Policies & Analysis

This order instructs DOJ to compile a list of "sanctuary jurisdictions," strip them of funding, and take vague "measures" against them if they do not fall in line.

This Executive Order relies on the unsupported assertion that immigration constitutes an "invasion" to claim claim the authority for DOJ and DHS to identify and punish so-called "sanctuary" jurisdictions. There is no legal definition of a "sanctuary" or "welcoming" city or state; it usually refers to jurisdictions that decline to use their own local law enforcement resources to carry out federal immigration enforcement, which states and localities have the right to do. However, this EO defines "sanctuary" jurisdictions as those that "obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration laws," and incorrectly claims that this constitutes a "lawless insurrection" against the federal government. The EO instructs DOJ to maintain the list of sanctuary jurisdictions, and inform all jurisdictions on the list of their designations. It unlawfully instructs executive branch agencies to strip designated jurisdictions of federal funding, and potentially to target them for prosecution under federal harboring, obstruction, conspiracy, and RICO statutes. It also encourages other undefined "measures" and "action" by DOJ and DHS. Finally, DHS is instructed to develop rules to prevent ineligible noncitizens from receiving public benefits through private organizations like nonprofits, and DOJ is instructed to sue states that provide in-state tuition at state colleges and universities to state residents who lack U.S. citizenship.

This order cuts funding to provide government-appointed counsel to noncitizens in immigration proceedings who are deemed mentally imcompetent.

The Department of Justice abruptly terminated grants to a number of legal services organizations who provide free immigration counsel to noncitizens who are deemed mentally incompetent. DOJ claimed that it was terminating these grants "for convenience." It maintained only grants that were required by the settlement in Franco-Gonzalez v. Holder, Case No. 10-02211 DMG (C.D. Cal.), and terminated the rest.

This order issues a new Civil Service Rule that would make it easier to fire civil servants and shrink the federal workforce.

This order means that even high-performing new federal employees (known as probationary employees) will be automatically fired at the end of their first or second year unless agency political leadership takes action to keep them. The new rule applies to all probationary federal employees across the entire government (except those who have been recently transferred, promoted, or assigned for the first time to a supervisory or managerial position). It requires agencies to actively affirm that probationary employees advance the public interest and should continue in the federal service before finalizing their appointments. Otherwise, employees will be terminated at the end of their probationary period. Currently, probationary workers may only be laid off due to performance or conduct, but the order adds the needs and interests of the agency as a reason for possible termination, potentially inserting ideology into the process. The order instructs political appointee agency heads, rather than the usual career employee supervisors, to make that determination, leaving new federal employees' continued employment at the discretion of political appointees

The Department of Justice abruptly halted funding to 365 federal grant programs that help victims, combat domestic terror, and solve cold cases.

The Department of Justice administers hundreds of federal grant programs to help people who were victims of crimes. But in April 2025, the Trump-Vance administration cut funding to 365 of those programs, including, for example, a hotline for victims of crime that receives thousands of calls each year, and organization that provides sign language interpreters to crime victims with disabilities and hearing impairments.

The Trump administration is attacking the independence of the National Credit Union Administration by purporting to remove members of its board without cause.

President Trump purported to fire two members of the board of the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) without explanation. Under the Federal Credit Union Act, board members can only be fired for cause, but no cause was given. Board members have filed suit to challenge their termination. This action continues the troubling effort to interfere with independent agencies, which is a culmination of a decades-long effort to eliminate independent agencies as a check on the President arbitrarily harming Americans' safety and security, and undermining the stability of the American economy. The independence of these agencies allows for impartial decision-making on a host of important issues, including transportation safety, nuclear safety, interstate electricity transmission and telecommunications, finance, and in this case, the banking systems. NCUA is an independent federal agency that insures the bank deposits of bank users at over 4,000 federal credit unions.

DOGE attempted to cut entire AmeriCorps programs and thousands of staff and grants that are providing essential disaster resilience and rebuilding services around the country.

Since its inception in 1993, AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC) has recruited thousands of people every year between the ages of 18 and 26 to work on projects across the country, including disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery efforts, in exchange for early career experience and assistance with federal student loans. But on April 15, 2025, AmeriCorps NCCC emailed all members to announce that, in alignment with DOGE cost-cutting priorities, all NCCC members are being terminated from the program, ending their pay on April 30 and restricting their eligibility for NCCC's student loan assistance.

The Department of Energy seeks to cut essential funding that research institutions receive for facilities, equipment, and personnel, known as "indirect costs."

This guidance caps the amount of "indirect costs" funding that universities and other research institutions receive at 15% of their "direct costs" amount. Until now, scientific and engineering research institutions might receive 50% or more in indirect costs funding, which is the funding that supports building and laboratory maintenance, equipment upkeep, accounting, and salaries for researchers. The change will severely limit the ability of universities and other grant recipients to carry out vital and cutting edge scientific research. Small institutions, including historically Black colleges and universities, may be especially likely to shutter research initiatives if they cannot access alternate funding in their budgets to cover indirect costs. America will lose its edge as a leader in research procedures and delivering results that positively impact scientific and engineering outcomes globally. This policy is similar to indirect cost rate caps that the Trump administration tried to impose at the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation in 2025.

DOJ retaliates against the American Bar Association because of positions it has taken on policy and legal issues.

The American Bar Association (ABA) is the nation's largest voluntary legal organization. Among other things, the ABA runs programs supported by federal funds awarded by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to increase access to justice for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. This DOJ memo sought to terminate these grants in retaliation for the ABA filing a lawsuit against the United States and purportedly supporting activist causes. The memo also prohibited DOJ attorneys from participating in ABA events and ended any financial support for such involvement.

This order suspends security clearances and access to federal buildings for employees of Susman Godfrey, and terminates government contracts with the firm.

Similar to earlier EOs from President Trump that targeted other private law firms, this EO focused on Susman Godfrey - a well-respected U.S. law firm of over 200 attorneys - largely because of its work defending the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. This EO directs agencies to suspend security clearances held by Susman Godfrey employees, deny them access to federal buildings, avoid meeting with them, and refuse to hire them. The EO also directs agencies to terminate any contracts between the federal government and the firm. The order also criticizes Susman Godfrey for seeking to support and hire law students of color, and accuses the firm of "spearhead[ing] efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections."

This order directs various federal agencies to find ways to promote the use of coal for energy production, including by opening up federal land for coal mining.

This Executive Order promotes the mining and use of coal and makes it a "national priority" to support the dirty and dangerous coal industry. The order directs federal agencies to identify coal resources on federal lands, prioritize coal leasing on those lands, and fast-track coal mining permits. Coal is reclassified as a "mineral" under the terms of EO 14241, another order signed by Trump that aims to increase mineral production. The order also instructs various federal agencies to identify and "consider revising or rescinding" any policies aimed at transitioning the country to cleaner energy sources.

Citing the fact that Maine allows trans girls to play on girls sports teams, the USDA Secretary froze the distribution of federal funds used to feed Maine schoolchildren.

On April 2, 2025, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins sent a letter to Maine Governor Janet Mills, explaining that she was freezing Maine's federal funding for certain administrative and technological functions in schools because she had concluded, without the legally required procedures, that Maine was violating Title IX by allowing trans girls to play on girls' sports teams. Although the letter claimed that the funding freeze would not affect federal feeding programs or direct assistance to Mainers, Maine alleged in a subsequent lawsuit against USDA that the Maine Department of Education's Child Nutrition Program was unable to access several sources of federal funds following the letter. The district court quickly granted a Temporary Restraining Order requiring USDA to resume funding, and the case settled on May 3 after USDA agreed not to interfere with Maine's access to federal funds without first following all legally required procedures.

The administration's unexplained delays and additional administrative burden on Head Start programs puts at risk early childhood education access for families across the country.

The administration is delaying and witholding appropriated funds from Head Start programs around the nation. Head Start programs provide high-quality early childhood education to support children, and their families, around the country. This action leaves many programs short on necessary funds for adequate staffing and supplies. Programs that serve primarily lower income and communities of color are faced with the choice to decrease access or close altogether. Decreased access to early childhood education immediately impacts parents' availability to participate in the workforce, harms children's access to education, and can harm future educational outcomes for affected children.