President Donald Trump has used executive orders to push through his policy agenda, issuing nearly 90 in just two months. While supporters view his approach as decisive leadership in the face of legislative gridlock, his heavy reliance on executive action has drawn criticism from opponents who argue he is bypassing Congress and overstepping presidential authority.
Why It Matters
President Trump’s aggressive use of executive orders in his second term underscores his reliance on unilateral action to implement policies. His administration has swiftly reshaped federal policies on immigration, trade and healthcare. While these actions allow for rapid policy shifts, they also have provoked significant legal battles and could strain relations with Congress and lead to reversals by future administrations.
What to Know
As of March 14, Trump has signed 89 executive orders in his second term, according to the Federal Register. This significantly surpasses the 17 executive orders he had issued by the same point in his first term.
These executive orders have addressed a broad range of policy areas, including imposing tariffs that has escalated trade tensions and provoked retaliatory measures from foreign governments. His executive orders have also tightened immigration policies through increased border enforcement measures and rolled back healthcare regulations enacted under the previous administration.
In contrast, former President Joe Biden, issued 37 executive orders during the same period of his term and 162 total while he was in office. Many of Biden’s orders focused on reversing policies from the previous Trump administration, addressing climate change and managing the COVID-19 pandemic.
More
Anna Moneymaker / Staff/Getty Images
Trump’s recent executive orders have sparked multiple legal challenges. According to the Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions at justsecurity.org, lawsuits have been filed against orders affecting immigration, citizenship policies, LGBTQ+ rights and diversity programs.
A federal court recently blocked an order revoking birthright citizenship, while civil rights groups have challenged executive actions targeting gender-affirming care and workplace diversity measures.
Gene Healy, senior vice president for policy at the Cato Institute told Newsweek while undoing previous executive orders is relatively standard, Trump’s approach goes beyond precedent, testing the limits of executive authority.
His decision to suspend a congressionally approved TikTok ban, for instance, has been framed as an attempt to override both legislative and judicial authority. Healy also notes Trump’s use of emergency economic powers to impose broad tariffs on allies and major trade partners is seen as an unprecedented stretch of executive authority, with the potential to destabilize markets.
What People Are Saying
Karoline Leavitt, White House press secretary, stated in a February 20 press briefing: “The President has already signed 73 executive orders. That is more than double the number signed by Joe Biden and more than quadruple the number signed by Barack Obama over the same period. These executive orders have ended burdensome regulations; sealed the border; unleashed our domestic energy sector; eliminated divisive DEI from our federal government; stopped the weaponization of government; cut waste, fraud, and abuse; reinstituted ‘America First’ trade and foreign policies; and ultimately restored common sense.”
Gene Healy, senior vice president for policy at the Cato Institute, told Newsweek: “…Donald Trump didn’t invent the Imperial Presidency, but he’s quite comfortable wielding the powers it brings. In terms of testing the limits, there are a number of EOs where President Trump is effectively claiming a George-W.-Bush-style royal prerogative to ignore or rewrite the law. One is the suspension of the TikTok ban. He’s essentially nullified a law that Congress passed with broad majorities and the Supreme Court upheld 9-0.
…Then there’s the executive-power grab currently roiling the markets: Trump’s attempt to convert the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 into a trade-war weapon. No president before Trump had ever used it for across-the-board tariffs on allies and major trading partners.
Even if you like the policies a particular president adopts, taking a longer view, it’s insane that the president gets to decide what kind of car you can buy, who gets to use the girls’ locker room, and how much water flows through your toilet.
It’s not new to have certain policies flip when the presidency changes parties, but 30 years ago they were pretty small stakes. When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, for example, he reversed two Reagan-Bush EOs: one on foreign aid and abortion; and another requiring federal contractors to post a notice telling their employees they weren’t required to join a union.
Now it’s everything from whether you can use plastic straws to whether we’ll have a trade war with Canada. “Elections have consequences,” but do we want them to be quite so consequential? Should everything turn on which party manages to seize the presidency?”
What Happens Next
The ongoing use of executive orders by President Trump in his second term is expected to continue shaping federal policies across various sectors. However, the legal challenges already emerging suggest that the judiciary will play a crucial role in determining the validity and implementation of these orders.
