Executive Orders and Memorandums

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      The Barrage of Trump’s Awful Ideas Is Doing Exactly What It’s Supposed To

      by

      The first month of the second Trump presidency has put the lie to the widespread wisdom that Donald Trump has no ideology and no ideas, only an insatiable thirst for power and money. Trump has shown that he has ideas. So many ideas. They are just really bad ideas:The United States can own, ethnically cleanse and redevelop Gaza as a luxury resort. The U.S. will buy Greenland and take possession of the Panama Canal. The government will become more efficient by cutting the Department of Education, U.S.A.I.D., medical and science research and many many jobs. D.E.I. caused the collision of an Army helicopter and a passenger plane in the air near Washington, D.C. Immigrants and transgender people are an existential threat to Americans. The president can and should rule by decree. These are all ideas, in the sense that they are opinions, beliefs or expressions of a possible course of action.Some of these ideas would have seemed unthinkable just weeks ago. But now that they have been thought and uttered by the man in possession of the world’s biggest megaphone, all of us are forced to engage with them. Otherwise sane people start debating questions like: Could the U.S. really take over Gaza? Would Egypt or Jordan go along with the ethnic cleansing project? Can trillions of dollars really be cut from the federal budget with a few keystrokes? Is there evidence that D.E.I. caused the crash? Are all immigrants criminals? Do trans people exist? Did the founders intend to check the power of the executive?Flooding the ether with bad ideas isn’t Trump’s unique know-how — it’s standard autocratic fare. Hannah Arendt used the word “preposterous” to describe the ideas that underpinned 20th-century totalitarian regimes. Bad ideas do a lot of the work of building autocracy. By forcing us to engage with them, they make our conversations, our media and our society dumber. By conjuring the unimaginable — radical changes in the geography of human relationships, the government and the world itself as we have known it — they plunge us into an anxious state in which thinking is difficult. That kind of anxiety is key to totalitarian control.Life under autocracy can be terrifying, as it already is in the United States for immigrants and trans people. But those of us with experience can tell you that most of the time, for most people, it’s not frightening. It is stultifying. It’s boring. It feels like trying to see and breathe under water — because you are submerged in bad ideas, being discussed badly, being reflected in bad journalism and, eventually, in bad literature and bad movies.Much has been said about the Democrats’ failure to sound the alarm loudly enough, fast enough or broadly enough as Trump has mounted his campaign of destruction. Some of the criticism is not entirely fair. The American system of checks and balances isn’t designed to move as fast as Trump is moving or to stop a bad-faith individual intent on breaking it. A real problem, though, is that Democrats’ objections to these ideas have been primarily procedural. Trump understands politics as the interplay of power and ideology. His opponents see politics as procedure. The contrast has never been starker — and never has the Democrats’ technocratic, legalistic approach been more detrimental to the cause of democracy. It’s not Trump who doesn’t have ideas; it’s the people who should be fighting to stop Trump’s autocratic breakthrough.It is not enough to say that Trump and his crony Elon Musk are staging a coup, though they are. Many of the people who voted for Trump want to see him smash what he has successfully framed as a useless, wasteful government. It is not enough to say that Trump is destroying American democracy. Many of the people who voted for him did so because they have long felt that the system as it is constituted doesn’t represent their interests — and both Trump and Musk have argued that they are wresting democracy back from unelected bureaucrats. It is not enough to say that Trump’s actions have caused a constitutional crisis or that his executive orders may violate laws passed by Congress. Many of the people who voted for Trump longed to see their frustrations addressed by decisive, spectacular action, which he is delivering.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Might Have a Case on Birthright Citizenship

      by

      On his first day in office, President Trump issued an executive order that purports to end birthright citizenship for certain children. It does so despite Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, which declares, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”The central question raised by Mr. Trump’s order is what it means to be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. The answer most legal observers give is that it includes virtually anyone born on American soil, including those whom the order is meant to exclude, namely children born to parents in the country illegally or temporarily. Indeed, on Monday, the American Bar Association described the order as an attack on a “constitutionally protected” right. Federal judges in four states have enjoined the order, with one claiming that it “conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment.”Not necessarily.The Supreme Court has held, in the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, that children born here to permanent residents are citizens. But it has never squarely held that children born to those illegally present are citizens. When the court addresses that question — which it almost certainly must — it should consider the 14th Amendment’s original purpose and the common-law principle of “jus soli,” or birthright citizenship, which informed the original public meaning of the text. Both relate to the idea of social compact and contradict today’s general assumption that the common-law principle depends solely upon place of birth.The 14th Amendment’s RootsAt the time of its adoption, the publicly known purpose of the 14th Amendment was to extend the benefits of the social compact — including, specifically, the privileges and immunities of citizenship — to African Americans newly freed after the Civil War. (Due in large part to a series of egregious Supreme Court rulings gutting the original letter and spirit of the amendment, that promise of equal citizenship was largely denied for decades.)Abraham Lincoln’s administration, rejecting the reasoning of Dred Scott v. Sandford, had already acknowledged that free African Americans were citizens. As Edward Bates, Lincoln’s first attorney general, wrote in 1862, in an official opinion, “The Constitution uses the word ‘citizen’ only to express the political quality of the individual in his relations to the nation; to declare that he is a member of the body politic, and bound to it by the reciprocal obligation of allegiance on the one side and protection on the other.”The equal protection clause, also found in Section 1 of the amendment, provides that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This clause was based on the same allegiance-for-protection theory enunciated by Bates.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Extends Halt on Trump Plan to Dismantle U.S.A.I.D.

      by

      For at least another week, a judge will keep a hold on a directive placing more than 2,000 employees on administrative leave and forcing the return of overseas workers.A federal judge on Thursday moved to extend by one week a temporary restraining order preventing the Trump administration from carrying out plans that would all but dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development.The order, which Judge Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said he would file later Thursday, continues to stall a directive that would put a quarter of its employees on administrative leave while forcing those posted overseas to return to the United States within 30 days.Judge Nichols said he would rule by the end of next week on whether to grant the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction that would indefinitely block key elements of the high-profile Trump administration effort.The plan was driven in large part by Elon Musk, the billionaire tech entrepreneur tasked with making cuts to the federal budget, to shutter an agency he and Mr. Trump have vilified. The temporary restraining order applies to about 2,700 direct hires of U.S.A.I.D., including hundreds of Foreign Service officers, who would have been put on administrative leave under the directive, which also warned that contractors’ jobs could be terminated.The lawsuit was filed by two unions representing the affected U.S.A.I.D. employees: the American Foreign Service Association, to which aid workers in global missions belong, and the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents other direct hires. They have argued that President Trump’s executive order freezing foreign aid for 90 days and subsequent directives to dismantle certain U.S.A.I.D. operations and reduce staff were unconstitutional, and have asked the court to overturn them.Democratic lawmakers, U.S.A.I.D. workers, and the aid organizations that depend on U.S. foreign assistance have decried any moves to unilaterally shut down the agency as unlawful, as its role in the federal government was established by law and Congress funded it, like the rest of the government, through March 14.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      State Department Revises Plan to Buy Armored Teslas

      by

      Tesla’s name was removed from a State Department document that listed planned vehicle purchases after the existence of the list was reported late Wednesday. The potential award raised questions about why the government was giving a lucrative contract to the company, which is led by Elon Musk, one of President Trump’s most important advisers.A department procurement forecast for 2025 detailed purchases the agency expected to make, including $400 million for armored Tesla vehicles. The document did not specify which Tesla model, but the electric Cybertruck, which has a body of high-strength stainless steel, would be the most suitable.Later on Wednesday, a different version of the procurement document appeared online. It referred to “armored electric vehicles,” omitting any mention of Tesla.Mr. Musk spent more than $250 million to help elect Mr. Trump, who then appointed him as the leader of a cost-cutting initiative that’s been called the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.Plans to spend $400 million on Tesla pickups raised eyebrows given that Mr. Musk has been posting almost hourly on X, the social media site he owns, about wasteful government spending.Tesla and the State Department did not respond to requests for comment. On X, Mr. Musk shared a post from a supporter that said a report on the topic by Rachel Maddow of MSNBC was a “hit piece.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      New Trump Executive Order Calls for ‘Reform’ to the U.S. Diplomatic Corps

      by

      President Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday calling for “reform” to the Foreign Service, America’s corps of professional diplomats, “to ensure faithful and effective implementation” of his foreign policy agenda.It was the latest of several recent moves by Mr. Trump to assert greater control over the federal work force, which the president largely views with a blend of suspicion and hostility. Mr. Trump and his allies believe that left-leaning bureaucrats will work to thwart his agenda and that he should have far more power than past presidents to install proven loyalists throughout the government.To that end, Mr. Trump’s order, titled “One Voice for America’s Foreign Relations,” directs the secretary of state to “implement reforms in recruiting, performance, evaluation and retention standards.” It also directs officials to “revise or replace the Foreign Affairs Manual,” along with “any handbooks, procedures or guidance” governing diplomacy.The executive order also makes explicit the price of defying Mr. Trump’s orders. “Failure to faithfully implement the president’s policy is grounds for professional discipline, including separation,” it says.All foreign policy arms of the government, it adds, must devise “an effective and efficient means” of ensuring that the president’s orders are followed.The executive order would appear to challenge basic and longstanding principles of the Foreign Service: that career diplomats should be hired based on their qualifications and expertise, not their political views, and that dissent should be welcomed and not punished.As part of the federal civil service, professional diplomats enjoy special job protections against partisanship and political retribution. Mr. Trump seems intent on weakening those protections.In an initial statement, the American Foreign Service Association, which represents professional diplomats, said it was still assessing the impact of the order. But the group noted that its members posted around the world “carry out the foreign policy initiatives of the president, regardless of party.”“We hope that any administration would value the expertise and knowledge of the Foreign Service, including its ability to provide advice on foreign policy matters,” the statement said, adding that the group would “always defend the integrity and nonpolitical nature of the Foreign Service so that our members can continue to serve the American people.”Separately, State Department officials are grappling with more proposed cuts to personnel. Some ambassadors have been told this week to present lists of cuts of 10 to 20 percent of employees who are local citizens, said a person briefed on the demands, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid retribution.Edward Wong More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Curtails Anti-Corruption Efforts, as Aides Seek End to Eric Adams Case

      by

      Two nearly simultaneous moves by the Trump administration on Monday signaled a new and far more transactional approach to the Justice Department’s handling of corruption cases.In the evening, President Trump signed an executive order halting investigations and prosecutions of corporate corruption in foreign countries, arguing such cases hurt the United States’ competitive edge. “It’s going to mean a lot more business for America,” he said of his decision to pause enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977.Around the same time, a top Justice Department official directed federal prosecutors in Manhattan to drop bribery charges against Mayor Eric Adams of New York. The stated justification for the demand had nothing to do with the evidence in the case and focused instead on politics.The actions on Monday stunned current and former prosecutors and investigators who said the department was abandoning a tradition of holding public officials, corporate executives and others accountable for corruption in favor of an approach built on political or economic expedience.That same day, Mr. Trump pardoned Rod R. Blagojevich, the former Democratic governor of Illinois who was convicted in 2011 of essentially trying to sell a Senate seat that was vacated by President Barack Obama. Mr. Trump had previously commuted Mr. Blagojevich’s sentence.Trump administration officials have also ordered the shutdown of an initiative to seize assets owned by foreign kleptocrats, dialed back scrutiny of foreign influence efforts aimed at the United States and replaced the top career Justice Department official handling corruption cases.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Orders Plans for ‘Large Scale’ Work Force Cuts and Expands Musk’s Power

      by

      President Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday directing agency officials to draw up plans for “large scale” cuts to the federal work force and further empowered the billionaire Elon Musk and his team to approve which career officials are hired in the future.The order gives the so-called Department of Government Efficiency vast reach over the shape of the Civil Service as the Trump administration tries to sharply cut the number of employees working for the federal government. It states that, aside from agencies involved in functions like law enforcement and immigration enforcement, executive branch departments will need hiring approval from an official working with Mr. Musk’s team.Each federal agency, with some exceptions, will be allowed to “hire no more than one employee for every four employees that depart” after a hiring freeze is lifted, according to Mr. Trump’s order. New career hires would have to be made in consultation with a “DOGE Team Lead,” the order stated. It also said that agencies should not fill career positions that Mr. Musk’s team deems unnecessary, unless an agency head — not a member of Mr. Musk’s initiative — decides that those positions should be filled.The “work force optimization initiative” was signed by Mr. Trump shortly before he and Mr. Musk spent roughly 30 minutes defending the drastic overhaul in front of reporters in the Oval Office. Mr. Musk, the world’s richest person, has moved rapidly to force change in Washington, an effort he asserted on Tuesday would benefit the public.In the first three weeks of the new Trump administration, Mr. Musk’s team has inserted itself into at least 19 agencies, according to a tally by The New York Times, where it has begun identifying programs to cut.The order is the latest move by Mr. Trump to bolster the authority of Mr. Musk’s effort.Eric Lee/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Amid Concern Over Trump Order, New Yorkers Rally to Support Trans Youth

      by

      Thousands of protesters in Union Square called for action against an executive order that threatens to withhold federal funding from hospitals that provide gender-affirming care.Bells, drums and chants rang out Saturday afternoon in Union Square in Manhattan as thousands of New Yorkers gathered to protest an executive order from the Trump administration targeting transgender children and teens.The order, which threatens to withhold federal funding from hospitals that provide gender-affirming treatments to trans youth, has left many local families worried and reeling.At the rally, parents and children came together with activists and lawmakers to share their stories and call for action against President Trump’s policies.Juno Krebs, 10, a nonbinary student from Brooklyn, said the executive order was “scary” and that it felt like the administration was “trying to take away our rights.”“I don’t identify as a girl or a boy, and I should be respected for that,” Juno said. “It doesn’t feel any different. It just feels like me, honestly.”For Michelle Byron, the mother of a transgender and nonbinary teenager, the order has raised painful and frightening questions about her child’s ability to continue receiving gender-affirming care, which can include hormone therapy, puberty blockers and surgery, though such procedures are rare for minors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More