to apply for or renew student aid. It is also likely there will be less oversight of the private contractors managing $1.6 trillion in student loans.  

• The Department’s main role in K-12 education is providing and overseeing funding through the Title I program for low-income schools and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The funding these programs provide include funding for smaller classes, additional teacher support, social workers, and disability accommodation. While these programs are mandated by Congress, it will be very difficult for the Department to fully implement and monitor these programs. 

• One of the key functions of the Department of Education, primarily through its Institute of Education Sciences (I.E.S.), is to collect data from schools in order to inform policymaking and Congressional budget making. The latest layoffs, along with earlier funding cuts and contract terminations, mean it is unlike the I.E.S. will be able to continue its work.  

• In his March 20 order, the president directed the Secretary of State to, “the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.”  

• Congress created the Department of Education, so the president most likely does not have the legal authority to unilaterally eliminate the department. As a result, the executive order is likely to continue the process of moving some of the department’s functions to other agencies while making other sections inoperable by eliminating staff.  

• Some of the impacts of the department’s ongoing dismantle are immediate. These include an increasing backlog of civil rights complaints, particularly those relating to the rights of disabled students. In addition, the layoffs mean the department is no longer able to collect and analyze the data it uses for funding allocations.  

• It is unclear how Title I and related funding to schools for 2026-2027 will be distributed considering the department’s inability to collect and analyze data.  

• This new office replaces the White Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which the administration eliminated on January 20, 2025.  

• The new White House Faith Office, compared to the office it replaces, places a heavier emphasis on supporting faith-based organizations and efforts to “combat… anti-religious bias.”  
• The order states the office is meant to “empower faith-based entities, community organizations, and houses of worship to serve families and communities.” The grammatical ambiguity makes it unclear whether it refers to all “community organizations” or just “faith-based” “community organizations.”  

• This is a technical order creating a new federal employee category for federal workers in “policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating” positions. 
• The order makes it easier to terminate workers in the new category. By doing so, it removes protections from political interference for career civil servants engaged in policy work. 

• This order challenges long-established legal understandings by creating a mechanism that would require nearly all regulatory agencies’ actions to have approval from the president and attorney general. Independent regulatory agencies include agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and Federal Communications Commissions. 

• The order states that any agencies’ interpretation of the law must in “the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation” must be in line with the president’s or the attorney general’s opinion. The only exceptions it provides are for “the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or to the Federal Open Market Committee in [their] conduct of monetary policy.” 

• Since the late 1800s, Congress has created certain independent regulatory agencies with safeguards from political interference by sitting presidents. The purpose of creating these safeguards was to ensure the agencies were guided by professional rather than political expertise.  

• The Trump Administration has disbanded several advisory groups to the Census, including the National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic, and Other Populations.
• Census Advisory Committees, and the NAC in particular, have served as valuable pathways for marginalized communities to provide insights into the policies and practices of federal agencies.
• We are still uncertain of the implications of this action, but we are concerned about what the lack of expert advising on race and ethnicity could mean for our communities’ representation and inclusion in Census data collection and implementation.

• The terminated grants provided key resources to support and recruit educators, particularly those teaching students from disadvantaged economic backgrounds and students with special needs. The termination of these grants is part of the administration’s plans to defund what it defines as DEI. 

• Terminated $336 million awarded to Regional Educational Laboratories that were meant for “research, development, and technical assistance activities.”   

• It stated these contracts were terminated due to “wasteful and ideologically driven spending not in the interest of students and taxpayers” and provided assistance for schools to carry out “‘equity audits’ and equity conversations” as examples of such spending. 

• Terminated $33 million in grants to Equity Assistance Centers stating grants “supported divisive training in DEI, Critical Race Theory, and gender identity for state and local education agencies as well as school boards.” 

• This order’s stated purpose is to eliminate the promotion of what the administration deems “radical, anti-American ideologies” K-12 educational institutions receiving federal funding. 

• The order emphasizes the enforcement of existing laws, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), to safeguard parental authority in educational settings. 

• The wide-ranging order emphasizes prioritizing “patriotic” education that present U.S. history in ways described as “admirable,” “noble,” and “inspiring.”  
• The prohibits diversity, equity, and inclusions efforts and characterizes them as discriminatory.  

Immigrant Visa Holders  

• The executive actions threaten to prosecute and deport visa holders, particularly university students and faculty, who engage or have engaged in First Amendment-protected speech supporting Palestinian rights and opposing genocide by declaring them as “Hamas sympathizers” expressing support for antisemitism, “jihadism,” and “foreign terrorism.” 

• Even if no actual actions are taken against visa holders under these actions, they already have the effect of chilling speech – meaning the government is spreading fear to deny people their First Amendment rights. 

• The actions also subject visa holders to the constant threat of anyone, such as a classmate, having the power to contact the government and report the visa holder as a supporter of terrorism. 

 Universities  

• The orders ask universities to “monitor for and report activities by alien students and staff” for “antisemitic” conduct but it does not outline how they should do this nor whether they are actually required to report students and faculty to the government. 

• In addition to targeting faculty and student visa holders, these actions along with plans announced for the Department of Education, will increase the ongoing pressure on universities to silence dissent with threats to their funding. 

• This memorandum directs the heads of all executive departments and agencies to review all funding provided to NGOs and “align future funding decisions with the interests of the United States and with the goals and priorities of [the] Administration.”  

• The brief memo states many NGOs are “engaged in actions that actively undermine the security, prosperity, and safety of the American people” and that is in the policy of the Administration to stop funding NGOs that undermine the national interest.” 

• While the impact of this order is unclear, its impact can potentially include limiting the ability of tens of millions of people to vote without assistance, file taxes, access healthcare, apply for government services, use courts, and navigate the immigration system. 

• This order rescinds the 25-year-old Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency [“LEP”].” By rescinding the order, federal agencies and federal grant recipients providing services to the public “develop and implement a system to provide those services so LEP persons can have meaningful access to them.”  

• This order does not prohibit or limit agencies from providing services and documents in languages other than English; instead, it removes the mandate and leaves the decision to provide non-English services and documents up to each agency.  

Potential travel bans:  

• The order directs relevant agency heads in 60 days to identify “countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a partial or full suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries.” Creating a framework before imposing any travel bans could help the administration avoid some of the court challenges to the first “Muslim Ban” in 2017.  

Immigrants:  

• The order directs “any actions necessary to protect the American people from the actions of foreign nationals who have undermined or seek to undermine the fundamental constitutional rights of the American people, including… our Citizens’ rights to freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, who preach or call for sectarian violence, the overthrow or replacement of the culture on which our constitutional Republic stands, or who provide aid, advocacy, or support for foreign terrorist.”  

• This provision creates a framework for denying entry to and for revoking the visas of people based on vague ideological grounds.  

• Please see the “Impacts on Free Speech and Dissent Through Overlapping Actions” summary for related information. 

TPS 

• The “Protecting the American People” order directs the Attorney General, Secretary of State, and Homeland Security Secretary to ensure TPS designations are “consistent” with the law.  

• Any premature terminations of TPS would require several steps and would be challenged in courts. However, on January 28, the DHS Secretary revoked the Venezuelan TPS extension granted by the prior administration on January 17, 2025 and could do so because the extension was still in a review period. On February 1, the DHS Secretary also announced she will allow the 2023 TPS designation for Venezuelans to expire on April 2, 2025. 

Humanitarian Parole  

• The “Protecting the American People” order states Parole should only be granted on a case-by-case basis as opposed to broad designations of Parole for entire groups. 

• The “Securing Our Borders” order instructs the DHS Secretary to end the “CBP One” parole process and to terminate the Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV) Parole program. 

• On January 28, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services stopped accepting Parole applications under the CHNV Parole program and under the United for Ukraine (U4U).  

• This order challenges the right to birthright citizenship for all persons born in the U.S., as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Specifically, it would deny citizenship to any child whose father is not a U.S. citizen or Legally Permanent Resident and whose mother is (1) an undocumented immigrant OR (2) whose mother is on a temporary visa, such as a tourist or student visa.

• This stop-work order stopped the continued distribution of a $200 million contract managed by the Acacia Center for Justice that funded nearly all legal representation for unaccompanied minors through a network of nonprofit partners.  

• The nationwide impact of this stop-work order is that nearly all representation for unaccompanied minors is no longer funded.  

• The administration has not offered an explanation for ending the funding but the stop-work order made a point of stating the order was “being implemented due to causes outside of your control and should not be misconstrued as an indication of poor performance by your firm.”  

• A similar January 23 Department of Justice stop-work order halting funding to a program providing legal information and training to undocumented immigrants facing deportation was rescinded after a court after impacted organizations brought legal action.   

• The attorney general directs all “[d]epartment components that provide federal funding to non-governmental organizations [to] immediately identify all contracts, grants, or other agreements with organizations that support or provide services to removable or illegal aliens.” It then directs each component to immediately “[p]ause any further distribution of funds for 60 days after complying with any notice and procedural requirements” while the funding is reviewed by the department.  

• The memorandum also requires the identification within 45 days of all nonprofits receiving DOJ funding and whether the funding “resulted in the provision of any funds or services to removable or illegal aliens.”  

• The stated purpose of the February 19 order is to stop undocumented immigrants from receiving any public benefits they are already legally barred from receiving. This order directs the heads of each agency to identify “all federally funded programs administered by the agency that currently permit illegal aliens to obtain any cash or non-cash public benefit.” It also directs them to ensure “Federal payments to States and localities do not, by design or effect, facilitate the subsidization or promotion of illegal immigration, or abet so-called “sanctuary” policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.  

• Because these provisions are framed as just enforcing current laws, it is unclear what impact they might have.  

• The February 19 order also seeks to “enhance eligibility verification systems, to the maximum extent possible, to ensure that taxpayer-funded benefits exclude any ineligible alien.”  

• Any such new verification systems could increase requirements on service providers to ask for documentation but this would probably require a significant amount of time to be implemented. 

• This primarily applies to undocumented immigrant. DHS states it applies, “with limited exceptions, [to] all aliens 14 years of age or older who were not fingerprinted or registered when applying for a U.S. visa and who remain in the United States for 30 days or longer.”  

• This requirement would create a government registry to more easily facilitate deportations and mass detentions for those who register. But because it is unlikely millions of people would participate, it would effectively classify millions of people as guilty of a crime.  

• Turning a civil offense into a criminal offense can only be done by Congress but the administration argues the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act grants it this power.  

• There is no clear definition of DEI provided but it presents DEI as being discriminatory and in violation of civil rights laws.  

• Requires any government contractor or grant recipient to “to certify that it does not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.” 

• Directs the Attorney General to work with the heads of agencies to pressure the private sector to end DEI through several ways, including:  “each agency shall identify up to nine potential civil compliance investigations of publicly traded corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with assets of 500 million dollars or more, State and local bar and medical associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments over 1 billion dollars.” 

• Directs the Attorney General and Secretary of Education to “issue guidance to all State and local educational agencies that receive Federal funds, as well as all institutions of higher education” receiving federal funds “regarding the measures and practices required to comply” with the 2023 Supreme Court case barring affirmative action on the basis of race in education.  

• The order exempts preferences for military veterans.  

• The order states it does not prevent First Amendment-protected speech by “State or local governments, Federal contractors, or Federally-funded State and local educational agencies or institutions of higher education.” 

• The order also states it does not prevent instructors at institutions of higher learning from “advocating for, endorsing, or promoting the unlawful employment or contracting practices prohibited by this order.” 

• By repealing Order 11246, government contractors and subcontractors will no longer need to demonstrate they are taking affirmative actions against discrimination in the workplace and in hiring. The main impact on non-profits that are government contractors appears to be fewer reporting requirements.  

• The removal of transparent and equal standards for granting federal contracts may also lead to more political favoritism in granting contracts. 

• Civil rights laws, namely the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, are still in effect and bar employers from discriminating against people based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, disability, and marital or familial status. 

• Rescinds the previous administration’s Executive Order 13985: “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” 

• The order directs key agency heads and the Attorney General to “coordinate the termination of all discriminatory programs, including illegal DEI and ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ (DEIA) mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the Federal Government, under whatever name they appear.” 

• “Each agency, department, or commission head” must within sixty days “terminate… all DEI, DEIA, and ‘environmental justice’ offices and positions (including but not limited to ‘Chief Diversity Officer’ positions); all ‘equity action plans,’ ‘equity’ actions, initiatives, or programs, ‘equity-related’ grants or contracts; and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, or grantees.” 

• While this order states all its actions must be conducted in line with the law, it provides no guidance on where it draws the line between DEIA programs and legally required non-discrimination in employment, hiring, or the provision of government services. 

Medicaid Cuts 

• Recipients – Millions of people could lose their health insurance if Congress’s proposal to cut at least $880 billion from Medicaid funding over the next years is passed. Moreover, those who would not lose their Medicaid health insurance would have fewer health services covered by Medicaid and greater difficulty accessing healthcare.  

• Healthcare Providers – Many healthcare providers will no longer be able to operate and maintain staffing if the U.S. healthcare system loses nearly $1 trillion dollars in funding. This will also limit healthcare options for those covered by private insurance.  

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Recipients –  

• Recipients – The proposal to cut at least $230 billion from SNAP over ten years would significantly impact the 44 million people receiving SNAP assistance. Millions will become ineligible for the assistance and those remaining eligible will have their assistance reduced along with added burdens and red tape.  

• Farmers – The agriculture sector and farmers will face significant losses if SNAP benefits are reduced because there will be less food purchased.  

• The SAVE Act stated purpose to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. 

• It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and there are no claims that there is a problem with noncitizens illegally voting in federal elections.  

• As a result, the impact of this bill if it becomes law would be to place barriers on American citizens from voting.  

• The SAVE Act would require voters to provide documentary evidence of their citizenship, which could include passports and birth certificates with a matching name but would not include most state IDs or drivers’ licenses because those do not indicate citizenship.  
• This bill would likely result in removing millions of Americans from state voter rolls. It would especially impact Americans who do not have a passport or a copy of their birth certificate. Moreover, because names of voters must match their names on birth certificates, millions of women who changed their last names could be disenfranchised.  

• The JLVRAA modernizes and strengthens the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which has had key provisions gutted through a series of Supreme Court rulings starting in 2013. The JLVRAA seeks to ensure that that all eligible Americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, or economic status, have equal access to voting and the right to decide who governs them.
• By prohibiting barriers to voting, especially those that disproportionately disenfranchise Black and Brown voters, the bill protects the right of all citizens to decide who governs them rather than allow politicians to select their voters. The bill achieves these goals through multiple provisions that include registration requirements, protections against tampering with voter rolls, ballot access, disability accommodations, language assistance, federal civil rights enforcement, and mechanisms against corruption. 

• Bars any federal government health providers or institutions receiving federal funding from providing any gender-affirming care for any person under the age of nineteen.  

• Defines “gender ideology” as the practice with which the “biological category of sex” is replaced “with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity.” 

• Prohibits any federal funds from being used to “promote gender ideology.”  

• Stops all recognition of transgender people in any data collection (e.g., Bureau of Prisons, hate crime tracking, passports), public policy guidance (e.g., CDC guidance on promoting mental wellbeing in schools for transgender and non-binary students), or research (e.g., NIH studies).  

• Prevents government agencies and institutions from recognizing prevailing scientific literature on gender.  

• This recission in combination with other directives immediately paused the disbursement of all funds already allocated under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.  

• Agencies are instructed to determine within 90 days whether paused funds “align” with president’s priorities and to cancel disbursements if they are not.  

• Whether the president can cancel Congressionally allocated funds will be challenged in courts.  

• The immediate impact of this withdrawal is the CDC was ordered to cease communications with the WHO. This leaves the U.S. vulnerable to potential infectious disease outbreaks because it limits transnational data tracking and research. U.S. public health agencies work closely with the WHO on responding to public health threats and on sharing research, such as identifying influenza variants to use for annual vaccines. 

• The rescinded order outlined a policy “to protect and strengthen Medicaid and the ACA [Affordable Care Act] and to make high-quality healthcare accessible and affordable for every American.” Through EO 14009, the prior administration established a special enrollment period during which time “uninsured and under-insured Americans” could “seek coverage through the Federally Facilitated Marketplace.” It also instructed agencies to review whether any of their policies and practices undermine the previously mentioned policy statement. 

• This rescission signals the new administration is interested in curtailing access to health insurance through the Affordable Healthcare Act; however, the Affordable Healthcare Act remains enshrined in law and would require Congress to repeal it. 

• During the first 24 hours of this memorandum’s distribution, there were significant disruptions across the country to various federally funded social and health services administered directly by the federal government and through state governments and non-profits.  

• Although the memorandum was rescinded and is blocked by courts, there continue to be some disruptions to federally funded programs. Most notably, many Community Health Centers and Head Start programs have had difficulty accessing the online portal distributing funds. The Department of Health and Human Services stated this was due to a technical issue rather than a funding freeze.  

• Because there are multiple, overlapping directives and orders pausing various federal funding, some unrelated funding pauses remain in place. These include, for example, pauses on certain health and science research.  

• Suspends all U.S. refugee programs for at least 90 days, including the admission of previously authorized refugees.  

• Pauses domestic funding to refugee resettlement programs. This pause is separate from the overall funding freezes that are currently subject to court injunctions. 

• This order identifies the cost and access to IVF treatment as problematic.  
• It orders the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy to submit a “list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment” within 90 days.  

• The order rescinded the legal requirement that all persons be counted in the Census regardless of citizenship or immigration status.  

• Rescinding the order does not remove the Constitutional requirement that all persons be counted in the decennial census.  

Medicaid Cuts 

• Recipients – Millions of people could lose their health insurance if Congress’s proposal to cut at least $880 billion from Medicaid funding over the next years is passed. Moreover, those who would not lose their Medicaid health insurance would have fewer health services covered by Medicaid and greater difficulty accessing healthcare.  

• Healthcare Providers – Many healthcare providers will no longer be able to operate and maintain staffing if the U.S. healthcare system loses nearly $1 trillion dollars in funding. This will also limit healthcare options for those covered by private insurance.  

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Recipients 

• Recipients – The proposal to cut at least $230 billion from SNAP over ten years would significantly impact the 44 million people receiving SNAP assistance. Millions will become ineligible for the assistance and those remaining eligible will have their assistance reduced along with added burdens and red tape.  

• Farmers – The agriculture sector and farmers will face significant losses if SNAP benefits are reduced because there will be less food purchased.