Latest news with #Rudalevige
Boston Globe
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
The blizzard of actions in the first 100 days of President Trump's second term, visualized
'It's a shift to see efforts to bring all of the executive branch within the president's political and personal control,' said Andrew Rudalevige, a Bowdoin College professor and senior fellow at the Miller Center at University of Virginia. 'That's not unprecedented in American history, but it's very different than the history of the last, say, 50 years since Watergate.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Remaking the federal bureaucracy — and punishing critics Advertisement Trump has focused much of his executive power on efforts to shrink the federal workforce, remove critics from positions of power, and sideline his opponents. Among the actions the Globe counted in its analysis, nearly 40 were related to 'staffing and agencies,' and among those, there were more than 20 firings or purges of government employees. 'I think there has been a lot of attention to ways in which the president can assert more control over, really, everybody in the executive branch. When people talk about personnel as policy, they're usually talking about, you know, political appointees,' said Rudalevige. Advertisement But he added that Trump's moves have gone far beyond typical shakeups of top agency officials. Indeed, Trump has spent considerable time on efforts to make it easier for federal workers to be fired, challenging the independence of insulated federal agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and punishing his perceived opponents. A record-breaking 100 days for executive orders Though Trump has not signed many pieces of legislation — just five so far — he's broken modern records for executive orders. As of Monday, Trump has signed more than 135 executive orders this term, according to the Federal Register, more then triple the number signed by former president Joe Biden during his first 100 days. His orders have run the gamut from 'This has been a consequential 100 days, but I wouldn't mistake the sheer number of orders for power or for their effectiveness,' Rudalevige said. 'A lot of them are held up in court, and a lot of them, I think, are issued simply to issue them, and to say, 'I am acting on this.' And what actually happens down the line? We don't know.' Immigration, education were the most common policy focuses Actions targeting education, immigration, transgender rights, and DEI initiatives were the most common policy areas for Trump in his first 100 days, according to the analysis. But more than half of Trump's moves on education were part of his attack on colleges and universities that his administration deems either antisemitic or engaged in DEI practices. His education-related actions have mostly included freezing grant funding, canceling government contracts, and taking steps to dismantle the Department of Education, according to the data. Advertisement Out of 223 major actions analyzed by the Globe, 26 of them targeted the nation's immigration system, beginning on day one when Trump rescinded several Biden-era immigration measures. New England figures prominently A review of the data showed that actions that targeted New England were most commonly related to higher education: In his first 100 days, Trump issued warnings to nine New England colleges and universities over alleged antisemitism, froze billions in grants and contracts to Harvard University and Brown University, and threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status. See all the actions with New England implications below. Explore the data See all of the notable actions by the Trump administration during its first 100 days, color-coded by topic and organized in chronological order. Methodology The Globe began tracking the most notable moves of Trump's second term in February, summarizing and regularly updating his administration's newsworthy actions. Many actions, such as a slew of related executive orders targeting the nation's military, were grouped together for brevity. The tracker is not comprehensive: Routine staff appointments, proclamations, and memoranda were generally not included, nor were public comments, threats, or promises. The Globe categorized each action, and analyzed the resulting data. If an action fell under more than one possible category, a second or third category was added. (For example, Trump's freeze of billions in funding to Harvard was categorized as 'education,' 'higher education,' and 'New England'.) Christina Prignano can be reached at
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Is Issuing A Flurry Of Executive Orders, Not Laws — Here's How They Differ
Outside of two Big Macs and a couple of Filet-O-Fish, there may be nothing President Donald Trump loves more than signing an executive order. In his first 100 days in office, Trump issued a record 100 executive orders on everything from defining gender to ending birthright citizenship and instituting sweeping tariffs. In his first term as president, Trump signed a total of 220 executive orders, though some of them were revoked by his successor, Joe Biden. (Naturally, Trump returned the favor when he was back in office, rescinding over a dozen Biden-era executive orders, including one that had raised the minimum wage for federal workers.) Has there ever been a president more executive order-happy? We asked Andrew Rudalevige, a professor of government at Bowdoin College and senior fellow at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia. 'Trump's 2025 executive order count will wind up being very high by recent standards. Previously, Franklin D. Roosevelt had the record for most executive orders ― 99 ― in his first hundred days,' Rudalevige said. Historically, a lot of executive orders are focused on pretty mundane or logistical affairs: notices that government agencies will observe a holiday on a certain calendar day, for instance, or an executive order banning smoking in federal buildings. (President Bill Clinton signed that one in 1997.) But they also can have major consequences for everyday Americans; as the ACLU notes, some of the federal government's worst actions have come via executive order. FDR, for example, used an executive order to force the relocation and internment of Japanese Americans to concentration camps during World War II. Every single president from George Washington onward has issued executive orders, but their use has actually gone down in recent presidencies, according to Rudalevige. 'That's partly because there are other means of unilateralism a president can use now, but also partly because things that used to require executive orders like land transfers or civil service matters are now delegated elsewhere,' he said. Clearly, Trump is still very much in his 'issue-as-many-executive-orders-as-possible' era, though. (As Rudalevige put it, 'President Trump loves signing executive orders because he loves ordering.') And those who've been impacted by Trump's flurry of EOs ― the thousands of federal employees let go from their jobs, immigrants separated from their families and sent to detention centers― know these orders can have serious impact, endangering people's lives and livelihoods. But there's still a lot of confusion about executive orders ― and rightly so. What is an executive order, and how do they differ from a law? When is a president actually able to carry out policy plans outlined in executive orders? Can an order be stopped, and if so, by whom? We asked legal and government experts like Rudalevige to answer all these questions and more. Article II of the Constitution vests the president with executive power over all executive branch officials, aka the president gets to tell officials in departments like the Treasury and Defense and in regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration how to do their jobs. (Or not do their jobs, in the case of the federal workers who've been impacted by DOGE cuts.) The Constitution says that the president has an obligation to ensure that the laws are 'faithfully executed.' To that end, an executive order (EO) is a written directive, signed by the president (in Trump's case, in big Sharpie pen script), instructing government officials on how to implement or enforce statutory law. While the president cannot write a new statute with an EO, he can tell federal agencies how to implement an existing statute. But here's the thing: An executive order is only valid if it draws on authority granted to the president by the Constitution or by a law, Rudalevige explained. 'Now, there are plenty of laws on the books, and presidents have made a habit of scouring old laws in hopes they can give them new meaning,' he told HuffPost. The Trump administration is pretty loosey-goosey with its interpretation of the law and finding new meaning. 'When President Trump decrees a certain scientific definition of gender or interpretation of the Civil Rights Act, that is simply his interpretation — it's not binding on the courts, who ultimately decide the meaning of the laws in question,' Rudalevige said. When an executive order doesn't have legal basis either in laws or in the Constitution, that's when it gets challenged in the courts: A number of federal judges have slowed Trump's sweeping agenda, at least for now: For example, last month, a judge in California ordered the rehiring of thousands of federal workers let go in mass firings across several agencies. (The Trump administration is currently fighting back, asking the Supreme Court to halt the judge's order.) 'An executive order cannot override state law, unless a federal court ultimately finds the president's interpretation to be correct and the state's to be wrong,' Rudalevige said. Executive orders are laws but only with respect to the executive branch, said Jodi Short, a professor who teaches constitutional law at the University of California College of the Law, San Francisco. They are an internal form of law, she explained, and do not bind private parties outside the government. 'This can be confusing for the general public, because EOs often have significant consequences for the general public,' she said. 'If an EO tells an agency to change the way it is implementing statutory law, that change might be felt by members of the public who deal with that agency.' For instance, last month Trump called for Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to cut staff and move forward with an executive order to dismantle the Education Department and send 'education back to the states.' Congress would need to act to fully eliminate the critical agency, but Trump is still able to stop many of the agency's key functions, and many parents and students are already feeling the ripple effect of that: Parents of kids with disabilities ― there's 7.5 million such students in the U.S. ― have been especially vocal about Trump's plans to do away with the Department of Education because their kids rely on an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to succeed in schools. As we mentioned, federal courts can review executive orders and overturn them if deemed unconstitutional. Congress can also overturn an EO. And as we saw with Biden after Trump's first term, any future president can issue a new executive order that rescinds or amends a previous executive order. An administration can achieve policy change relatively quickly with an EO as the Trump White House has, but major, lasting change requires action by Congress. And at least in principle, the executive branch itself can be a check on legally questionable executive orders, Rudalevige said: Since the 1930s, there's been a presidential practice, currently codified in a 1962 executive order by President John F. Kennedy (EO 11030), that a draft order should be be approved by the director of the Office of Management and Budget and by the Justice Department. 'OMB has a longstanding practice of 'central clearance' that allows a sort of peer review of an EO to make sure it is workable and helps build consensus among the agencies the order impacts,' Rudalevige said. 'DOJ checks for 'form and legality.' Unfortunately, there's little evidence that the Trump administration is conducting either of these reviews in any systematic way, the professor said. 'It is possible that the central clearance process has prevented even more extreme EOs from seeing the light of day — that happened in Trump's first term, and frequently in presidential history,' he said. 'But certainly the 'lawyering' for many of them seems slipshod at best.' Many of Trump's executive orders are openly contrary to statutory law, Short said. 'They are not, and do not purport to be, reasonable interpretations consistent with statutory law,' she explained. 'Rather, they assert that what the president says is the law. This is flat-out wrong, and it is deeply subversive of our Constitution and rule of law.' Rudalevige thinks Americans should be worried when the president 'isn't bothered by ordering things that are not within their power to order,' like issuing de facto amendments to the Constitution, or using executive orders to punish specific political opponents (law firms, for instance). 'We should also worry when other branches of government, notably Congress, refuse to use their own institutional powers to push back on presidential overreach,' he said. 'That is a violation of their own oaths to the Constitution.' The TL;DR version of all this, according to Rudalevige? 'Executive orders are supposed to be used to help presidents carry out their Constitutional duty to faithfully execute the law. To use them to do the opposite is hugely problematic.' Trump Signs Order To Restore Racist Monuments, Remove 'Anti-America' Ideology Trump Set To Announce Biggest Tax Increase On Americans In Decades Librarians Are Mad As Hell At The Trump Administration. They Think You Should Be, Too.
USA Today
27-01-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Could Trump executive order hold up money for NJ Transit projects, Gateway tunnel?
One of President Donald Trump's day-one executive orders has already caused chaos and confusion — and could jeopardize billions of dollars in New Jersey transportation projects. The order, in part, aims to stop funding 'Green New Deal' projects and specifically calls for a pause on two grant programs, the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program and the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program, which help fund electric vehicle infrastructure projects, such as charging stations. But the order also more broadly says 'all agencies shall immediately pause the disbursement of funds' appropriated through two other acts, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act — a far more sweeping, and potentially illegal, action, some experts say. Story continues below photo gallery. 'The president is bound to enforce the law. That's part of the fundamental oaths you take when you become president," said Kevin DeGood, senior director of infrastructure and housing policy for the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank. "He's also obligated to spend money that Congress appropriates. Absent that, you have a king.' There are billions of dollars authorized to be spent through the inflation reduction and infrastructure acts across the country on thousands of big and small projects — repairing highways, fixing bridges, buying new trains and buses, and building sidewalks. On any given day, the federal Highway Trust Fund reimburses project sponsors about $218 million, while about $52.6 million is reimbursed daily for mass transit projects, DeGood said. Money for new rail cars, zero-emission buses at NJ Transit In New Jersey, these laws authorized spending on the purchase of new zero-emission buses at NJ Transit and badly needed railcars to replace the old ones that are frequently breaking down. The laws are also partly funding the largest infrastructure project in the country, the $16 billion program to build a new two-track rail tunnel under the Hudson River for Amtrak and NJ Transit riders. Trump's executive order is pretty close to an impoundment order, which is illegal under the Impoundment Control Act, said Andrew Rudalevige, a government professor at Bowdoin College. That 1974 law does allow the executive branch to pause federal spending with a letter to Congress, but it can't be paused indefinitely unless Congress approves the rescission of funds, Rudalevige said. In the near term there could be concerns about the effect on large-scale projects, and in the long term there are questions about checks and balances, Rudalevige said. How can Congress "pass spending bills if they don't know that the president is going to live up to his end of the bargain?' Rudalevige said. 'This is a big question about how Congress can use its own constitutional powers.' NJ transportation agencies wading through the confusion The effect of Trump's executive order has already been felt across local, state and federal agencies. The Federal Highway Administration last week temporarily shut down its computer system that reimburses agencies and municipalities for authorized projects. The Office of Management and Budget sent out a notice to clarify what programs are subject to the pause and directed agency heads to 'disburse funds as they deem necessary after consulting with the Office of Management and Budget.' "The U.S. Department of Transportation is complying with President Trump's executive orders and revised guidance from the Office of Management and Budget," said a department spokesperson, who declined to answer emailed questions. The OMB did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, transportation agencies in New Jersey are scrambling to figure out whether they have already been affected by the FHWA shut down and whether the executive order will affect active projects. Most agencies have so far interpreted the executive order and clarification from the OMB as applying only to grants related to the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program and the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program, but nothing is certain. Steve Schapiro, a spokesman for the New Jersey Transportation Department, declined to say whether the agency has had trouble getting reimbursed for projects so far or what projects could be at risk, but said the agency is 'aware that the FHWA is working through the executive orders and awaiting its guidance.' Melissa Hayes, a spokeswoman for the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, said it was awaiting guidance, but was under the impression that the executive order affects only the two programs related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Steve Sigmund, a spokesman for the Gateway Development Commission, which is building the new rail tunnel beneath the Hudson, said it doesn't anticipate any delays to that mega project. 'GDC appreciates the Office of Management and Budget clarification that the order is not intended to impact nuts-and-bolts infrastructure projects like the Hudson Tunnel Project. We will work collaboratively with our federal partners to ensure we deliver the most urgent infrastructure project in the nation,' Sigmund said. On Thursday, Jim Smith, an NJ Transit spokesman, said the agency hadn't encountered any issues in the last 48 hours but was evaluating the executive order to determine what effects it may have on NJ Transit projects and programs. If money is not forthcoming, the recourse for agencies is getting Congress to pressure the president to spend the authorized money or to suing the administration, Rudalevige said. Congestion pricing Trump has also vowed to end New York's congestion pricing plan, a tolling program to reduce congestion in Manhattan below 60th Street that received federal approval and launched earlier this month. So far, there have been no attempts at the federal level to end or pause the program, but many in the region are waiting to see if it will happen — and how such an attempt would be made. Gov. Phil Murphy wrote a letter to Trump asking the president to take a closer look at the tolling plan, which Murphy said 'has never been well-designed or adequately studied.' So far, a federal judge has largely disagreed with Murphy and his legal team's argument that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's 4,000-page environmental review was inadequate, but the governor reiterated that he is still hoping for a lengthier federal review. 'The Biden administration … did not do what is called an environmental impact study, which takes longer but is more comprehensive,' Murphy told reporters last week. 'We're asking the Trump administration to do what the Biden administration did not do.' Murphy said last Tuesday that he has not yet received a response. Kate Slevin, executive vice president of the Regional Plan Association, which has advocated for congestion pricing for at least a decade, said the program so far has withstood potential legal challenges. 'It's been successful in reducing traffic as planned. It was authorized under state and federal law, and has been authorized under the federal Value Pricing Program agreement, which has benefited other states,' Slevin said. The MTA "really followed the process and abided by the law, and thus far that is what the outcomes of the legal challenges have shown.' Yonah Freemark, principal research associate on fair housing, land use and transportation practice area for the Urban Institute, said anything is possible with the Trump administration. 'It would not surprise me if they try to mount a barrier to congestion pricing,' Freemark said. 'If that stands up in court is another question.'
