Project 2025 › What has happened
What has happened
Actions taken since 2025-01-20 that bear on a
proposal indexed from Project 2025.
92 actions recorded.
A record here means an action addresses the subject of a proposal. It is not a claim that
the document caused the action, and this site makes no such claim.
What this page showsThe book asked for a lot of things. Here is what the government has really done since 2025.
Each item below has a date and a source you can open.
Be careful about one thing. An action may match a plan in the book. That does not prove the book caused it.
What a match means
Closely matches
The action does what the proposal asked for.
Partly matches
The action addresses part of the proposal, or addresses it less directly.
Same subject, different route
The action addresses the same subject by a route the document did not propose.
Contested reading
Whether this action answers the proposal is a reading, and is not resolved here.
Runs the other way
The action runs contrary to what the document proposed.
Action · 91 FR 46733
The Secretary of Education amends the regulations implementing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VI") to eliminate disparate-impact liability. These amendments bring the U.S. Department of Education's (Department's) regulations in line with Title VI's original public meaning, avoid constitutional concerns, implement changes that are consistent with Executive Order 14281, "Restoring
In plain English
A part of the Civil Rights Act bars bias in funded programs. This drops parts of one agency's rules under it.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 335 · the document says
“should”
The Education Department's final rule of July 24, 2026 amends its Title VI regulations to eliminate disparate-impact liability, implementing Executive Order 14281 and following the Justice Department's change to its own Title VI regulations effective December 10, 2025. The department the passage names did the thing the passage asks for, by the regulation it asks for. The fit breaks down on the rest of the ask: this is a rule about what the regulations make unlawful, not the joint enforcement guidance from the department and the Justice Department that the passage calls for, so it does not say which complaints will or will not be investigated. Agriculture, Homeland Security, Transportation, Labor, Health and Human Services and the General Services Administration made the same change to their own Title VI rules.
2026-07-13
Action · 91 FR 45169
By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation On December 28, 2016, President Obama issued Proclamation 9558, which established the Bears Ears National Monument (Monument) in the State of Utah; reserved approximately 1.35 million acres of Federal land as part of the Monument; and directed that the Monument be jointly managed by the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Mana
In plain English
This shrinks a national monument in Utah. Bears Ears drops to about 121,096 acres. The rest goes back to normal federal rules.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 16, p. 532 · the document says
“must”
Proclamation 11043 reduces the Bears Ears National Monument, and Proclamation 11044 of the same day, July 13, 2026, does the same for Grand Staircase-Escalante. Both use the Antiquities Act rather than seeking its repeal, reasoning that objects named in the prior proclamations are generic or common and that the reservations exceeded the smallest area compatible with their care. They answer the chapter's complaint that the earlier review adjusted too little, and they answer it in the same place the chapter called insufficient: two monuments in one state, Utah, with nothing done in Maine or Oregon. The act itself remains in force and no repeal has been sought.
2026-07-06
Action · 91 FR 40879
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission") is rescinding its regulations regarding Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Guidelines"), and removing it from the Code of Federal Regulations. The Commission is rescinding the Guidelines and removing them from the Code of Federal Regulations because the Guidelines are inconsistent wit
In plain English
A jobs watchdog had guidance on hiring goals by race and sex. This drops it.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 18, p. 586 · the document says
“should”
The EEOC rescinded its 1979 Guidelines on Affirmative Action under Title VII and removed them from 29 CFR part 1608 on July 6, 2026, stating that the Guidelines were inconsistent with the statutory language and unsupported by Supreme Court precedent when issued. That is the commission withdrawing a Title VII regulation of the kind the chapter says it had no authority to issue. The fit breaks down because it drops one set of guidelines rather than disclaiming a regulatory role, and it does not reach the chapter's other asks: acting by majority vote of Commissioners rather than by the Chair or by delegation to staff, giving up consent decrees that require what the law does not, or reorienting enforcement.
2026-06-03
Executive Order 14410 · 91 FR 34893
Amends: EO 13562, December 27, 2010; EO 13957, October 21, 2020; EO 14171, January 20, 2025; EO 14217, February 19, 2025.
States that Executive Order 13957 as amended by Executive Order 14171 created Schedule Policy/Career, that such positions are filled on merit and not political affiliation, and that they are exempted from the adverse action procedures that apply to other career positions. The order transfers senior policy-influencing positions into the schedule and amends the Civil Service Rules to implement it.
In plain English
This later order carried the same plan further. It moved senior workers whose jobs shape policy into the new group. The order says they are still hired on merit. It also says the usual rules that make firing hard do not apply to them.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 3, p. 81 · the document says
“should”
Carries the reinstated schedule into effect and transfers positions into it. This goes beyond what the chapter asked for, which was reinstatement of the 2020 order; the chapter did not propose the transfer mechanism this order uses.
2026-06-03
Action · 91 FR 33348
This interim final rule with comment period (IFC) interprets and implements the community engagement requirement in Medicaid under section 1902(xx) of the Social Security Act. States are required to implement the new requirement no later than January 1, 2027. This IFC specifies the requirements and expectations for States, including the Medicaid applicants and beneficiaries who must demonstrate co
In plain English
Some adults on Medicaid must work or train to keep it. This sets out how.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 468 · the document says
“should”
This interim final rule implements the Medicaid community engagement requirement enacted as section 71119 of Public Law 119-21. It sets which applicants and beneficiaries must show qualifying work, study or service, the exceptions and exclusions, how states verify activity, what happens on noncompliance, and a January 1, 2027 deadline for states. That answers the work requirement half of the proposal. It does nothing about the rest, which asks for a personal option to buy coverage outside Medicaid, health savings account style arrangements, removal of benefit mandates for able-bodied recipients, or stronger eligibility and asset tests. None of the documents the search offered for this proposal is about work requirements.
2026-04-30
Action · 140 Stat. 811
A law lets the government watch some foreign targets. This extends that power.
In plain English
A law lets the government watch some foreign targets. This extends that power.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 215 · the document says
“should”
Signed April 30, 2026, the law moves the repeal date of title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which contains Section 702, from April 30, 2026 to June 12, 2026, so the authority stayed in force rather than lapsing. Public Law 119-84 of April 18, 2026 had set the April 30 date in the same way. Congress kept the tool, which is what the chapter asks. The fit breaks down in that both laws are extensions of weeks that change only dates and cross references: neither settles the authority for the long term, and neither addresses the oversight board report the chapter asks Congress to review or the reforms against partisan abuse of the surveillance statute that the chapter raises alongside.
2026-03-13
Executive Order 14394 · 91 FR 13207
In plain English
This order is about home building. It says rules slow new homes down. It asks agencies to trim those rules.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 429 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14394 of March 13, 2026 directs the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works, and the EPA Administrator to review and revise requirements related to stormwater, wetlands, lakes, rivers and other bodies of water, naming among them the federal standards for permits under section 404 of the Clean Water Act for the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States and the standards for state and tribal assumption of that permitting under section 404(g). That is a directed revision of the federal water regulations the passage concerns. The fit breaks down in that the order reaches section 404 permitting standards rather than the definition of waters of the United States, it does not mention section 401 state certification, it calls for review and revision rather than repeal and reissuance, and its stated purpose is reducing housing construction and ownership costs rather than the jurisdictional question the passage raises.
2026-02-18
Action · 91 FR 7686
In this action, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is rescinding the Administrator's 2009 findings of contribution and endangerment and repealing all greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty vehicles and engines to effectuate the best reading of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 202(a)(1). The EPA determines that CAA section 202(a)(1) does not autho
In plain English
The clean air agency had found that greenhouse gases endanger health. This takes that finding back.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 422 · the document says
“should”
In the rule published February 18, 2026, the EPA rescinds the Administrator's 2009 findings of contribution and endangerment and repeals all greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty, medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and engines, stating that section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act does not authorize the agency to prescribe emission standards in response to global climate change concerns and that this reading is corroborated by the major questions doctrine. An agency ending an activity because it concludes the statute does not authorize it is the test the passage sets. The fit breaks down in that the rule applies that test to one set of standards under one Clean Air Act provision rather than across the agency, it is a rescission of rules rather than the agency-wide review the passage asks for, and only the rule's own summary is indexed here, so what the preamble says beyond that is not recorded on this site.
Partly matches
chapter 19, p. 628 · the document says
“must”
The Federal Register summary of this final rule of February 18, 2026 records the Environmental Protection Agency rescinding the 2009 findings of contribution and endangerment and repealing all greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty, medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and engines, on the agency's reading that section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act does not authorize standards set in response to global climate change concerns. That removes the federal carbon limits on vehicles that the passage says must not override the fuel economy standards Congress assigned to the Transportation Department, so the clash the chapter describes no longer arises. The fit breaks down because the passage assumes such limits continue and asks only that they support and work in harmony with the Transportation Department's standards, offering air conditioning systems as an example of what the environmental agency might still regulate, while the rule concludes the agency has no authority to set vehicle greenhouse gas standards at all. The rule states no relationship between the two agencies, and neither the 1975 energy statute nor the Transportation Department appears in what the site holds, which for this document is the rule's own summary rather than its full text.
2026-02-03
Action · 140 Stat. 173
This is a spending law. It funds more of the government through September 2026.
In plain English
This is a spending law. It funds more of the government through September 2026.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 185 · the document says
“should”
Section 6611 adds a section 1015 to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requiring the Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to establish an Abraham Accords Office headed by a director, sited within two years in a country the Department of State identifies as having signed the Abraham Accords Declaration, to give technical assistance on regulatory oversight to partners in those countries and help interested parties there deal with the agency, with a report to Congress within three years. It builds on the Accords by attaching a standing federal benefit to having signed them. It does not do what the passage asks: it is addressed only to countries that have already signed, it encourages no further state to join, it names neither Saudi Arabia nor any other prospective party, it says nothing about the partnership with Saudi Arabia or about Chinese influence, and it is a drug regulatory measure carried out by the Food and Drug Administration rather than a diplomatic one.
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 460 · the document says
“should”
Section 508 of Public Law 119-75, enacted February 3, 2026, provides that none of the funds made available in the act may be used for the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes, or for research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero, and defines human embryo to include any organism derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning or any other means from human gametes or human diploid cells. That reaches the destruction the passage objects to and, through the definition, the cloning research the chapter separately asks be barred. The fit breaks down in that the section does not end funding for research using human embryonic stem cell lines already derived or close the registry the chapter names, says nothing about fetal tissue from elective abortions or the ethics advisory committee, bars the use of funds rather than the research itself, and reaches only the money made available in that one act.
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 472 · the document says
“should”
Section 507(d) of Public Law 119-75 provides that none of the funds made available in the act may be made available to a federal agency or program, or to a state or local government, if that agency, program or government subjects any institutional or individual health care entity to discrimination on the basis that the entity does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions, and defines health care entity to include a health insurance plan. That is the provision the chapter builds its proposal on, and it makes loss of federal money the consequence for a state. The fit breaks down in that it is a condition carried in an appropriations act rather than a decision by the department to withdraw funds, it reaches the funds made available in that act rather than Medicaid by name and sets no 10 percent figure, it turns on discrimination against a health care entity rather than on a state requiring abortion coverage as such, and nothing indexed here applies it to any state.
2026-02-03
Action · 91 FR 5040
The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, is exercising time-limited Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 authority to issue up to, but not more than, an additional 64,716 visas for the fiscal year. All of these supplemental visas will be available only to those American businesses that are suffering or will suffer impending irreparable harm, i.e., those facing permanent an
In plain English
There is a yearly cap on some short-term work visas. This raises it for the year.
Recorded against
Runs the other way
chapter 5, p. 138 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asks the Secretary to state that the discretionary authority to raise the H-2B cap will not be used. This rule uses it: the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, made up to 64,716 supplemental visas available for fiscal year 2026, released in three allocations by the employer's start date of need. The reversal is bounded rather than total: the supplemental visas go only to businesses attesting that they face permanent and severe financial loss, the authority is time limited to one fiscal year and must be exercised again to have effect the next, and the chapter's separate request that no regulation support the eligible country list is not addressed here.
2026-01-27
Action · 91 FR 3332
To implement the foreign policy objective of the United States not to support the promotion of gender ideology overseas, the U.S. Department of State (Department) is adding a new award term for grants, cooperative agreements, and voluntary contributions entitled "Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance." The award term imposes certain requirements relating to gender ideology on foreign non
In plain English
This bars foreign aid money from being used to push views on gender.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 259 · the document says
“should”
The State Department's final rule of January 27, 2026 adds an award term, Combating Gender Ideology in Foreign Assistance, to grants, cooperative agreements and voluntary contributions, imposing requirements relating to gender ideology on foreign and United States nongovernmental organizations, international organizations, foreign governments and parastatals, and incorporating the term into awards as new funds are added. Contracts and grants are among the places the chapter asks that the language be removed. The rule conditions what a recipient may do with the money rather than removing terms from the agency's own websites, publications and policies, it is a State Department rule rather than an act of the agency the chapter addresses, and this site holds the rule's summary rather than the text of the award term, so what the term requires word for word cannot be checked here.
2026-01-27
Action · 91 FR 3345
To implement the foreign policy objective of the United States not to support the promotion of discriminatory equity ideology overseas directly or indirectly, the U.S. Department of State (Department) is adding a new award term for grants, cooperative agreements, and voluntary contributions entitled "Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance." The award term imposes certain re
In plain English
This bars foreign aid money from being used to push some views on equity.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 48 · the document says
“should”
The State Department rule adds an award term, Combating Discriminatory Equity Ideology in Foreign Assistance, to grants, cooperative agreements and voluntary contributions, which is the route the passage describes: attaching conditions to federal awards in order to press recipients on diversity policy. The fit breaks down on nearly every particular. The rule reaches foreign assistance recipients, which it lists as foreign and United States nongovernmental organizations, international organizations, foreign governments and parastatals, rather than corporate America. It applies to grants and cooperative agreements rather than to procurement contracts. And it is issued by the State Department under the Foreign Assistance Act rather than through the Office of Federal Procurement Policy and the governmentwide contracting rules the passage names.
2026-01-23
Action · 140 Stat. 5
This is a spending law. It funds several agencies through September 2026.
In plain English
This is a spending law. It funds several agencies through September 2026.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 12, p. 374 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-74, enacted January 23, 2026, acts on the same offices the passage names and funds them. Title III appropriates $3,100,000,000 under the heading Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, $235,000,000 under Electricity, $1,785,000,000 under Nuclear Energy and $720,000,000 under Fossil Energy, each for fiscal year 2026 and each to remain available until expended. The passage asks Congress to eliminate those applied energy programs. The fit breaks down in that an appropriations act does not decide whether an office continues to exist: it neither creates nor abolishes any of these offices, it sets amounts for a single fiscal year, and it says nothing about the exception for basic science research the chapter allows.
Same subject, different route
chapter 12, p. 385 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-74 appropriates $350,000,000 under the heading Advanced Research Projects Agency, Energy for the activities authorized by section 5012 of the America COMPETES Act, of which $40,000,000 is available until September 30, 2027 for program direction. The passage asks Congress to eliminate that agency, and the act instead names it and funds it for fiscal year 2026. The fit breaks down in that the act carries no provision addressing whether the agency should continue, repeals no part of its authorizing statute, and reaches only one fiscal year, so it records a funding decision rather than a decision on the agency's existence.
Same subject, different route
chapter 12, p. 383 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-74 carries a heading for the Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program, appropriates $35,000,000 for its necessary administrative expenses available until September 30, 2027, and adds $150,000,000 for the cost of loan guarantees for the construction of small modular reactors or advanced nuclear reactors eligible under section 1703(b)(4) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The passage asks that the department's loan authority be sunset through Congress and the Loan Programs Office eventually eliminated, and the act continues and funds that program instead. The fit breaks down in that the act does not name the Loan Programs Office, sets no end date for the lending authority in either direction, and is an appropriation for one fiscal year rather than a decision on whether the authority should be sunset.
Same subject, different route
chapter 12, p. 383 · the document says
“should”
The passage asks that the department not back any new loans or loan guarantees. Public Law 119-74 provides $150,000,000, to remain available until expended, for the cost of loan guarantees for the construction of small modular reactors or advanced nuclear reactors under section 1703(b)(4) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and attaches provisos restricting which projects those commitments may cover. The fit breaks down in that the act supplies subsidy cost and conditions rather than directing the department to make any particular loan, it says nothing about the department's existing loan portfolio, and the passage addresses what the department should choose to do while the act addresses what Congress has made available.
Same subject, different route
chapter 16, p. 529 · the document says
“must”
Public Law 119-74 acts on the same animals and runs the other way. It appropriates $144,000,000 for the wild horse and burro program, authorizes multiyear contracts and cooperative agreements for the long-term care and maintenance of excess wild horses and burros on private land, provides that amounts appropriated by the act shall not be available for the destruction of any healthy, unadopted wild horse or burro under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned or for a sale that results in the animal being processed into a commercial product, and bars a government agency receiving a transferred animal from euthanizing it except on a licensed veterinarian's recommendation in a case of severe injury, illness or advanced age. The passage asks Congress to enact laws permitting the Bureau of Land Management to dispose humanely of these animals. The fit breaks down in that these are conditions on one act's appropriations rather than an amendment to the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, and the act leaves the underlying statute untouched.
Runs the other way
chapter 21, p. 675 · the document says
“should”
Section 114 of the Commerce title of this appropriations act, approved January 23, 2026, provides that the National Weather Service shall maintain staffing levels in order to fulfill the mission required under 15 U.S.C. 313 to protect life and property to the maximum extent possible. That is a statutory direction to keep the service staffed for its own mission, which runs the other way from a proposal to move its forecasting operations to private companies and leave it gathering data. The fit breaks down because the section speaks only to staffing and names no number and no baseline, because it says nothing about who produces forecasts and does not bar the service from relying on or contracting with private forecasters, because 15 U.S.C. 313 is a separate statute that is not indexed here so what that mission covers is not recorded, and because the same sentence appears in the Act for several other agencies, which makes it a general staffing provision rather than an answer aimed at this proposal.
2025-12-11
Executive Order 14366 · 90 FR 58503
In plain English
This order is about proxy advisors. These firms tell big investors how to vote. It says two of them have too much sway. It asks the SEC to look at its rules.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 30, p. 874 · the document says
“can”
Section 3 of the order directs the FTC Chairman, in consultation with the Attorney General, to investigate whether proxy advisors engage in unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts, and the order's stated reason for singling them out is that they hold more than 90 percent of their market and use it to advance what it calls politically-motivated agendas such as diversity, equity, and inclusion and environmental, social, and governance policies. That is the chapter's route, market power plus a political agenda examined under the FTC's unfair practice authority. The fit breaks down on the firms and the grounds. The chapter's conditions describe publicly traded, highly regulated companies with legal privileges, while the order targets two privately held, foreign-owned advisory firms and asks the SEC to consider whether they should have to register at all. The unfair practice grounds the order lists are collusion, undisclosed conflicts of interest, misleading information, and undermining informed choice, not the political character of the conduct by itself. It also directs an investigation rather than issuing the regulation the chapter contemplates, and it reaches firms that advise shareholders rather than companies taking political positions of their own.
Partly matches
chapter 30, p. 873 · the document says
“should”
Section 3(b)(i) of the order directs the FTC Chairman to investigate whether proxy advisors are conspiring or colluding, explicitly or implicitly, to diminish the value of consumer investments, and the order frames those firms' conduct around diversity, equity, and inclusion and environmental, social, and governance policies. So an FTC inquiry into collusion tied to social and environmental practices exists. Three things the chapter asked for are absent. No task force is created; the work is assigned to the Chairman. The inquiry covers two named proxy advisory firms rather than firms generally, and private equity, which the chapter singles out, is not mentioned. The collusion theory is diminishing the value of consumer investments, not using the practices as cover to meet targets, fix prices or reduce output, and nothing asks Congress to investigate the same question. EO 14364 of December 6, 2025 does create FTC and Justice Department task forces to investigate collusion, which shows the instrument in use, but its subject is the food supply chain.
2025-11-25
Action · 90 FR 53448
This final rule with comment period revises the Medicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and the Medicare Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) payment system for calendar year 2026 based on our continuing experience with these systems. We also describe the changes to the amounts and factors used to determine the payment rates for Medicare services paid under the OPPS and those pa
In plain English
This sets what Medicare pays for care that does not need a hospital stay.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 464 · the document says
“should”
The calendar year 2026 outpatient payment rule finalizes phasing out the inpatient only list over three years, beginning with the removal of 285 mostly musculoskeletal services for 2026, and adds 271 of those codes to the ambulatory surgical center covered procedures list. That is the step the passage names. The elimination is phased rather than immediate, and taking a service off the list changes where Medicare will pay for it rather than making the payment the same in a physician's office, a clinic and a hospital, which is the wider site neutrality the proposal asks for.
2025-11-12
Action · 139 Stat. 495
This keeps the government funded for 2026. It also carries some programs forward.
In plain English
This keeps the government funded for 2026. It also carries some programs forward.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 15, p. 508 · the document says
“should”
Section 739 of Public Law 119-37, enacted November 12, 2025, provides that the Secretary of Agriculture shall be included as a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States on a case by case basis for each covered transaction involving agricultural land, agriculture biotechnology or the agriculture industry, and requires that Secretary to notify the committee of agricultural land transactions believed to pose a national security risk, with particular emphasis on acquisitions by foreign governments or entities of concern including the People's Republic of China. That is the same mechanism the passage asks for, adding a Cabinet secretary to the committee to reach foreign acquisition of American real property. The fit breaks down on the particulars: the member added is the Secretary of Agriculture and not the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the reach is farmland and the agriculture industry rather than the rental and ownership housing markets, membership is case by case rather than standing, and it was done by a provision of an appropriations act rather than by the executive order the passage asks the President to issue.
2025-10-31
Action · 90 FR 48966
The Secretary establishes new regulations on the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program in the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) program under 34 CFR 685.219 by adding or clarifying provisions to exclude employers that engage in specific enumerated illegal activities such that they have a substantial illegal purpose, including defining obligations and processes tied to maki
In plain English
Some public workers can have a student loan wiped. This sets new rules for that.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 322 · the document says
“should”
The Education Department's final regulations of October 31, 2025 rewrite the Public Service Loan Forgiveness rule to exclude employers that engage in enumerated illegal activities such that they have a substantial illegal purpose, and state the aim as keeping taxpayer dollars from subsidizing them. That answers the chapter's demand to end what it calls abuses in the loan forgiveness programs, and it carries out Executive Order 14235 of March 7, 2025, which ordered the rewrite. It does not reach the wider proposal: forgiveness itself continues, borrowers keep full credit for work performed until a determination takes effect, an excluded employer can regain eligibility, and nothing in the rule requires borrowers generally to repay what they owe.
2025-10-15
Executive Order 14356 · 90 FR 48387
See: EO 14170, January 20, 2025; EO 14210, February 11, 2025.
Continues hiring controls established by Executive Orders 14170 and 14210.
In plain English
This order kept the hiring limits going.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 79 · the document says
“is needed”
Continues government-wide hiring controls rather than the targeted freeze on top career positions that the chapter proposed.
2025-09-05
Executive Order 14346 · 90 FR 43737
In plain English
This order narrows the broad trade taxes. Some goods are taken out of them.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 26, p. 791 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14346 of September 5, 2025 puts the reciprocity principle into operation: it treats large and persistent goods trade deficits as the emergency being addressed, makes tariff relief conditional on what a trading partner commits to in a trade and security agreement, states that the President will generally refrain from narrowing a tariff before a final agreement is concluded, and directs Commerce and the Trade Representative to keep monitoring the trade deficit, the lack of reciprocity in bilateral relationships and disparate tariff rates. The fit breaks down in what the proposal actually asks for. The chapter states a principle for the President to hold when free trade arguments are used against reform; it does not ask for an emergency declaration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and this order neither announces the principle nor rests on the chapter, so the connection is one of direction rather than instrument.
2025-09-04
Executive Order 14345 · 90 FR 43535
In plain English
This order puts a trade deal with Japan into effect. It lowers some taxes on goods.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 26, p. 808 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14345 of September 4, 2025 implements a framework agreement with Japan, one of the five countries the essay names, and records that Japan is working to accept for sale United States manufactured and United States safety certified passenger vehicles without additional testing. That is recognition of another country's approvals, which is the mechanism the proposal describes. The fit is narrow in three ways: the recognition runs one direction, with Japan accepting United States certification rather than the United States accepting Japanese approvals; it covers passenger vehicles rather than a wide variety of goods; and the order's treatment of pharmaceuticals, the essay's main example, is a tariff rate of zero percent on generic drugs and their ingredients, not any acceptance of a foreign drug approval. The order's substance is a 15 percent tariff framework, which the proposal does not ask for.
2025-08-28
Executive Order 14343 · 90 FR 42683
Amends: EO 12171, November 19, 1979. See: EO 14251, March 27, 2025.
Further amends Executive Order 12171 to exclude additional agency subdivisions from the federal labor-management relations program.
In plain English
A later order added more agencies to that same list.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 3, p. 82 · the document says
“should”
Extends the approach taken in Executive Order 14251. The same distinction applies: the chapter asked for the three 2018 orders to be reinstated, not for agencies to be excluded from the program.
2025-08-25
Executive Order 14339 · 90 FR 42121
In plain English
This order adds to the crime steps in the capital. It sends more federal agents and guard troops.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 17, p. 553 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14339 of August 25, 2025 puts more federal law enforcement into a jurisdiction the order says has lost control of crime: the Park Police are to hire in the District of Columbia and enforce the DC Code, the United States Attorney for the District is to hire prosecutors focused on violent and property crime, and a specialized federal unit is created that the order says could be deployed in other cities where public safety and order has been lost. That answers the chapter's call for a greater federal law enforcement presence where local authorities are said to have abdicated. The fit breaks down on the proposal's actual instruction: the order does not direct anyone to bring federal charges against criminals whom local prosecutors declined to charge. It rests on a declared crime emergency in the capital and the Home Rule Act rather than on a general charging policy, and deployment to any other city is contingent.
2025-08-07
Executive Order 14332 · 90 FR 38929
In plain English
This order tightens checks on federal grants. Each must be signed off by a political appointee.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 15, p. 509 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14332 of August 7, 2025 requires each agency head to designate a senior appointee responsible for a process to review new funding opportunity announcements and discretionary grants, and provides that until that process is in place agencies shall not issue any new funding opportunity announcements without prior approval from that appointee, except as required by law. It also requires annual review of discretionary awards by a senior appointee. That is the same shape as the passage: a political appointee halting new external awards pending review. The fit breaks down in that the halt runs only until the review process is in place rather than suspending anything outright, it reaches new funding opportunity announcements rather than grants already awarded, it applies to every agency and names neither the Department of Housing and Urban Development nor its Office of Policy Development and Research, and it does not single out research and evaluation grants.
2025-07-30
Executive Order 14324 · 90 FR 37775
Supersedes: EO 14256, April 2, 2025 (in part) See: EO 14193, February 1, 2025; EO 14194, EO 14195, February 1, 2025; February 1, 2025; EO 14200, February 5, 2025; EO 14226, March 2, 2025; EO 14227, March 2, 2025; EO 14257, April 2, 2025; EO 14289, April 29, 2025; Notice of March 24, 2026 (91 FR 15517) Amended by: EO 14388, February 20, 2026
Suspends duty-free de minimis treatment under 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) for all countries, extending suspensions previously applied to specific countries.
In plain English
Small parcels used to come in without duty. That break has ended.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 26, p. 789 · the document says
“should consider”
One item on the first essay's list was ending what it called China's abuse of the de minimis exemption for parcels under $800. This order suspends that treatment for all countries rather than for China specifically, and the essay's other listed measures are separate.
2025-07-24
Executive Order 14321 · 90 FR 35817
In plain English
This order is about homeless camps and street crime. It presses cities to clear camps and treat addiction.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 15, p. 509 · the document says
“should”
Section 5(a) of EO 14321 directs the Secretaries of Health and Human Services and of Housing and Urban Development to end support for housing first policies that deprioritize accountability and fail to promote treatment, recovery and self-sufficiency, and section 5(b) directs HUD to increase requirements that participants with substance use disorder or serious mental illness use treatment as a condition of participation. That is what the passage asks. The order directs the agencies to act as appropriate and to the extent permitted by law rather than changing a rule itself, and it sets the directive among civil commitment, encampment removal and grant conditioning measures the proposal does not ask for.
2025-07-24
Action · 139 Stat. 467
The President asked Congress to take back money already granted. This law takes it back.
In plain English
The President asked Congress to take back money already granted. This law takes it back.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 8, p. 247 · the document says
“should”
The Rescissions Act of 2025 rescinds the amounts made available for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for fiscal year 2026 by Public Law 118-47 and for fiscal year 2027 by Public Law 119-4. Those are the advance appropriations the chapter objects to, and Congress canceled them instead of letting them stand beyond its reach, which is the oversight point the chapter makes. It ends two particular advance appropriations, not the practice. No provision changes the authority under which the Corporation is funded two years ahead, so a later appropriation could be made the same way. The two paragraphs name no dollar figure, and the laws they reach into are not indexed on this site, so the amounts rescinded are not recorded here.
Same subject, different route
chapter 9, p. 268 · the document says
“should”
The Rescissions Act of 2025 cuts the portfolio the proposal is about: $800,000,000 from Migration and Refugee Assistance, $496,000,000 from International Disaster Assistance and $43,000,000 from the Complex Crises Fund, with food aid programs held out of the disaster assistance cut. It makes the portfolio smaller, but not in the way the chapter asks. The accounts it cuts are the emergency relief side of the portfolio rather than the longer term work the chapter would move away from, nothing in the Act repurposes the portfolio toward short term relief or addresses the 2020 merger of food and non-food emergency relief into a single bureau, and these are rescissions enacted by Congress rather than a resizing carried out by the agency.
2025-07-17
Executive Order 14317 · 90 FR 34753
In plain English
This order creates a new class of federal job. Those posts are filled without the usual hiring rules.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 1, p. 32 · the document says
“is responsible for”
Executive Order 14317 creates Schedule G of the excepted service for noncareer positions of a policy-making or policy-advocating character, which is the kind of political workforce tool the passage has the Office of Presidential Personnel planning for, and the order's definition section ties the covered positions to those whose appointment requires the assent of that office. The fit breaks down in three places: the passage asks for a planning practice inside Presidential Personnel rather than a new schedule, Schedule G is a different schedule from the Schedule F the passage gives as its example, and the order's instructions on making Schedule G appointments run only to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 173 · the document says
“should”
The order creates Schedule G in the excepted service for noncareer positions of a policy-making or policy-advocating character that are normally subject to change at a presidential transition, and provides that civil service rules do not apply to removals from them. That builds a route for placing appointees in posts that require no Senate vote, which is what the chapter asks for. The fit breaks down in that the order names no State Department position: its only agency-specific instruction is to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. It does not increase the number of appointees at the State Department, does not name senior advisors or deputy assistant secretaries, and says nothing about having them in place on the first day.
Partly matches
chapter 20, p. 652 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14317 of July 17, 2025 creates Schedule G in the excepted service for noncareer positions of a policy-making or policy-advocating character that normally change at a presidential transition, a category the order says did not previously exist, and directs the Office of Personnel Management to write the implementing regulations. Its implementation section addresses the Secretary of Veterans Affairs directly on how to make those appointments. That is the personnel agency providing a new authority to appoint noncareer political staff, which is what the chapter asks for. The fit breaks down because Schedule G is an excepted service schedule, not the noncareer Presidential Appointment positions the chapter names, it is government-wide rather than an authority granted to the department, and it sets no number, so nothing indexed raises the count of political appointees at Veterans Affairs.
2025-07-07
Executive Order 14315 · 90 FR 30821
In plain English
This order ends federal aid for wind and solar. It calls those sources costly and unsteady.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 22, p. 696 · the document says
“should”
EO 14315 of July 7, 2025 states a policy of building on the repeal of green energy tax credits in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and directs the Secretary of the Treasury, within 45 days of that act, to strictly enforce the termination of the clean electricity production and investment credits under sections 45Y and 48E for wind and solar facilities, including by issuing guidance so that beginning of construction rules are not circumvented, and to implement the foreign entity of concern restrictions. Where the fit breaks down: the order repeals nothing itself, and it reaches only the subsidy side. Every tax increase the chapter names is left in place, including the book minimum tax, the stock buyback excise tax, the coal excise tax, the reinstated Superfund tax and the excise taxes on drug manufacturers. The statutory terminations the order enforces sit in sections 70501 to 70515 of PL 119-21, which end a range of clean vehicle, efficiency and clean energy credits but not all of them.
2025-07-04
Action · 139 Stat. 72
This is a large budget and tax law. It changes taxes, spending and many programs at once.
In plain English
This is a large budget and tax law. It changes taxes, spending and many programs at once.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 143 · the document says
“should”
Section 100052 of the reconciliation act appropriates $29,850,000,000 to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for fiscal year 2025, available through September 30, 2029, and the first of its eleven named purposes is hiring and training more officers, agents, investigators and support staff, with performance, retention and signing bonuses attached to written service agreements. Congress funded the hiring the chapter asked it to fund. It set no number: the law does not require 20,000 Enforcement and Removal Operations officers, does not single out that division, and leaves the resulting size of the force to how the agency spends the money.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 143 · the document says
“should”
Section 90003 appropriates $45,000,000,000 to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for fiscal year 2025, available until September 30, 2029, for single adult detention capacity and family residential center capacity. That is the funded increase in detention space the chapter asked Congress to mandate. The law sets no target: 100,000 daily beds appears nowhere in it, the number of beds the money buys is left to the agency, and the section adds terms for how long families may be held that the proposal does not raise. Executive Order 14159, also among the candidates, directs the Secretary to use all legally available resources for detention facilities but appropriates nothing.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 148 · the document says
“must”
Section 90003 provides that aliens may be detained at family residential centers pending a decision on removal and, where removal is ordered, until they are removed; defines a family residential center as a facility used to detain family units including children who are not unaccompanied; and leaves detention standards for single adult capacity to the Secretary. That is Congress setting a term for family detention in statute, which is the route the chapter proposes. It is not the end of the settlement the chapter asks for: the Flores Settlement Agreement is not named or terminated, no nationwide housing standards are set, unaccompanied children are not covered, and the large scale temporary facilities the chapter has in mind are not mentioned.
Partly matches
chapter 22, p. 697 · the document says
“should”
Section 70106 of the 2025 tax law strikes $5,000,000 from the estate and gift tax exemption in section 2010(c)(3) and inserts $15,000,000, moves the inflation measuring year to 2025, and strikes the subparagraph that would have ended the higher exemption after 2025, so the increase no longer expires. It applies to deaths and gifts after December 31, 2025. Where the fit breaks down: the chapter also asks that the tax itself be cut to no higher than 20 percent, and the law leaves the rate schedule untouched. This section reaches only the exemption, not the other items the chapter groups with the request.
Same subject, different route
chapter 22, p. 697 · the document says
“should”
Section 70120 of the 2025 tax law acts on the same deduction and goes the other way. It replaces the flat $10,000 cap with an applicable limitation amount of $40,000 for 2025, $40,400 for 2026 and 1 percent more each year through 2029, reduced by 30 cents for each dollar of income above a threshold starting at $500,000 but never below $10,000, and returning to $10,000 for years after 2029. The deduction is widened for five years rather than repealed. Where the fit breaks down: full repeal, which is what the chapter asks, is not done here or anywhere else in the record. Section 70110 of the same law does terminate miscellaneous itemized deductions other than educator expenses, which is one of the items the chapter groups with this request.
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 471 · the document says
“should”
Section 71113 of Public Law 119-21 bars federal Medicaid money from paying a prohibited entity for one year, defined as a tax exempt essential community provider mainly engaged in family planning that provides abortions outside cases of rape, incest or danger to the woman's life and whose Medicaid spending topped $800,000 in fiscal year 2023. That uses the Medicaid channel the chapter names. The bar lasts one year rather than ending the funding, it reaches only entities meeting all four tests rather than all abortion providers, it redirects nothing to other health centers, it is not the Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act, and the Idaho, South Carolina and Tennessee waivers are left unresolved. EO 14182, the top candidate, ends federal funding of elective abortion but leaves payments to providers for other services untouched.
Closely matches
chapter 16, p. 522 · the document says
“must”
Section 50101 of Public Law 119-21 requires the Secretary of the Interior to immediately resume quarterly onshore oil and gas lease sales under the Mineral Leasing Act, and to hold at least four sales a year of available land in each of nine named states, with a replacement sale in the same fiscal year if one is canceled or draws no bid. Congress rather than the BLM did it: the duty names nine states rather than all producing states, it does not restore the earlier BLM instruction memorandum, and it adds no expanded public notice and comment step, which the chapter asked for as an adjustment. None of the candidates offered for this proposal sets a lease sale schedule.
Runs the other way
chapter 10, p. 297 · the document says
“should”
Section 10504 amends section 508(e)(2) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act, the provision that sets the taxpayer share of the premium the chapter would cap, and raises five of its figures: 64 to 69, 59 to 64, 55 to 60, 48 to 51 and 38 to 41. Section 10502 raises a further figure in the same subsection, in subparagraph (H)(i), from 65 to 80. The chapter asks that taxpayers pay no more than 50 percent of the premium, so the law moves the same numbers the other way. The figures raised attach to particular coverage levels rather than to the roughly 60 percent average share the chapter cites, and the provisions amended are not indexed on this site, so which coverage each figure governs cannot be checked here.
Runs the other way
chapter 10, p. 296 · the document says
“should”
Section 10312 works on the machinery the chapter would repeal. It sets the raw cane sugar loan rate at 24.00 cents a pound for the 2025 through 2031 crop years and the refined beet sugar rate at 136.55 percent of it, puts a floor under storage rates for forfeited sugar, carries dates in the marketing allotment provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 from 2023 to 2031, sets deadlines for reallocating unused import quota, and orders a study of whether further terms and conditions should be placed on refined sugar imports. Nothing in it repeals or ends the program. The law continues and adjusts the loan rate and quota provisions the chapter describes, so it answers the proposal only by going the other way.
Runs the other way
chapter 10, p. 297 · the document says
“should”
Section 10303 acts on the overlap the chapter would prohibit. It amends section 508(c)(4)(C)(iv) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act by striking the words Crops for which the producer has elected under section 1116 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 to receive agriculture risk coverage and acres, and inserting the single word Acres, which removes the exclusion that had kept crops enrolled in agriculture risk coverage out of that provision, and section 10305 extends agriculture risk coverage itself through the 2031 crop year. The chapter asks Congress to bar a farmer from receiving an agriculture risk coverage or price loss coverage payment in the same year as a crop insurance indemnity, and no indexed law enacts such a bar. The provision amended is not indexed on this site, so what coverage it governs cannot be checked here, and the amendment concerns eligibility for a crop insurance option rather than the receipt of an indemnity.
Closely matches
chapter 11, p. 337 · the document says
“should”
Section 82001 does what the proposal asks and by the means it names. For loans made on or after July 1, 2026 the Secretary may offer only a standard plan and the new Repayment Assistance Plan, and may not offer, carry out or change any other plan for such a loan. A consolidation loan offered on or after that date may be repaid only under those two. The income contingent repayment authority in section 455(e) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 is repealed, and every borrower repaying under an income contingent plan must move to another plan before July 1, 2028. Three things differ. It was done by statute rather than by the Secretary, as the chapter proposed. The replacement is not the chapter's design: payments run on a band from $120 a year at incomes of $10,000 or less up to 10 percent of adjusted gross income above $100,000, rather than 10 percent of income above the poverty line, and the balance is canceled after 360 payments, where the chapter would prefer no forgiveness at all. And income based repayment under section 493C survives, rewritten at 15 percent of income above 150 percent of the poverty line, so not every income driven plan is gone.
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 327 · the document says
“should”
Section 81001 pulls the federal government out of part of the lending the 2010 change brought in. A graduate or professional student may not receive a Federal Direct PLUS Loan for any period of instruction beginning on or after July 1, 2026, annual unsubsidized borrowing is capped at $20,500 for a graduate student and $50,000 for a professional student, parent PLUS borrowing is capped at $20,000 a year and $65,000 for each dependent student, and a student may borrow no more than $257,500 in a lifetime. That reduces direct federal lending, which is the object of the proposal. It is not the reversal the chapter describes. Nothing spins Federal Student Aid off into a government corporation, nothing restores origination to private lenders or revisits the government's role as guarantor, and the Direct Loan program continues for everyone else, the section adding limits rather than changing who lends.
Partly matches
chapter 12, p. 372 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-21, enacted July 4, 2025, appropriates thirty-six sums to the Secretary of Defense for shipbuilding for fiscal year 2025, available through September 30, 2029. Twenty-one of them buy ships and craft, including $4,600,000,000 for a second Virginia-class submarine in fiscal year 2026 and $5,400,000,000 for two more guided missile destroyers, and fifteen build up the shipbuilding industrial base and workforce. That is the fleet expansion half of the passage. The fit breaks down on the other half: the section buys ships and yard capacity and says nothing about developing new nuclear naval reactors, it names neither the National Nuclear Security Administration nor its Naval Reactors program, and the chapter's proposal sits in a chapter about the Energy Department while this section runs to the Defense Department.
2025-06-11
Action · 90 FR 24518
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is issuing this interpretive rule to set forth the agency's interpretation of the factors the agency is prohibited by law from considering when setting maximum feasible fuel economy standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and other applicable law. This rule describes NHTSA's
In plain English
Carmakers must meet a fuel economy target. This sets out how the agency now reads that rule.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 19, p. 628 · the document says
“must”
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued an interpretive rule on June 11, 2025 titled Resetting the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Program. It sets out the factors the agency reads the law to forbid it from considering when it sets maximum feasible standards under the 1975 and 2007 statutes, describes this as the legal foundation for bringing both the passenger car program and the medium and heavy duty program into compliance with those statutes, and says the agency will exercise its enforcement authority over existing standards according to that reading. That is the chapter's argument about statutory limits carried into agency practice. The fit breaks down because an interpretive rule does not set mileage numbers: replacement standards are left to a later rulemaking, so the levels the chapter asks for, feasible for combustion vehicles, are not yet in place, and the rule takes no position on returning to model year 2020 levels.
2025-05-23
Executive Order 14303 · 90 FR 22601
In plain English
This order sets rules for how agencies use science. It says findings must be open to review.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 438 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14303, signed May 23, 2025, directs agency heads and employees that highly unlikely and overly precautionary assumptions and scenarios should only be relied upon in agency decision making where required by law or otherwise pertinent to the action, requires them to document how uncertainty propagates through models, and requires a weight of scientific evidence approach. That is the shift in default assumptions the passage asks for, and it applies across the government rather than to the EPA alone. It falls short in three ways: the instruction on precautionary assumptions is worded as should rather than shall, the order names no particular model, so the low-dose linear non-threshold model and the uncertainty factors the chapter objects to are not addressed by name, and it does not tell agencies to default to less restrictive regulatory outcomes.
Partly matches
chapter 21, p. 676 · the document says
“should”
EO 14303 of May 23, 2025 sets rules for how agencies use, interpret and communicate scientific data. Agency heads must publish the data, analyses, conclusions and models, including source code, behind information that will have a substantial effect on public policy or private decisions; employees must document uncertainty and how it propagates through models; and employees must be transparent about the likelihood of the assumptions and scenarios used, with highly unlikely or overly precautionary scenarios relied on only where the law requires it. The order's statement of reasons names agency use of the RCP 8.5 climate scenario as an example of a worst case presented as likely. Where the fit breaks down: this is a government wide scientific integrity order run through the Office of Science and Technology Policy, not a Commerce Department policy about its own records. It says nothing about the National Hurricane Center or the environmental satellite data centers, does not address adjustments made to collected data, and does not touch the continuity of long climate series that the chapter raises.
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 438 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14303 of May 23, 2025 requires agency heads, to the extent practicable and within the agency's authority, to make publicly available the data, analyses and conclusions associated with influential scientific information the agency produces or uses, including data cited in peer-reviewed literature, and the models and source code used to generate it, and it bars employees from invoking exemption 5 of the Freedom of Information Act to withhold those models without the agency head's written authorization. That is the disclosure the chapter's principle of open supporting studies asks for, and the order also directs that updated scientific integrity policies provide for consideration of dissenting viewpoints. The fit breaks down in that the order creates no citizen science program and deputizes no member of the public to audit agency data, it runs to every agency rather than to the EPA, and it expressly excludes from disclosure the risk models used to guide agency enforcement actions or select enforcement targets.
2025-05-19
Action · 139 Stat. 55
Some intimate images get shared without consent. A website must take them down when asked.
In plain English
Some intimate images get shared without consent. A website must take them down when asked.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 28, p. 849 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-12, approved May 19, 2025, does impose a disclosed process on covered platforms: within one year each must build a way for a person to report a nonconsensual intimate visual depiction and request its removal, must carry a clear and conspicuous notice of that process in plain language explaining its responsibilities and how to submit a request, and must act within 48 hours, with the Federal Trade Commission enforcing failures as an unfair or deceptive practice. It runs the opposite way from what the proposal asks. The process is for requesting a takedown, not for appealing one; the poster whose material is removed gets no appeal; the law shields a platform from liability for a good faith removal that later proves unfounded; and it requires nothing about the specificity of a platform's terms of service or accountability for departing from them.
2025-05-09
Executive Order 14294 · 90 FR 20363
In plain English
This order is about rules that carry jail time. Agencies must list them and limit new ones.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 29, p. 863 · the document says
“must”
Executive Order 14294 of May 9, 2025 sets as the policy of the United States that criminal enforcement of criminal regulatory offenses is disfavored, that prosecutions should focus on matters where a putative defendant is alleged to have known his conduct was unlawful, and that strict liability offenses are disfavored. It directs each agency, in consultation with the Attorney General, to publish every criminal regulatory offense it enforces together with the applicable mens rea standard, and it strongly discourages criminal enforcement of any offense left off that list. That is a presidential direction against prosecuting people who cannot tell that they are breaking the law, which is the reason the passage gives for its request. The fit breaks down because the order reaches criminal regulatory offenses, which it defines as federal regulations enforceable by a criminal penalty, rather than violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act itself, because it names neither the Justice Department's election crimes work, the Federal Election Commission, nor the First Amendment concern the passage raises, and because it governs when a regulatory offense should be charged rather than setting any standard of clarity for election law.
2025-05-09
Executive Order 14296 · 90 FR 20369
In plain English
This order sets up a center for veterans without homes. It puts land in California to that use.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 20, p. 645 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14296 of May 9, 2025 directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to report a plan to reduce wait times for Veterans Health Administration appointments and to develop a strategy to improve health care delivery that prioritizes reducing access times, including options for treating veterans at selected military treatment facilities with reimbursement. It expands where a veteran may be seen outside a VA hospital and attacks the wait times that drive eligibility. The fit breaks down because Community Care means the VA paying a provider in the community, and the order routes care to Defense Department facilities instead. It does not change Community Care eligibility, its access standards, its provider network or how it pays, and it creates none of the new arrangements the chapter asks for.
2025-05-09
Action · 139 Stat. 53
Congress can cancel a new agency rule. It has a short window to do it. This law cancels the rule on overdraft fees at very large banks.
In plain English
Congress can cancel a new agency rule. It has a short window to do it. This law cancels the rule on overdraft fees at very large banks.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 27, p. 839 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-10, enacted in 2025 under the Congressional Review Act, states that Congress disapproves the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Overdraft Lending rule for very large financial institutions and that the rule shall have no force or effect. A companion, Public Law 119-11, does the same to the bureau's larger participants rule for digital payment applications. That answers the part of the chapter that asks Congress to pull down the bureau's rules. It does not answer the proposal itself: the bureau continues to exist with its funding and structure intact, section 1061 of Dodd-Frank is untouched, no function returns to the banking regulators or the Federal Trade Commission, and the resolutions state no reason and reach only the two rules they name.
2025-05-09
Action · 139 Stat. 49
Congress can cancel a new agency rule. It has a short window to do it. This law cancels the rule on energy limits for some home appliances.
In plain English
Congress can cancel a new agency rule. It has a short window to do it. This law cancels the rule on energy limits for some home appliances.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 12, p. 379 · the document says
“should”
Public Law 119-6 disapproves, under the Congressional Review Act, the Energy Department's rule on energy conservation standards for consumer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters, and provides that the rule shall have no force or effect. Three companion laws do the same for walk-in coolers and freezers, for appliance certification and labeling, and for commercial refrigerators. This is Congress and the President acting together against particular standards, which is nearer the chapter's fallback of narrowing which appliance rules proceed than to what it asks for. It does not modify or repeal the law that mandates the standards: the statutory scheme stands, the department keeps its duty to set standards, and the resolutions state no reason.
2025-05-01
Executive Order 14290 · 90 FR 19415
In plain English
This order cuts federal money to NPR and PBS. It says their news leans one way.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 8, p. 246 · the document says
“must”
Executive Order 14290, signed May 1, 2025, instructs the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Board to cancel direct funding to NPR and PBS to the maximum extent allowed by law and to decline future funding, to revise the 2025 Community Service Grants provisions so station grantees cannot pass federal money to either, and directs every agency to identify and terminate its own direct or indirect funding of the two. Where it falls short of the proposal: it does not end public funding of the Corporation itself. The Corporation's appropriation is made by Congress and the order leaves it standing, directing only where the money may go once received. The chapter asks the President to stop the funding even over opposition in his own party in Congress, which is a legislative act the order does not perform.
2025-04-28
Executive Order 14287 · 90 FR 18761
In plain English
Some cities shield migrants from federal agents. This order threatens to cut their funding.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 150 · the document says
“should”
The order does the financial part by executive action. Section 2 requires the Attorney General, with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to publish and update a list of states and local jurisdictions that obstruct enforcement of federal immigration law and to notify each of them; section 3 requires every agency head, working with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to identify federal funds going to those jurisdictions, including grants and contracts, for suspension or termination, and directs legal remedies against jurisdictions that do not comply. What the chapter asks Congress to do is not done: nothing here requires compliance with immigration detainers, the penalties rest on agency discretion under existing law rather than on a statute that sets them, and the authorization of state and local police to enforce immigration law is not in this order, though Executive Order 14159 separately expands agreements under section 287(g).
2025-04-24
Executive Order 14284 · 90 FR 17729
Requires agency certification that a probationer will be an asset to the government before the employee becomes tenured, and provides that employment terminates at the end of the probationary period absent that certification, citing a 2005 Merit Systems Protection Board report.
In plain English
New government workers get a trial period. This order says a boss must sign off before that worker becomes permanent. Without that sign-off the job ends.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 73 · the document says
“will need to”
Shares the chapter's subject of removing poor performers, and the chapter's list of Executive Order 13839's requirements includes reminding supervisors of expiring probationary periods. This order goes further than that item by making tenure conditional on affirmative agency certification, which the chapter did not propose.
2025-04-23
Executive Order 14281 · 90 FR 17537
See: EO 12250, November 2, 1980.
States that disparate-impact liability holds that a presumption of unlawful discrimination exists where there are differences in outcomes among groups even without a facially discriminatory practice or discriminatory intent, and sets the policy of eliminating its use.
In plain English
One rule said a test can count as unfair if fewer people from one group pass it. It did not matter what anyone meant to do. This order set out to stop the government using that rule.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 3, p. 72 · the document says
“could”
The chapter raised ending or narrowing disparate impact as a possibility rather than a recommendation: 'could be ended legislatively or at least narrowed through the regulatory process'. This order acts by the executive route on the narrower of the two. The chapter's framing was conditional, so a reader should not treat this as an implemented plank.
2025-04-23
Executive Order 14282 · 90 FR 17541
In plain English
A law makes colleges report gifts from abroad. This order tells agencies to enforce that law.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 7, p. 218 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14282 treats foreign money on American campuses as a national security problem and directs the Secretary of Education, working with the Attorney General, to enforce the foreign funding disclosure requirement of section 117 of the Higher Education Act, to require disclosure of the true source and purpose of the funds, to conduct audits and investigations, and to withhold federal grant funds from institutions that do not comply. It goes at foreign penetration of universities by a different route than the one asked for. It amends no statute and leaves the Counterintelligence Enhancement Act of 2002 untouched, it concerns disclosure of money rather than espionage, and it gives the work to the Education Department and the Attorney General rather than to the National Counterintelligence and Security Center or the FBI, whose role and resources the chapter would expand.
2025-04-15
Executive Order 14273 · 90 FR 16441
In plain English
This order is about drug prices. It tells agencies to press for lower costs for patients.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 465 · the document says
“should”
EO 14273 keeps the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and directs the Secretary to propose guidance for initial price applicability year 2028 that improves transparency, prioritizes drugs with high costs to Medicare, and minimizes negative effects of the maximum fair price on innovation, and to work with Congress to align small molecule drugs with biologics. That matches the chapter's fallback, implementing the program prudently and minimizing its harmful effects. It is not the first ask: the program stands, and only Congress can repeal it.
2025-04-09
Executive Order 14267 · 90 FR 15629
In plain English
This order tells agencies to drop rules that shut out new firms. It says some rules pick winners.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 19, p. 625 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14267 of April 9, 2025 opens with the statement that federal regulations should not predetermine economic winners and losers, and directs every agency head, including at the Transportation Department, to review all regulations under their rulemaking authority with the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission and the Attorney General and identify those that create monopolies, raise barriers to entry, or otherwise limit competition, with a view to rescinding them. It adopts the chapter's premise and turns it into a concrete review. The fit breaks down because it acts on regulations that restrict competition between firms and does not reach the government backing particular technologies through funding or promotion, and it says nothing about who bears the liability when a technology underperforms or about the department's role in overseeing testing and deployment.
2025-04-09
Executive Order 14268 · 90 FR 15631
In plain English
This order speeds up arms sales to allies. It says the old process took too long.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 4, p. 101 · the document says
“should”
The order is aimed at the delay the chapter wants removed. It directs the Secretaries of State and Defense to send Congress a joint letter proposing higher statutory notification thresholds for foreign military sales and direct commercial sales, and directs the Secretary of State to work with Congress to review notification processes so that notified cases are adjudicated in time. It also orders priority partner and priority end-item lists and a single electronic tracking system. What the proposal asks for is not done: tiered review, the informal preview of prospective transfers with Congress, is never mentioned and is not ended, no days are removed from the process by the order itself, and the route is through Congress and statutory thresholds rather than by dropping a State Department practice that is not written into law.
2025-04-09
Executive Order 14269 · 90 FR 15635
In plain English
This order backs shipbuilding at home. It says the trade has withered and the fleet has shrunk.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 189 · the document says
“should”
Section 18 of Executive Order 14269 directs the Secretary of Defense, with the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commandant of the Coast Guard, to develop within 90 days a strategy to secure arctic waterways and enable American prosperity in the face of evolving arctic security challenges. It treats the Arctic as a theater needing a defense strategy, which is the neglect the chapter describes, and it is aimed at keeping those waterways usable. NATO has no part in it. The order builds a single national strategy inside a maritime policy order, says nothing about the alliance acknowledging an Arctic role, and does not address commercial access to Arctic shipping lanes or the fees the chapter raises.
2025-04-02
Executive Order 14257 · 90 FR 15041
See: Proc. 9704, March 8, 2018; Proc. 9705, March 8, 2018; Proc. 9980, January 24, 2020; Memo. of January 20, 2025; EO 14193, February 1, 2025; EO 14194, February 1, 2025; EO 14197, February 3, 2025; EO 14198, February 3, 2025; Proc. 10895, February 10, 2025; Proc. 10896, February 10, 2025; Memo. of February 13, 2025; EO 14227, March 2, 2025; EO 14231, March 2, 2025; Proc. 10908, March 26, 2025; EO 14256, April 2, 2025; EO 14259, April 8, 2025; EO 14266, April 9, 2025; EO 14298, May 12, 2025; EO 14309, June 16, 2025; EO 14316, July 7, 2025; Proc. 10962, July 30, 2025; EO 14323, July 30, 2025;
Section 1 declares a national emergency arising from persistent goods trade deficits, which the order states reached $1.2 trillion in 2024, and imposes tariffs described as reciprocal, citing non-reciprocal tariff rates and non-tariff barriers.
In plain English
This order put new taxes on goods coming in. It says other countries charge higher rates than the United States does.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 26, p. 770 · the document says
“should”
Same subject, different instrument. The first essay asked Congress to pass the United States Reciprocal Trade Act, giving the President authority to mirror a partner's tariffs after negotiation. This order proceeds instead by declaring a national emergency under existing authority, without the statute the essay asked Congress to enact.
Runs the other way
chapter 26, p. 803 · the document says
“should”
The chapter's second essay argues the opposite of this action: that tariffs have backfired, that the reform is to remove those enacted since 2017 and build safeguards against future use, and that the next President should ignore those seeking protection. The chapter contains both positions and resolves neither.
2025-03-27
Executive Order 14251 · 90 FR 14553
Amends: EO 12171, November 19, 1979. See: EO 14343, August 28, 2025.
Determines that listed agencies and subdivisions have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative or national security work, and that Chapter 71 of title 5 cannot be applied to them consistently with national security requirements. Amends Executive Order 12171 to add them to the list of excluded agencies, which include the Departments of State, Defense and the Treasury with stated exceptions.
In plain English
Most federal workers can join a union. The union can then bargain for them. But a law lets the president take that right away. He can do it where the work involves security. This order did that at a long list of agencies. The list includes State, Defense, and the Treasury.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 3, p. 82 · the document says
“should”
Same subject, different instrument, and much wider. The chapter asked for three 2018 orders to be reinstated. Those orders regulated how agencies bargain, how official time is used, and how grievances are handled, while leaving bargaining rights in place. This order instead invokes the national security exclusion in 5 U.S.C. 7103(b) to remove listed agencies from the labor-management relations program altogether. Chapter 3 does not propose that mechanism. It does say Congress should consider whether public-sector unions are appropriate at all, which is a separate proposal indexed here.
Contested reading
chapter 3, p. 82 · the document says
“should consider”
Whether this order answers the chapter's question is a reading, not a fact. The chapter put the question to Congress and proposed no executive action on it; this is executive action, and it removes coverage from named agencies rather than deciding the general question. Recorded here because readers reasonably connect the two, and left unresolved.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 147 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14251 determines that a list of agencies and subdivisions, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services among them, have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative or national security work, and that chapter 71 of title 5 cannot be applied to them consistently with national security requirements. It adds the agency to the exclusions from the Federal Labor-Management Relations Program, which ends collective bargaining there. That is the national security classification and the end of union representation the chapter asks for, reached through the labor relations statute rather than through decertification, and the determination attaches to the agency rather than to each employee's position. The rest of the proposal is untouched: nothing about investigating and punishing leaks, nothing about separating employees who cannot meet those standards, and nothing about keeping the Washington presence skeletal or rotating staff to field offices. Among the listed candidates, Executive Order 14343 makes further exclusions of the same kind but does not reach this agency, and the codification rule gives certain of its officers arrest and firearms authority without changing its classification.
2025-03-20
Executive Order 14242 · 90 FR 13679
Section 1 states that closure of the Department of Education would improve program implementation and that the department must return what it calls bank functions to an entity equipped to serve students, noting a student loan portfolio of more than $1.6 trillion managed by fewer than 1,500 staff.
In plain English
This order says the Education Department should close. Only Congress can close it. So the order tells staff to work toward it.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 319 · the document says
“should”
Shares the chapter's central aim. The chapter said plainly that eliminating the department requires Congress to pass a Department of Education Reorganization Act. An executive order cannot abolish a department created by statute, so this directs steps toward closure rather than achieving it.
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 320 · the document says
“should”
Addresses the chapter's subject of returning control to states. Whether it produces the no-strings block grants the chapter asked for is not established by the order alone.
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 325 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14242 directs the Secretary of Education to take all necessary steps, to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the states and local communities, and states that the department's main functions can and should be returned to the states. That is the withdrawal of the federal role the proposal describes. It stops short in both directions. The order says nothing about what federal function would remain, and does not mention statistics, the National Center for Education Statistics or the dissemination of information to the states, which is the role the chapter would keep. Its section 2(b) keeps conditions on the allocation of department funds, which is a continuing federal policy role. And closing the department takes an act of Congress, so the order directs steps toward closure rather than accomplishing it.
2025-03-18
Executive Order 14239 · 90 FR 13267
In plain English
This order shifts more disaster planning to states and towns. It says they know their own risks best.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 135 · the document says
“should”
Section 3(b) orders a review of all critical infrastructure policies and states that for purposes of the order those policies do not include any related to purported misinformation, disinformation or malinformation, nor so-called cognitive infrastructure, which is the work the chapter says drew the agency away from its statutory mission, and the order's stated policy is that preparedness be owned at the state, local and individual level. The order never names the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. It reaches critical infrastructure policy across the government rather than one agency's mission and funding, it moves no emergency communications, chemical facility or school security function to the Federal Emergency Management Agency or to the states as the chapter proposes, it says nothing about duplication of work at the Defense Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the National Security Agency, and it commissions recommendations to the President rather than making the change itself.
2025-03-14
Executive Order 14238 · 90 FR 13043
In plain English
This order cuts more small federal offices. It follows an earlier order that did the same.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 8, p. 245 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14238 names the United States Agency for Global Media among seven entities whose non-statutory components and functions shall be eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, and whose statutory functions and associated personnel shall be reduced to the minimum presence and function required by law, with the Office of Management and Budget directed to reject funding requests inconsistent with that. That is the defunding the chapter contemplates, done by executive order. It does not disestablish the agency, which was created by statute and would take an act of Congress, and it is not conditional in the way the chapter's recommendation is: the chapter asks first for reform top to bottom and would defund only if the agency's aim did not change, while the order sets no condition and gives no reason tied to what the agency broadcasts.
Same subject, different route
chapter 8, p. 242 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14238 acts on the size of the same agency. It eliminates the non-statutory components and functions of the United States Agency for Global Media and reduces its statutory functions and personnel to the minimum required by law, which reaches the surplus services the chapter says are unnecessary. It goes a different way from the proposal. Consolidation, the cornerstone the chapter names, would merge overlapping foreign language broadcasting into fewer services, while the order cuts back across the agency without merging anything, names no service or language, and says nothing about the fiscal responsibility and transparency the chapter asks be restored.
2025-03-01
Executive Order 14225 · 90 FR 11365
In plain English
This order tells agencies to speed up logging on federal land. It says more wood should be cut at home.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 16, p. 533 · the document says
“must”
EO 14225 directs the Interior and Agriculture Secretaries to issue guidance expanding timber production, to submit a plan setting the annual volume to be offered for sale from BLM and Forest Service lands over four years, and to adopt categorical exclusions for thinning and salvage. The O&C lands are BLM land in western Oregon, so they fall inside that direction. The order never mentions the O&C lands, the 1937 statute or permanent forest production, and it sets a sale target across all federal lands rather than managing those lands under the mandate the proposal invokes.
2025-02-25
Action · 90 FR 10610
This interim final rule removes the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) from the Code of Federal Regulations. In addition, this interim final rule requests comments on this action and related matters to inform CEQ's decision making.
In plain English
A law makes agencies weigh the effect of a project on nature. This drops one office's rules for doing that.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 60 · the document says
“should”
The Council on Environmental Quality acted on its National Environmental Policy Act regulations, as the proposal asks, and did so at the President's instruction: Executive Order 14154 directed the Chairman to issue guidance and propose rescinding the regulations, and this interim final rule removes 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508 from the Code of Federal Regulations. The fit breaks down on how. The passage asks for a rewrite along the lines of the 2020 revision, restoring provisions such as the ban on weighing cumulative impacts; the rule writes no new provisions at all, so that requirement disappears with the rest of the regulations rather than being replaced by a rule banning it, and the substantive text moves to agency-level procedures issued separately by the Interior, Energy and Agriculture Departments and others. The rule also does not address the two further things the passage asks the new regulations to do, limiting the scope of judicial review of an agency's environmental review and limiting the remedies available.
2025-02-19
Executive Order 14219 · 90 FR 10583
In plain English
This order tells agencies to drop rules that go beyond what the law allows. DOGE staff help pick which ones.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 49 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14219 puts guidance documents inside the definition of regulation for the purposes of the order, and then directs in section 4 that agencies continue to follow the processes set out in Executive Order 12866 for submitting regulations to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and consult that office on potential new regulations, which is the substance of what the passage asks for. The fit breaks down because the order does not revive Executive Order 13891, which was revoked in 2021 and stays revoked, and so does not restore that order's separate machinery for significant guidance, including the agency guidance portals and the notice and comment step. It also takes its definition of guidance document from Executive Order 13422 rather than from 13891, and it exempts military, national security, homeland security, foreign affairs and immigration functions along with anything the Director of the Office of Management and Budget chooses to exempt.
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 422 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14219 of February 19, 2025 directs every agency head, within 60 days, to review all regulations under the agency's jurisdiction and identify those based on anything other than the best reading of the underlying statutory authority and those implicating matters of social, political or economic significance that are not authorized by clear statutory authority, to send that list to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for a unified agenda that seeks to rescind or modify them, and to generally de-prioritize enforcement of them. That is the test the passage sets. The fit breaks down in that the order reaches regulations rather than any ongoing or planned activity, so it does not touch programs, grants or staffing; it runs to all agencies rather than the EPA; it directs identification and proposed rescission rather than stopping the activity; and it says nothing about the reduction in full-time positions or the budget request the chapter attaches to the proposal.
2025-02-18
Executive Order 14215 · 90 FR 10447
In plain English
This order gives the White House more say over agencies that once ran free. Their rules must be cleared first.
Recorded against
Same subject, different route
chapter 29, p. 863 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14215 of February 18, 2025 acts on exactly the question the proposal raises, whose reading of the law governs, and settles it the other way. It amends Executive Order 12866 so that the definition of agency expressly includes the Federal Election Commission, bringing the commission's significant regulatory actions under review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and section 7 makes the opinions of the President and the Attorney General controlling on all executive branch employees, barring any employee from advancing an interpretation of law as the position of the United States that contravenes them, including in regulations, guidance and litigation positions, unless authorized. The proposal asks the President to direct the Justice Department not to prosecute under a reading the commission rejects. Where they part: the order says nothing about prosecutions or about the Federal Election Campaign Act, and it does not forbid such a directive, so it reverses the direction of deference without addressing the charging decision the chapter is about.
Closely matches
chapter 2, p. 49 · the document says
“should”
Section 1 states that all executive departments and agencies, including so-called independent agencies, shall submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs before publication in the Federal Register, and section 3 amends the definition of agency in Executive Order 12866 to reach any agency under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1) plus the Federal Election Commission. That is the extension of White House regulatory review the passage asks for, applied to the same class of agencies. The fit is not complete: the order exempts the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee in the conduct of monetary policy, reaching the Board only on its supervision and regulation of financial institutions; it covers significant regulatory actions rather than the regulatory analysis the passage also names; and it cites no Office of Legal Counsel finding, which is the authority the passage rests the proposal on.
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 45 · the document says
“should”
Section 5 directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to review independent regulatory agencies' obligations for consistency with the President's policies and priorities on an ongoing basis and to adjust those agencies' apportionments by activity, function, project or object, including by prohibiting spending on particular activities where consistent with law. Apportionment decisions are placed with a politically appointed officer and used as a policy instrument, which is the direction the passage argues for. It does not do what the quoted sentence asks: it does not restore apportionment decision-making to the personal review of the Program Associate Directors, says nothing about who signs an apportionment document, and reaches only independent regulatory agencies rather than the executive branch generally.
Partly matches
chapter 29, p. 865 · the document says
“should consider”
Section 7 of Executive Order 14215 of February 18, 2025 provides that the President and the Attorney General supply authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch, that their opinions on questions of law are controlling on all employees in the conduct of their official duties, and that no employee acting in an official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes them, naming positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized by the President or in writing by the Attorney General. The same order amends the definition of agency in Executive Order 12866 to include the Federal Election Commission by name. That subordinates the legal positions the commission may take to the Attorney General's, which is the independence the passage asks the President to consider ending. The fit breaks down because the passage asks for an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act and the order asks Congress for nothing, because nothing in the order removes or mentions the commission's authority to appear in court in its own name, because section 7 governs which interpretation of law may be advanced rather than who may sue, and because section 7 speaks of employees of the executive branch without stating whether the commissioners are covered.
2025-02-11
Executive Order 14210 · 90 FR 9669
See: EO 14158, January 20, 2025; EO 14170, January 20, 2025; Presidential Memorandum, January 20, 2025; EO 14356, October 15, 2025.
Directs agency heads, working with DOGE Team Leads, to undertake reductions in force and to limit hiring, with exemptions including immigration enforcement, law enforcement and national security.
In plain English
This order told agencies to cut jobs and slow down hiring. Some jobs were left out, such as police and border work.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 79 · the document says
“should”
Directs reductions in force, which is the subject of the chapter's proposal. The chapter's specific ask was to change the order of retention so that performance outranks tenure, veterans' preference and seniority, a change it noted had repeatedly failed as legislation. This order directs reductions; it is not established here that it reorders retention factors.
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 79 · the document says
“is needed”
Limits hiring across agencies. The chapter proposed something narrower and differently aimed: a freeze on top career positions specifically, to stop outgoing political appointees converting into career jobs. The chapter separately warned that broad hiring freezes and buyouts have not produced lasting reductions and can raise costs.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 137 · the document says
“should”
The order tells every agency head, the Secretary of Homeland Security included, to prepare large scale reductions in force and to prioritize in them all offices performing functions not mandated by statute, all diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and any component the administration suspends or closes, while hiring is held to one for every four departures. Functions related to public safety, immigration enforcement and law enforcement are exempt from both the ratio and the reductions, which is the shift toward operational components the chapter describes. The route is not the chapter's: this is a presidential order applying across the government rather than the Secretary using discretionary leadership authority on particular corners of the department, it names no Homeland Security office, and it does not tie any closure to shrinking or dismantling the department.
2025-02-05
Executive Order 14201 · 90 FR 9279
In plain English
This order bars men from women's school sports. Schools that allow it may lose federal money.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 334 · the document says
“should”
Section 3(a)(i) of Executive Order 14201 directs the Secretary of Education, in coordination with the Attorney General, to continue to comply with the vacatur of the rule Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance of April 29, 2024, and to take other appropriate action to ensure that regulation does not have effect, and section 3(a)(ii) directs that regulations and policy guidance be brought into line with the statutory demand for equal athletic opportunity for members of both sexes. The rule the chapter would displace is therefore treated as having no effect. The route is not the one asked for. Nothing here opens a notice and comment rulemaking to restore the 2020 regulation, the action rests on a court's vacatur rather than on the department's own rulemaking, the order's subject is athletics rather than the whole regulation, and instead of dropping investigations opened on a gender identity reading of Title IX it directs new enforcement actions.
2025-02-01
Executive Order 14193 · 90 FR 9113
In plain English
This order puts a tax on goods from Canada. It says drugs cross that border. The tax is a form of pressure.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 61 · the document says
“must”
Executive Order 14193 declares the influx of illicit opioids a national emergency and imposes tariffs on Canadian goods on the ground that fentanyl is reaching the United States across the northern border, which acts on the third of the three commitments the passage names, reducing the availability of illicit drugs, and treats the flow across the border as the priority the passage says it should be. The fit breaks down because the order is a trade measure taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and aimed at another country's conduct: it sets no drug policy priority as such, gives no direction to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and does nothing on the other two commitments the passage names, preventing drug use before it starts and providing treatment leading to long-term recovery.
2025-01-31
Executive Order 14192 · 90 FR 9065
See: EO 12866, September 30, 1993; EO 14265, April 9, 2025; EO 14269, April 9, 2025; EO 14270, April 9, 2025; EO 14275, April 15, 2025
Directs agencies to repeal existing regulations when issuing new ones and establishes a cost accounting approach to the regulatory budget.
In plain English
For each new rule, agencies must scrap old ones. The idea is fewer rules overall.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 49 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked for eight named Trump-era regulatory orders to be reinstated, of which Executive Order 13771 established the repeal-for-issuance approach. This order re-establishes that approach rather than reinstating the named orders as a set.
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 49 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14192 does both of the specific things the passage names. Section 6(b) revokes OMB Circular A-4 of November 9, 2023, the document that underpins the weighing of costs against benefits and that the passage says should be restored if it was changed, and reinstates the prior version issued on September 17, 2003. Section 6(c) reinstates the 2018 memorandum of agreement between the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget on review of tax regulations under Executive Order 12866, which is the extension to Treasury the passage says should be maintained. The fit breaks down because the order does not touch the amendments made to Executive Order 12866 itself by Executive Order 14094 in 2023, including the raised threshold for a significant regulatory action, and because it adds a ten-for-one repeal requirement and an agency-by-agency cost allowance that the passage does not ask for.
2025-01-29
Executive Order 14190 · 90 FR 8853
In plain English
This order is about what schools teach. It bars federal money for lessons it calls radical. Parents get more say.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 334 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14190 treats access to school records as a parental right to be enforced. Its section 3(a)(ii) requires the Secretary of Education, with the Secretaries of Defense and Health and Human Services and in consultation with the Attorney General, to deliver a plan for protecting parental rights under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, and section 3(b)(iv)(A) requires an analysis of each agency's process for preventing or rescinding federal funds used to interfere with a parent's federal statutory right to information about school curriculum, records, physical examinations and surveys under that Act or the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. What the chapter asks for is different in kind: a statement by the Secretary making clear that the Act allows parents full access to their children's educational records. The order produces a strategy for the President rather than guidance to schools, and it reaches only the policies and conduct implicated by that order's own subject.
2025-01-29
Executive Order 14191 · 90 FR 8859
Section 1 states that geographically assigned schools fail many children and notes that more than a dozen states have enacted universal K-12 scholarship programs allowing families rather than government to choose the setting.
In plain English
This order pushes for families to pick their child's school. Money would follow the child.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 319 · the document says
“should”
Addresses the chapter's subject of letting parents direct their child's share of education funding. The chapter's proposal was for education savings accounts funded overwhelmingly by state and local taxpayers, which is a matter for states; this order works on the federal levers available to it.
2025-01-29
Action · 139 Stat. 3
This law is about people in the country illegally who are charged with theft. It orders the government to hold them. States may also sue over some choices.
In plain English
This law is about people in the country illegally who are charged with theft. It orders the government to hold them. States may also sue over some choices.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 177 · the document says
“should”
Section 3(c) adds a new subsection (e) to section 243 of the Immigration and Nationality Act giving a state attorney general or other authorized state officer standing to sue the Secretary of State in federal district court for injunctive relief over a violation of the requirement in subsection (d) to discontinue granting visas, with the court instructed to expedite the case and financial harm above $100 counted as harm. The sanction the chapter wants enforced becomes enforceable by states rather than resting on the Secretary's own decision. The Act leaves the sanction itself unchanged: it requires no country to be sanctioned, sets no scope for the visa categories covered, and fixes no duration.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 150 · the document says
“should”
Section 2 adds a new subparagraph (E) to section 236(c)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the list of aliens who must be taken into custody, covering those inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(A), (6)(C) or (7) who are charged with, arrested for, convicted of or admit burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or a crime resulting in death or serious bodily injury, and provides that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue a detainer and take custody. Section 3 strikes the words or release from section 236(e). Congress is replacing discretion with a duty, by statute, which is the instrument and the direction the passage names. It is one added class rather than the general change described: the discretionary language of section 236(a) stands, and the rest of Title 8 is untouched.
2025-01-28
Executive Order 14187 · 90 FR 8771
In plain English
This order is about care for children who question their sex. It bars federal money for drugs and surgery for them.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 462 · the document says
“should”
Section 3 of EO 14187 orders HHS to publish, within 90 days, a review of the existing literature on best practices for promoting the health of children who assert gender dysphoria, and to use all available methods to improve the quality of data guiding their care. That reaches the study half of the proposal by a different route: it commissions a literature review and better data rather than funding studies of the short and long term negative effects of the interventions, and it does not mention studying desistance among young people given counseling without medical or social intervention.
2025-01-27
Executive Order 14183 · 90 FR 8757
See: EO 14148, January 20, 2025; EO 14168, January 20, 2025 Revokes: EO 14004, January 25, 2021
Section 2 states that the policy is inconsistent with the medical, surgical and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria, and with shifting pronoun usage. Section 4 directs the Secretary of Defense to update the medical standards instruction within 60 days.
In plain English
This order changed who may serve in the military. It points to people with gender dysphoria.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 4, p. 104 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked that policies allowing transgender individuals to serve be reversed. This order directs revision of the medical standards that govern service on those grounds.
Partly matches
chapter 4, p. 103 · the document says
“should”
The chapter went further than reversing the service policy: it asked that those with gender dysphoria be expelled from service. This order directs a change to medical standards; what follows for serving members is not established by the order alone.
2025-01-27
Executive Order 14184 · 90 FR 8761
Section 2 directs the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security to make reinstatement available to members discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine. Section 1 calls the mandate an unfair, overbroad and unnecessary burden and says redress is overdue.
In plain English
Some troops were made to leave for refusing the COVID shot. This order lets them come back.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 4, p. 103 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked that these servicemembers be reinstated at their appropriate rank with back pay. This order directs that reinstatement be made available. Whether rank and back pay follow in each case is a matter of implementation and is not settled by the order's text.
2025-01-27
Executive Order 14185 · 90 FR 8763
In plain English
This order ends race and sex based programs in the armed forces. It says promotion should rest on merit alone.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 4, p. 103 · the document says
“should”
Section 4 orders the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security for the Coast Guard, to abolish every DEI office and any vestige of one, including sub-offices, programs, elements and initiatives, which is the abolition of offices and staff the chapter asks for. Section 6 bars the Department and the Armed Forces from promoting divisive concepts as defined in Executive Order 13950 and bars hiring anyone to teach them, and section 5 orders an internal review documenting past DEI actions. The fit is not exact in wording or scope: the order never uses the chapter's terms Marxist indoctrination or critical race theory, works instead through the divisive concepts definition carried over from 2020, and adds gender ideology, which this proposal does not raise.
Partly matches
chapter 4, p. 104 · the document says
“should”
Section 6(c) directs the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security to review the leadership, curriculum and instructors of the United States Service Academies and other defense academic institutions, and requires those institutions to teach that America and its founding documents remain the most powerful force for good in human history. That is the audit of course offerings the chapter asks for, conducted against the order's own definition of divisive concepts rather than the chapter's terms. The rest of the proposal is untouched: the order says nothing about ending tenure for academic staff and nothing about placing instructors under the rules that govern other Department of Defense contracting personnel. Executive Order 14190, the candidate closest by title, reaches only K-12 schooling and never mentions the academies.
2025-01-27
Executive Order 14186 · 90 FR 8767
In plain English
This order calls for a shield against missiles aimed at the country. It is named the Iron Dome for America.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 4, p. 118 · the document says
“should”
The order directs the Secretary of Defense to plan for proliferated space-based interceptors capable of boost-phase intercept and for capabilities to defeat missile attacks before launch and in the boost phase, which places weapons in orbit and reaches past interception of incoming warheads. That overlaps part of what the chapter asks for. The purpose is different and the rest is missing: the architecture ordered is a homeland missile defense shield against ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles, not the space control capability against an adversary's space assets that the chapter has in mind, there is nothing about extending space control to cis-lunar space, and nothing about the overclassification the chapter also raises.
2025-01-24
Executive Order 14182 · 90 FR 8751
In plain English
A rule bars federal money for most abortions. It is named for a member of Congress. This order tells agencies to enforce it.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 450 · the document says
“must”
EO 14182 sets a policy of ending the use of federal money to fund or promote elective abortion and revokes the two 2022 orders on abortion access. It acts on funding rather than on how health care is defined, it directs OMB guidance rather than reorienting HHS programs around the goal, and it does not mention euthanasia, which is half of what the passage asks.
2025-01-24
Action · 90 FR 8753
). I direct the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to the extent allowable by law, to implement a plan to extend the requirements of the reinstated Memorandum to global health assistance furnished by all departments or agencies. I further direct the Secretary of State to take all necessary actions, to the extent permitted by law, to ensure that U.S
In plain English
This brings back a rule on aid abroad. Groups that take part in abortion may not get funds.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 261 · the document says
“should”
The memorandum of January 24, 2025 revokes the January 28, 2021 memorandum, reinstates the January 23, 2017 Mexico City Policy, and directs the Secretary of State, with Health and Human Services, to implement a plan extending the reinstated requirements to global health assistance furnished by all departments and agencies. It also directs the Secretary of State to ensure that no taxpayer money funds organizations or programs supporting or participating in coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization. Where it falls short of the proposal: it does not name the United Nations Population Fund or block its funding, and its extension reaches global health assistance rather than all foreign assistance including humanitarian aid. It says nothing about subgrantees and subcontractors or about removing the exemptions for United States based nongovernmental organizations and international organizations. The State Department rule Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance, published January 27, 2026 and effective February 26, 2026, later carried the policy into an award term binding foreign NGOs, United States NGOs, public international organizations, foreign governments and parastatals.
2025-01-23
Executive Order 14178 · 90 FR 8647
In plain English
This order backs digital money and the firms that build it. It bars work on a central bank digital dollar.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 27, p. 835 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14178 of January 23, 2025 takes up the same question by a different route. It makes regulatory clarity and well defined jurisdictional regulatory boundaries a stated policy, revokes the prior digital asset order, and creates a working group that includes both the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, directing it to propose within 180 days a federal regulatory framework for digital assets covering market structure and oversight. It stops short of what the proposal asks: it adopts no test for when a holder is party to an investment contract, deems no asset a commodity, assigns nothing to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and issues no joint regulation, leaving the line between the two agencies where it was and only commissioning recommendations about it.
2025-01-21
Executive Order 14173 · 90 FR 8633
Revokes: EO 11246, September 24, 1965; EO 12898, February 11, 1994; EO 13583, August 18, 2011; EO 13672, July 21, 2014; Memo. of October 5, 2016
The Federal Register records this order as revoking Executive Order 11246 of 1965, which required federal contractors to take affirmative action, along with three other orders. Section 1 states that institutions have adopted race and sex based preferences under the banner of diversity, equity and inclusion.
In plain English
An order from 1965 made firms that sell to the government follow extra hiring rules. This order canceled it.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 18, p. 584 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked for Executive Order 11246 to be rescinded, which it said would eliminate the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. The Federal Register records this order as revoking 11246. The chapter noted contractors would remain bound by statutory nondiscrimination law, which this order does not alter.
Partly matches
chapter 27, p. 830 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14173 of January 21, 2025 orders all executive departments and agencies to terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders and requirements, and revokes Executive Order 11246 along with three other diversity directives. To the extent financial regulators are covered by that instruction, it reaches the regulations the proposal wants eliminated. The fit breaks down on the specific ask: the order abolishes no office, names no financial regulator, and creates no exception process for the offices of minority and women inclusion that Dodd-Frank requires by statute at the banking and securities agencies, which an executive order cannot close. Its detailed operative provisions run to federal contractors, private employers and educational institutions rather than to the regulators themselves.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14147 · 90 FR 8235
In plain English
This order is about federal law offices. It says they were used to go after foes. It calls for a review of what they did.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 1, p. 28 · the document says
“must”
Executive Order 14147 directs the Attorney General to review the civil and criminal enforcement activities of every department and agency over the previous four years, and to report to the President through the Counsel to the President with recommendations for remedial action, which routes a review of the prior Administration's legal actions through the office the passage assigns the task to. The fit breaks down because the review is conducted by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence rather than by the Counsel, because it is limited to conduct the order describes as weaponization rather than covering significant litigation generally, and because it addresses enforcement actions brought by the government rather than the positions the government takes in defending suits.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14148 · 90 FR 8237
Revokes: EO 13985, January 20, 2021; EO 13986, January 20, 2021; EO 13987, January 20, 2021; EO 13988, January 20, 2021; EO 13989, January 20, 2021; EO 13990, January 20, 2021; EO 13992, January 20, 2021; EO 13993, January 20, 2021; EO 13995, January 21, 2021; EO 13996, January 21, 2021; EO 13997, January 21, 2021; EO 13999, January 21, 2021; EO 14000, January 21, 2021; EO 14002, January 22, 2021; EO 14003, January 22, 2021; EO 14004, January 25, 2021; EO 14006, January 26, 2021; EO 14007, January 27, 2021; EO 14008, January 27, 2021; EO 14009, January 28, 2021; EO 14010, February 2, 2021; EO
Section 1 states the policy of revoking the previous Administration's orders. Its revocation list includes Executive Order 14020, which established the White House Gender Policy Council, along with dozens of others.
In plain English
This order canceled a long list of orders from the last president. One of them set up the gender council.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 2, p. 62 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked for Executive Order 14020 to be revoked. The Federal Register records this order as revoking it by name. The chapter also asked for the appointment of an official at Special Assistant rank or higher to lead life and family policy with the Domestic Policy Council; that is a separate step and is not established by this order.
Partly matches
chapter 18, p. 584 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14148 of January 20, 2025 revokes Executive Order 13988, the 2021 order that had directed agencies to apply the reasoning of Bostock to every statute prohibiting sex discrimination, and its section 3(b) directs the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council to review actions taken under the revoked orders and take steps to rescind, replace or amend them. Withdrawing that instruction is the route by which the broad reading the chapter objects to loses its government-wide backing. The fit breaks down because revoking an executive order does not restrict what the Supreme Court held: the order does not confine Bostock to hiring and firing in terms, names no guidance document or regulation to be withdrawn, and lists the revocation among 78 others without giving any reason tied to Bostock.
Closely matches
chapter 21, p. 676 · the document says
“should”
EO 14148 of January 20, 2025 revokes EO 14008 of January 27, 2021 (Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad) outright. That is the order that set the goal of conserving at least 30 percent of United States lands and waters by 2030 and directed the report that became the America the Beautiful initiative, so the instrument the chapter asks to be withdrawn is withdrawn. Where the fit breaks down: the revocation is one entry in a list of 78 revoked actions and names neither the 30 percent goal nor the initiative, and it does nothing about designations, grants or agency plans made while the order stood. EO 14313, a candidate here, later sets up a separate conservation commission rather than restoring or replacing the goal.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14149 · 90 FR 8243
In plain English
This order says the government must not push firms to take down speech. It tells agencies to stop any work that does so.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 155 · the document says
“should”
The order bars every federal department, agency, officer, employee and agent from acting or using federal resources in a way that would unconstitutionally abridge an American citizen's speech, names work carried out under the heading of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation as what it is reversing, and directs the Attorney General to investigate the previous four years of such activity and recommend remedies. It reaches the cyber agency only as one agency among all of them: CISA is never named, no program of the agency is closed by the order, the Cybersecurity Advisory Committee is not dismissed, work against foreign actors is not moved to the Intelligence Community, and what is prohibited is conduct that would be unconstitutional rather than the subject matter itself.
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 216 · the document says
“should”
The order bars every federal department, agency, officer, employee and agent from acting or using federal resources in a way that would unconstitutionally abridge the speech of American citizens, in terms that name the government's work against misinformation, disinformation and malinformation, and it directs the Attorney General to investigate such activity over the previous four years. Being government-wide, it reaches the intelligence agencies. The fit breaks down in that it prohibits conduct that abridges speech rather than monitoring as such, so watching domestic speech without acting on it is not addressed. The order names no intelligence agency and creates no rule specific to the intelligence community, which is where the chapter asks the prohibition to sit.
Partly matches
chapter 17, p. 550 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14149 of January 20, 2025 states that the federal government infringed protected speech under the guise of combatting misinformation, disinformation and malinformation, bars every federal department, agency, officer, employee and agent from acting or spending federal resources in a way that would unconstitutionally abridge an American citizen's speech or facilitate such conduct, and directs the Attorney General to investigate the previous four years and recommend remedies. The prohibition is government-wide and covers the activity the chapter names. It breaks down on scope and on line-drawing: the order names no agency, so it neither singles out the FBI nor ends any identified FBI program, and it forbids only conduct that would be unconstitutional rather than setting the chapter's firewall between monitoring online activity for evidence of crime and asking a publisher to remove material.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14151 · 90 FR 8339
In plain English
This order shuts down diversity programs across the government. It calls them a form of bias that the law does not allow.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 258 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14151, signed January 20, 2025, orders every agency head within sixty days to terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI and DEIA offices and positions, naming Chief Diversity Officer positions, along with all equity action plans, equity related grants or contracts, and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors and grantees, and to report to the Office of Management and Budget every such position, program and expenditure in existence on November 4, 2024 plus the contractors and grantees involved. Where the fit breaks down: the order is government-wide and reaches USAID only by that route, never naming the agency or its structures. The diversity scorecard and dashboard the chapter asks be canceled are not mentioned, there is no directive on what the chapter calls the LGBTQ plus agenda, and the order ends positions and programs rather than dismissing staff or debarring implementers and grantees.
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 462 · the document says
“should”
EO 14151 orders every agency head, within 60 days, to terminate all DEI and DEIA offices and positions, which covers the NIH Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. The order never names NIH or that office, leaves each closure to the agency to the maximum extent allowed by law, and says nothing about the conference sponsorship practice the passage also asks to end. The candidate the search ranked first, EO 14185, ends DEI programs inside the Armed Forces only.
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 204 · the document says
“must”
Executive Order 14151 directs every agency head to terminate, within 60 days and to the maximum extent allowed by law, all diversity, equity and inclusion offices and positions, all equity action plans and equity related grants and contracts, and all such performance requirements, and bars those factors from federal employment practices and performance reviews. Because it runs to the whole executive branch it reaches the intelligence agencies. The fit breaks down on aim and addressee. The order names no intelligence agency, is not directed at intelligence leadership, and closes offices, positions and programs rather than addressing the culture the chapter describes, and the passage quoted sits among recommendations for empowering the Director of National Intelligence, which the order does not touch.
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 209 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14151 terminates diversity, equity and inclusion offices, positions, programs and equity related grants and contracts across the executive branch, which moves resources away from the activities the chapter describes, and its section 2(a) requires federal employment practices, including performance reviews, to reward individual initiative, skills, performance and hard work and never to consider those factors, which touches the promotion criteria the chapter raises in the same passage. It is not addressed to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, names no intelligence agency or directorate, and says nothing about rewarding officers who accept high risk or about the risk aversion the chapter treats as the other half of the problem.
Partly matches
chapter 13, p. 441 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14151 of January 20, 2025 requires each agency head, within 60 days, to terminate to the maximum extent allowed by law all environmental justice offices and positions along with equity action plans, equity actions, initiatives and programs and equity-related grants or contracts, to give the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a list of every environmental justice position, committee, program, service, activity, budget and expenditure in existence on November 4, 2024, and to have the deputy agency head recommend actions aligning the agency's programs, regulations, guidance, enforcement activities, grants, consent orders and litigating positions with the order's policy. The inventory and the recommendation are a review of ongoing actions. The fit breaks down in that the order terminates rather than pauses, it runs to every agency rather than to the EPA, it does not mention Title VI or the pending Supreme Court decision the chapter ties the pause to, and it sets no point at which paused actions would resume.
Partly matches
chapter 18, p. 582 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14151 of January 20, 2025 has the Director of the Office of Personnel Management review and revise all existing federal employment practices, union contracts, and training policies or programs to comply with the order, directs each agency head within 60 days to terminate to the maximum extent allowed by law all diversity, equity and inclusion mandates, policies, programs, preferences and activities and all such performance requirements for employees, contractors or grantees, and requires each agency to report the federal contractors that have provided such training or training materials to its employees. That is an executive order ending the federal government's use of taxpayer money for training of the kind the passage names. The fit breaks down in that the order works through the diversity, equity and inclusion label and does not use the term critical race theory or define a body of ideas to be banned, it directs termination and review rather than stating a prohibition, and the second half of the passage, a law from Congress prohibiting the spending, is not in the indexed record.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14152 · 90 FR 8343
In plain English
This order takes away the security clearance of 51 former spy chiefs. It says they signed a letter in 2020 that misled voters.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 213 · the document says
“should”
The order directs the Director of National Intelligence, with the Director of the CIA, to revoke the current or active clearances of 49 named former intelligence officials, among them former Directors of National Intelligence and of the CIA, over a public letter they signed during the 2020 campaign, and of John Bolton over a memoir the order says treated sensitive information recklessly. That is the President stripping clearances from former senior intelligence officials for speaking publicly, the action the chapter asks for. The fit breaks down in that the order reaches a closed list of named people on two specific grounds rather than establishing that any former official who discusses their work in the press or on social media without the current Director's prior clearance loses their clearance, and it says nothing about keeping former officials subject to the Hatch Act.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14153 · 90 FR 8347
Section 3 directs the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate changes to, including potential rescission of, Public Land Order 5150 of 1971, to place a temporary moratorium on activities under the June 2024 Ambler Road record of decision pending review, and to reinstate the July 2020 record of decision.
In plain English
Alaska has land the state was promised long ago. Old orders held it back. This order tells officials to look at lifting them. It also revisits a mining road.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 16, p. 530 · the document says
“should”
The chapter named Public Land Order 5150 specifically, saying its revocation would give Alaska 1.3 million acres and should be a top priority. This order directs that changes to it, including potential rescission, be evaluated. Directing an evaluation is not the revocation the chapter asked for.
Partly matches
chapter 16, p. 530 · the document says
“must”
The chapter asked for immediate approval of the Ambler Road project. This order pauses activity under the 2024 record of decision pending review and reinstates the 2020 record of decision, which is a step toward that outcome by a different route than immediate approval.
Closely matches
chapter 16, p. 521 · the document says
“must”
Matches the chapter's request to roll back current orders and restore an energy development agenda on Alaskan lands.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14154 · 90 FR 8353
Revokes: EO 11991, May 24, 1977; EO 13990, January 20, 2021; EO 13992, January 20, 2021; EO 14008, January 27, 2021; EO 14007, January 27, 2021; EO 14013, February 4, 2021; EO 14027, May 7, 2021; EO 14030, May 20, 2021; EO 14037, August 5, 2021; EO 14057, December 8, 2021; EO 14072, April 22, 2022; EO 14082, September 12, 2022; EO 14096, April 21, 2023 See: Memo. of January 27, 2021; EO 14300, May 23, 2025; EO 14301, May 23, 2025; EO 14303, May 23, 2025
Section 6(b) disbands the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, established under Executive Order 13990, and withdraws its guidance and documents including the February 2021 technical support document. The order also revokes thirteen prior executive orders and directs agencies to use what it calls the most robust methodologies and not ones that are arbitrary or ideologically motivated.
In plain English
This order shut down the group that set the cost of carbon. It also threw out the papers that group had written.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 2, p. 61 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked that the working group be eliminated and the use of the analysis ended by executive order. The Federal Register text disbands that working group by name and withdraws its documents. The chapter's request covered ending use of the analysis generally, which extends beyond disbanding the group that produced it.
Partly matches
chapter 12, p. 370 · the document says
“should”
Addresses the chapter's subject of removing what it calls politicized considerations from energy policy, by a different route: this order works through revocations and methodology instructions rather than through the departmental programs the chapter named.
Partly matches
chapter 2, p. 61 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14154 does the second half of what the passage asks. Section 4(a) revokes Executive Order 14008 and abolishes any offices established in the orders it revokes, and the Office of Domestic Climate Policy was established by Executive Order 14008, so the office the passage names is abolished by executive order as asked. The fit breaks down on the first half: the order does not create a Senior Advisor to coordinate energy and environment policy across the Executive Office of the President, and it creates no position reporting directly to the Chief of Staff. Coordination was instead given to the National Energy Dominance Council, established by Executive Order 14213 and chaired by the Secretary of the Interior rather than by an advisor inside the White House.
Partly matches
chapter 12, p. 369 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14154, signed January 20, 2025, directs the Secretary of Energy to restart reviews of liquefied natural gas export applications as expeditiously as possible and, in weighing the public interest, to consider economic and employment impacts and the effect on the security of allies and partners. A separate section disbands the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, withdraws its estimates and guidance, and tells agencies in permitting and regulatory processes to adhere only to legislated environmental requirements. That removes a climate input from federal decisions and adds factors that favor approval. It stops short of the proposal in that the order never states that climate effects are excluded from the public interest test itself, and it does not carry out the chapter's separate request that Congress extend automatic approval beyond free trade agreement countries.
Partly matches
chapter 16, p. 533 · the document says
“should consider”
Section 5(e) of Executive Order 14154 of January 20, 2025 directs the Director of the National Economic Council and the Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs to jointly prepare recommendations to Congress that provide greater certainty in the federal permitting process, including, but not limited to, streamlining the judicial review of the application of the National Environmental Policy Act. The passage raises eliminating judicial review as something to consider and directs it to Congress, and this is a directed step toward legislative recommendations on that question. The fit breaks down in that the order says streamlining rather than eliminating, it addresses judicial review of the application of the act rather than of the adequacy of environmental review documents, and the record indexed here does not show what the recommendations said or whether they were delivered.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14159 · 90 FR 8443
In plain English
This order is about people in the country without legal status. It says the last President let too many in. It tells agencies to remove them.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 135 · the document says
“is critical”
The order sets the priority the chapter asks for. Section 2 makes total and efficient enforcement of the immigration laws, including detention, the policy of the United States; section 4 directs the Secretary to enable ICE, CBP and USCIS to set enforcement priorities and makes enforcement against illegal entry and unlawful presence the primary mission of Homeland Security Investigations; section 10 directs all legally available resources toward detention facilities. The structural half of the proposal is absent: the order does not reorganize the department, does not change its size or budget, and does not shift resources from supporting components to operational ones.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 149 · the document says
“should”
Section 19 directs the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to review and, if appropriate, audit all contracts, grants and other agreements providing federal funding to non-governmental organizations supporting or providing services, directly or indirectly, to removable or illegal aliens, to pause distribution of all further funds under those agreements pending the review, to terminate any found to violate law or to be sources of waste, fraud or abuse, to prohibit future ones, to coordinate with the Office of Management and Budget so that no such funding appears in appropriations requests, and to start clawback where appropriate. The chapter asks Congress to halt the funds. This is executive action inside existing appropriations, and the terminations turn on a finding about a particular agreement rather than on the processing or transport of aliens as such. The order also does not redirect the money to border security, detention or space for immigration court proceedings, and it does not mention the department's joint processing centers.
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 177 · the document says
“should”
Section 13 directs the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security to cooperate and effectively implement the sanctions provided by section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the maximum extent permitted by law, to ensure that diplomatic efforts and negotiations with foreign states include those states' acceptance of nationals subject to removal, and to eliminate documentary barriers, dilatory tactics and other restrictions preventing prompt repatriation, with a state's failure or delay in verifying identity counted in applying the sanction. The rest of the passage is not carried out: the order names no country, does not say whether a sanction should cover immigrant visas, non-immigrant visas or all visas, sets no condition that a sanction remain in force until the country accepts every national pending removal and commits to future acceptance, and qualifies the direction with the phrases as appropriate and to the maximum extent permitted by law.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14162 · 90 FR 8455
In plain English
This order pulls the country out of climate deals. It says such deals cost jobs. Money pledged to them is to stop.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 257 · the document says
“should”
Section 3(e) of Executive Order 14162 revokes and rescinds the U.S. International Climate Finance Plan immediately and directs the Office of Management and Budget to issue guidance within 10 days for the rescission of all frozen funds. Section 3(f) requires the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, with the heads of the other departments and agencies that fund work abroad, to report within 30 days on their actions to revoke or rescind policies implemented to advance that plan. That is the rescission of climate policies from foreign aid programs the chapter asks for. The rest of the proposal is absent. The order does not direct support for the responsible management of oil and gas reserves in the developing world, and it says nothing about the agency's collaboration with or funding of the foundations, corporations, international institutions and nongovernmental organizations the chapter names.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14164 · 90 FR 8463
Section 1 states that capital punishment is an essential tool for deterring and punishing the most heinous crimes, and that officials who oppose it have sought to thwart the execution of lawfully imposed sentences.
In plain English
This order tells the government to use the death penalty more. It says past sentences should be carried out.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 17, p. 554 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked that the Administration do everything possible to obtain finality for those on federal death row and pursue capital punishment for applicable crimes. This order directs that approach.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14165 · 90 FR 8467
In plain English
This order is about the southern border. It calls the crossings an invasion. It sends more staff and building work to the line.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 6, p. 178 · the document says
“must”
Section 6 of the order, signed January 20, 2025, directs the Secretary of Homeland Security, with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, to resume the Migrant Protection Protocols in all sectors along the southern border and to return aliens described in section 235(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the territory they came from. Section 8 directs the Secretary of State to pursue international agreements, naming section 208(a)(2)(A), the provision under which safe third country agreements are made. The fit breaks down in that resumption is ordered as soon as practicable rather than done on the day, the order concludes no safe third country agreement itself, and returning people to Mexico depends on Mexico accepting them, which the order does not address. None of the five candidates offered for this proposal touched the subject.
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 150 · the document says
“should”
Section 5 directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to detain, to the fullest extent permitted by law, aliens apprehended for immigration violations until their removal, and to issue policy guidance or propose regulations on consistent use of detention authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act, including terminating the practice commonly known as catch and release. Section 2(c) states the same as policy. The result sought is the same as the passage seeks, but by the route the passage identifies as the problem: the direction operates inside existing discretion, is expressly bounded by what the law permits, and amends no statute, so the discretionary language the passage wants replaced remains and a later Secretary could read it differently.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14166 · 90 FR 8611
In plain English
A law bans apps run by hostile states. This order delays how that law is enforced. It gives more time to sort out TikTok.
Recorded against
Runs the other way
chapter 26, p. 789 · the document says
“should”
The proposal asks for a ban on Chinese social media applications including TikTok. Executive Order 14166 of January 20, 2025 goes the other way on the same application: it orders the Attorney General not to enforce the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act for 75 days, to impose no penalty for conduct during that period or before it, to write each provider a letter stating there was no violation, and to resist enforcement by states or private parties. What it does not do is repeal the statute: the ban remains law, the order is framed as time limited while the administration reviews intelligence and seeks a divestiture, and three later orders extended the delay. It also reaches only TikTok and other ByteDance applications, not WeChat or Chinese applications generally.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14167 · 90 FR 8613
In plain English
This order gives the armed forces a bigger role at the border. It says guarding the border is a military job too.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 17, p. 555 · the document says
“should consider”
Executive Order 14167 of January 20, 2025 assigns United States Northern Command the mission to seal the borders and repel what it calls forms of invasion, including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, and human smuggling, and adds Level 3 and campaign planning requirements for that mission. Active-duty forces are put to border work, which is the first half of what the chapter raises. It breaks down on the specific step the chapter says has not yet been tried: the order says nothing about arrest operations, does not mention the National Guard, and does not address the Posse Comitatus limits that stand between a military presence and military arrests.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14168 · 90 FR 8615
Rescinds: EO 13988, January 20, 2021; EO 14004, January 25, 2021; EO 14021, March 8, 2021; EO 14075, June 15, 2022 See: EO 14183, January 27, 2025; EO 14185, January 27, 2025; EO 14201, February 5, 2025
Section 2 states the policy of recognizing two sexes, male and female, and that they are not changeable. Section 3(g) provides that federal funds shall not be used to promote what the order calls gender ideology and directs agencies to assess grant conditions accordingly. Section 4 addresses prisons and detention.
In plain English
This order says there are two sexes only. It says that cannot change. Federal money must not go to work on gender identity.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 18, p. 585 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked that agencies enforce sex discrimination law on the biological binary meaning of sex. This order establishes that policy across the federal government. The chapter's request was framed around enforcement of discrimination law specifically; this order is broader.
Partly matches
chapter 14, p. 456 · the document says
“should”
Addresses the chapter's subject. The chapter asked specifically that the Centers for Disease Control end its collection of gender identity data; this order sets a government-wide policy on recognizing two sexes and on federal funds rather than naming that data collection.
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 259 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14168 directs every agency to remove all statements, policies, regulations, forms, communications and other internal and external messages that promote or otherwise inculcate gender ideology and to stop issuing them, to use the term sex and not gender in all applicable federal policies and documents when administering sex based distinctions, and to ensure that grant funds do not promote gender ideology. That is the removal of material the chapter asks for, and it reaches the U.S. Agency for International Development as an executive agency. It is government wide and names neither the agency nor its websites, it turns on material that promotes gender ideology rather than on the vocabulary the chapter lists, which includes gender equality, gender equity, gender aware and gender sensitive, and it neither renames the Office of Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment nor rescinds the presidential memorandum on gender in the program cycle.
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 334 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14168 supplies the definitional half of what the chapter asks. It defines sex as an individual's immutable biological classification as either male or female, states that the definition shall govern all executive interpretation and application of federal law, directs the Attorney General to issue guidance correcting the application of Bostock v. Clayton County to sex based distinctions in agency activities, naming Title IX as the example, and rescinds the Education Department's Title IX guidance documents, including the 2024 implementation pointers and the 2021 enforcement guidance on sexual orientation and gender identity. It changes no regulation. The Title IX rule itself is untouched, no rulemaking is begun, and the order says nothing about reviewing or dropping investigations conducted on the earlier understanding.
Partly matches
chapter 11, p. 337 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14168 removes the federal premise the chapter is objecting to. Every agency must enforce laws governing sex based rights, protections, opportunities and accommodations to protect men and women as biologically distinct sexes, must give the terms sex, male and female the order's meanings when interpreting statutes, regulations and guidance, and the Attorney General is directed to correct the application of Bostock v. Clayton County to sex based distinctions in agency activities, with Title IX named. A school that keeps a biological definition of sex in administering Title IX is no longer at odds with the federal position. It is not the prohibition the chapter asks for. No provision bars an agency from withholding services over the definition of sex, the Department of Agriculture and the school meal programs are not mentioned, and the conditioning of federal money on a definition of sex continues in the other direction, since Executive Order 14201 directs agencies to review grants to educational programs and rescind funding where they do not comply with its sex based policy.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14169 · 90 FR 8619
See: Memo of July 15, 2025
Section 3 imposes a 90-day pause on new obligations and disbursements of development assistance pending review for programmatic efficiency and consistency with foreign policy. Section 2 states that no further assistance shall be disbursed in a manner not fully aligned with the President's foreign policy.
In plain English
This order paused most foreign aid for 90 days. Each program was to be reviewed.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 254 · the document says
“should”
Addresses the chapter's subject of scaling the agency back, by a different route. The chapter asked for a return to at least the 2019 budget level and deep cuts to the international affairs account, which requires Congress; this order pauses and reviews existing assistance under executive authority.
Partly matches
chapter 9, p. 256 · the document says
“should”
The review standard is alignment with the President's foreign policy generally. The chapter's proposal was narrower and specific: ending funding to any partner engaging with Chinese entities.
Partly matches
chapter 6, p. 174 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14169 orders an immediate pause on new obligations and disbursements of foreign development assistance pending reviews conducted under guidelines provided by the Secretary of State, with the Office of Management and Budget enforcing the pause through its apportionment authority. That answers the freeze on foreign assistance disbursements, contracts and payments pending review that the chapter asks for in the same passage. It does not reach the sentence quoted. Nothing in the order concerns unratified treaties or international agreements, and the pause runs across every agency with development assistance programs rather than being a freeze ordered inside the State Department.
Same subject, different route
chapter 9, p. 255 · the document says
“should”
Executive Order 14169 settles who coordinates foreign assistance, which is the question the proposal turns on, and settles it the other way. Reviews of each foreign assistance program are ordered under guidelines provided by the Secretary of State, determinations to continue, modify or cease a program require his concurrence, and any new foreign assistance program or obligation must be approved by him or his designee. The chapter would place that coordinating role with the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, holding the additional title of Director of Foreign Assistance with the rank of Deputy Secretary. The order creates no such title or rank, and it is a pause and review order rather than a standing grant of authority over all foreign assistance.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14170 · 90 FR 8621
See: EO 14210, February 11, 2025; EO 14356, October 15, 2025.
Directs the preparation of a Federal Hiring Plan addressing merit-based hiring and the assessment of candidates.
In plain English
This order told the government to write a new plan for hiring. The plan is meant to pick people on skill.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 73 · the document says
“must”
Addresses merit hiring and candidate assessment, which is the subject of the chapter's proposal. The chapter's specific ask was that OPM restore testing on knowledge, skills and abilities against the 1981 consent decree and the Uniform Guidelines; whether the hiring plan does that is not established by the order alone.
2025-01-20
Executive Order 14171 · 90 FR 8625
Reinstates: EO 13957, October 21, 2020. Revokes: EO 14003, January 22, 2021. Amended by: EO 14410, June 3, 2026.
Section 2 reinstates Executive Order 13957, which created Schedule F, subject to amendments made by the order, and revokes Executive Order 14003. The order states that only 41 percent of civil service supervisors are confident they can remove an employee for serious misconduct.
In plain English
This order brought back the Schedule F rule from 2020. It also canceled the Biden order that had undone it. Workers whose jobs shape policy can now be moved into a group with much less job protection.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 3, p. 81 · the document says
“should”
The chapter asked for Executive Order 13957 to be reinstated, and the Federal Register records this order as reinstating it. The chapter attached a qualification, 'but SES responsibility should come first', and this order does not sequence Senior Executive Service reform ahead of the reinstatement.
Closely matches
chapter 16, p. 524 · the document says
“must”
EO 14171 reinstates EO 13957, the Schedule F order, with amendments, renames the schedule Schedule Policy/Career, and revokes the 2021 order that had undone it. That is the reinstatement the passage asks for, and it applies across the government. The order places no Interior position in the schedule by itself, which happens by agency recommendation under OPM's final rule of February 6, 2026, and positions in the schedule stay career and nonpartisan rather than becoming political. None of the candidates offered here is that order: three are cases and one is a Transportation Department procedures rule.
2025-01-20
Action · 90 FR 8247
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order a freeze on the hiring of Federal civilian employees, to be applied throughout the executive branch. As part of this freeze, no Federal civilian position that is vacant at noon on January 20, 2025, may be filled,
In plain English
This stops the hiring of new federal workers. Some jobs are left out of the freeze.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 208 · the document says
“should”
The memorandum of January 20, 2025 freezes the hiring of federal civilian employees throughout the executive branch from noon that day, so that no position vacant at that moment may be filled and no new position created, whatever the source of an agency's funding. That is a day one halt on hiring into vacant career posts, the route by which the chapter says outgoing political personnel burrow in. Three things break the fit. The freeze does not apply to positions related to national security, which covers much of the agency the chapter is writing about. It expressly does not limit the appointment of noncareer officials. And it names no intelligence agency, being an instruction from the President to all agencies rather than a step taken by the Deputy Director the chapter would have act.
2025-01-20
Action · 90 FR 8249
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order all executive departments and agencies to take the following steps: (1) Do not propose or issue any rule in any manner, including by sending a rule to the Office of the Federal Register (the ``OFR''), until a depa
In plain English
This tells agencies to stop issuing new rules. Rules not yet in force are held back for review.
Recorded against
Closely matches
chapter 13, p. 436 · the document says
“should”
The memorandum of January 20, 2025 freezes rulemaking across all executive departments and agencies, with no exception for the EPA, and its definition of rule goes well beyond notice and comment rulemaking: it reaches guidance documents, notices of inquiry, advance notices, proposed rules, and any agency statement of general applicability and future effect that sets out a policy or an interpretation. That covers the quasi-regulatory actions the chapter names. The fit is not exact. The freeze bars new rules and asks agencies only to consider postponing rules already published, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may exempt any rule deemed necessary for emergencies or other urgent circumstances, and nothing in it reaches back to assessments, determinations or standards issued in earlier years.
2025-01-20
Action · 90 FR 8481
Directs the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, with the Office of Management and Budget, to issue Senior Executive Service performance plans that agencies must adopt within 30 days; directs each agency head to terminate its Executive Resources Board and reconstitute it with senior noncareer officials as a majority, and to reconstitute its Performance Review Board membership.
In plain English
This covers top career staff. OPM must write the plans used to grade them. Political appointees now run the boards that review their work.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 3, p. 74 · the document says
“is essential”
The chapter asks that political executives build policy goals into employee appraisals and supervise those appraisals themselves rather than delegating them. The memorandum puts political appointees in control of the bodies that run senior executive appraisal: clause (d) reconstitutes each agency's Executive Resources Board with senior noncareer officials as a majority, and clause (e) reconstitutes the Performance Review Boards. Two differences. The performance plans themselves are issued centrally by OPM and OMB for agencies to adopt, rather than written by political executives at each agency as the chapter describes. And the memorandum reaches only the Senior Executive Service, while the chapter speaks of employee appraisals without that limit.
Partly matches
chapter 7, p. 214 · the document says
“should”
The memorandum of January 20, 2025 names unauthorized disclosure of executive branch deliberations first among the conduct for which career Senior Executive Service officials should be held accountable, and directs any agency head who becomes aware of such an official to take all appropriate actions, up to and including removal. That answers the firing half of the proposal for senior career officials government wide. It reaches only the Senior Executive Service, not the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and Central Intelligence Agency workforces the chapter names, it concerns disclosure of deliberations rather than of classified information, and it carries none of the rest: no referral for prosecution, no removal of pension benefits, and no bar on retiring while an investigation is open.
2025-01-20
Action · 90 FR 8483
Memorandum for the Secretary of the Treasury[,] the United States Trade Representative[, and] the Permanent Representative of the United States to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development The OECD Global Tax Deal supported under the prior administration not only allows extraterritorial jurisdiction over American income but also limits our Nation's ability to enact tax policies th
In plain English
This pulls the country out of a global tax deal made through the OECD.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 22, p. 698 · the document says
“should”
The memorandum of January 20, 2025 directs the Secretary of the Treasury and the United States Permanent Representative to the OECD to notify the organization that any commitment the previous administration made on the Global Tax Deal has no force or effect in the United States without an act of Congress, and directs Treasury and the Trade Representative to develop options against foreign tax rules that reach American companies extraterritorially. That answers the chapter's objection to a global minimum tax set outside Congress. Where the fit breaks down: the United States remains a member of the OECD and keeps funding it. The memorandum neither withdraws nor ends financial support, and memo-2026-00976, which lists the organizations the United States is to leave, does not include the OECD.
2025-01-20
Action · 90 FR 8333
By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby proclaim: An essential feature of any sovereign nation is the existence of territorial boundaries and the inherent authority to decide who and what may cross those boundaries. The Supreme Court of the United States has
In plain English
This says the country faces an invasion at the southern border. It uses that finding to bar entry there.
Recorded against
Partly matches
chapter 5, p. 152 · the document says
“shall”
The proclamation finds an ongoing invasion at the southern border and, under sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act together with claimed inherent Article II authority, suspends the entry of aliens engaged in it, restricts those aliens from invoking provisions of the Act that would permit their continued presence including the asylum provision at section 208, and directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to repel, repatriate or remove them, none of it through notice and comment. That is close to the substance of the power the chapter drafts. It is not the statute the chapter asks Congress to pass: the determination and the power sit with the President rather than the Secretary, the trigger is an invasion at the southern border rather than a mass migration en route to or arriving off the coast, no countries or places are designated, nothing authorizes waiver of any requirement of Title 8, and because the instrument is a proclamation rather than a rule there is no rulemaking for the Administrative Procedure Act exemption to apply to.
What this tracker does not cover
Executive orders signed on or after January 20, 2025 that bear on a proposal indexed here. Every entry's date, Federal Register citation and URL come from the Federal Register API and are not typed by hand.
- Agency rulemaking. OPM and other agencies have issued rules in this area; none are indexed here yet, so the absence of a rule below is not evidence that none exists.
- Litigation. Challenges have been filed against several of these orders. No court docket is recorded here yet, and a match below says nothing about whether an action survived review.
- Appointments, budget actions, and agency guidance.
- Chapters other than 3. Only chapter 3 is indexed, so an action matching an unindexed chapter does not appear.
