Trump’s Executive Orders: Part Governing, Part Performance

James Kelly

He/Him

News Editor

1/28/25

In just the first week of his second term, Donald Trump signed 62 executive actions. The executive orders, proclamations, and memos made headlines as they seek changes in federal policy, but their actual effect is more complicated.

Executive orders are directions from a President that instruct the federal bureaucracy how to interpret and enforce laws, according to John Lappie, a political science professor at Plymouth State University who specializes in American government and elections. In that regard, executive orders are fairly limited because they must exist within the scope of already existing policy.

“Because the laws are a little vague, or there might be details that need to be fleshed out about implementation, the President can basically issue a directive saying ‘here is how you are going to do it,’ or, ‘here is how you are going to interpret this,’” Lappie said. “But it has to have some logical connection to how the law is written, or else it is illegal.”

Many of Trump’s executive orders, however, step beyond the traditional – and potentially legal – bounds of what an executive order can do. Already, Trump is facing lawsuits against executive orders targeting birthright citizenship and federal diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.

To some extent, the very notion of an executive order seems at odds with the ethos of a country founded in opposition to monarchy, with a constitution that grants most governmental powers to Congress. But the early federal bureaucracy was tiny, so executive orders were necessarily unremarkable. “We didn’t have a navy. We didn’t have Social Security, Medicare, TSA, or any of that stuff,” Lappie said. “So, what could you do with executive orders?”

Now that the Federal Government is much larger, executive orders have more power. And since Congress is increasingly dysfunctional, Presidents rely more and more on executive action to govern.

That’s not always a sustainable way to govern, though. “If you get your policy agenda done through executive order, it’s kind of like building a house on a foundation of sand,” Lappie said. “When the tide comes in, i.e. the next party takes over, then everything you did goes away.” Indeed, much of Trump’s first day in office was spent undoing Biden-era executive orders. Likewise, much of Biden’s first day was spent undoing executive orders from the first Trump term. Modern presidents seem to know that though, and it has motivated what Lappie describes as a more symbolic style of governing. 

Many of Trump’s executive actions really do impact Americans, including his pausing of federal financial assistance, hiring freeze, efforts to make legal immigration more difficult, firing of Inspectors General, commitment to fossil fuels, and tariffs. At the same time, executive orders have evolved so that one of their functions is that of a marketing tool. 

Take Trump’s executive order denying citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants, for instance. The order has prompted lawsuits from numerous states and advocacy groups, who argue it violates the 14th Amendment. Already, a federal judge has called the order “blatantly unconstitutional” and temporarily blocked the Trump administration from implementing it. “I’ve been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is,” the judge said.

The 14th Amendment grants citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” an apparently direct contradiction to Trump’s executive order. Trump probably knew that, Lappie suggested, but decided it was nonetheless politically worthwhile.  This strategy of throwing executive action against the wall, even if you know it won’t stick, is not unique to Trump; Biden’s attempts to declare the Equal Rights Amendment law and to forgive student loan debt through executive action were also unlikely.

“That was… always going to get struck down by the courts, and Biden knew that. His administration knew that,” Lappie said. “But it was a way for him to say, ‘hey, look, I tried to do something about student loan debt,’ even though he knew it would get struck down.”

Likewise, “Trump can say, ‘hey, look, I tried,’” Lappie said. Now, along with the growing influence of social media on politics, the theatrics of executive orders seem to matter as much as their substance. “Politics has become increasingly more performative. It’s about winning the battle on Twitter… winning the battle in the media,” Lappie said. And because so many Americans are low information voters, those performances have a significant effect. 

“Sometimes those voters think something actually happened when it didn’t. I met a lot of people who think that Donald Trump, in his first presidency, built the wall. He did not.” Lappie said. “There are probably people who think Donald Trump got rid of birthright citizenship when, no, he didn’t… Some people probably still think that Joe Biden got rid of student loan debt when he did not.”

Still, Donald Trump is serving his second and, save a constitutional amendment, final term. Beyond the 2026 midterms, Trump does not have much to gain electorally through executive posturing – at least, not in the way a President in his first term does. Instead, Lappie suggests Trump’s wave of executive actions are about his legacy. “I’m not entirely convinced [he cares about midterms]. But, if he wants some policy legacy, he doesn’t have a lot of time, because he basically has one year,” Lappie said. “Congress does not like doing controversial legislation in midterm years… so anything controversial will be in 2025.” Whatever sweeping changes Trump wants to implement throughout his Presidency, he’ll be doing it this year, as quick as he can. After midterms, all the attention turns to the presidential election, and Trump will be a true lame duck.