Since returning to office on January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump has used executive orders as his primary governing tool, and the Trump executive orders of his second term now number more than 250, spanning immigration, trade, energy, diversity programs, gender policy, the federal workforce, and emerging technology. Courts have blocked or narrowed many of them. The Supreme Court struck down his signature tariff program, upheld other actions on emergency motions, and is scheduled to decide the birthright citizenship question in 2026.1The American Presidency Project. Executive Orders
The Pace and Scale
Through March 2026, Trump issued 252 numbered executive orders, an annualized pace of roughly 214 per year. His first term averaged 55 per year. Biden averaged 41. Obama averaged 35. Before this term, the last president to exceed 100 executive orders in a single first year was Harry Truman in 1945.2Pew Research Center. Trump Has Already Issued More Executive Orders in His Second Term Than in His First
The first day set the tone. Rather than one or two signature priorities, Trump signed dozens of orders, memorandums, and proclamations simultaneously across immigration, energy, government operations, and civil rights. He also pardoned roughly 1,500 January 6 defendants and commuted sentences for 14 others.3NPR. Trump Inauguration Executive Orders 2025 Day 1
Immigration and Border Enforcement
Immigration is the single largest category and the most heavily litigated. Executive Order 14165, “Securing Our Borders,” directed the Defense and Homeland Security departments to build physical barriers, deploy personnel, and reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols, commonly known as “Remain in Mexico,” across all southern border sectors.4The American Presidency Project. Executive Order 14165, Securing Our Borders A companion order, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” expanded expedited removal, established Homeland Security Task Forces in every state, and threatened to cut federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions.5The White House. Protecting the American People Against Invasion
Birthright Citizenship
Executive Order 14160 directed federal agencies to deny citizenship, passports, and Social Security numbers to children born in the United States to parents who are undocumented or present under temporary legal authorization.6Brennan Center for Justice. Birthright Citizenship Under the U.S. Constitution Federal judges in Washington, Maryland, and Massachusetts blocked it immediately.7SCOTUSblog. Where Does Birthright Citizenship Order Currently Stand
The case reached the Supreme Court as Trump v. CASA, Inc., where a 6-3 majority written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett held that federal courts lack authority to issue universal or nationwide injunctions. The Court did not address the constitutionality of the order itself; it sent the cases back with instructions to narrow injunctions to the specific parties.8Supreme Court of the United States. Trump v. CASA, Inc. On remand, District Judge Joseph Laplante certified a class action and issued a class-based injunction that continues to block the order. Oral arguments on the underlying constitutional question are scheduled for April 1, 2026, with a decision expected by late June or early July 2026.6Brennan Center for Justice. Birthright Citizenship Under the U.S. Constitution
The Alien Enemies Act
On March 15, 2025, Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to authorize removal of Venezuelan nationals the administration designated as members of the gang Tren de Aragua. In A.A.R.P. v. Trump, the Supreme Court held in an unsigned May 2025 opinion that the roughly 24 hours of notice the government had been giving detainees, without instructions on how to contest removal, was constitutionally inadequate. The Court blocked further removals while the Fifth Circuit sorted out procedural requirements. Only Justices Alito and Thomas dissented.9Supreme Court of the United States. A.A.R.P. v. Trump
In September 2025, a Fifth Circuit panel ruled 2-1 that the administration had improperly invoked the Act because there was no evidence of an “invasion or predatory incursion,” the statutory prerequisite. Judge Leslie Southwick, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote the majority opinion.10Al Jazeera. US Appeals Court Blocks Trump Use of Alien Enemies Act in Deportation Drive The case is expected to return to the Supreme Court.
Tariffs and Trade
Beginning in February 2025, the administration imposed tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, China, and eventually most of the world’s trading nations, citing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and declaring a national emergency on April 2, 2025.11Office of the United States Trade Representative. Presidential Tariff Actions
In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, decided February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that IEEPA does not grant the President authority to impose tariffs. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority, joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson on the core holding. The Court emphasized that the power to tax, including through tariffs, belongs to Congress under Article I, and that IEEPA’s 50-year history included no precedent for using it to set trade duties. A plurality applied the major questions doctrine, reasoning that such an extraordinary delegation of a core congressional power of the purse requires unmistakably clear statutory authorization. Justice Kavanaugh, joined by Thomas and Alito, dissented.12Supreme Court of the United States. Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
The ruling invalidated all IEEPA-based tariffs at a stroke. That same day, Trump signed an executive order ceasing collection and pivoted to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, issuing a proclamation imposing a 10% temporary surcharge on most imports, effective February 24 through July 24, 2026. The proclamation exempted critical minerals, energy products, pharmaceuticals, vehicles and aerospace products, and goods from Canada and Mexico covered by the USMCA.13The White House. Imposing a Temporary Import Surcharge to Address Fundamental International Payments Problems
The surcharge faced quick legal challenge. On May 7, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 that it was “invalid” and “unauthorized by law,” finding current economic conditions do not meet Section 122’s requirement of “large and serious balance-of-payments deficits.” The ruling applied only to the specific plaintiffs (the State of Washington, Burlap and Barrel, Inc., and Basic Fun, Inc.), and the government continues collecting the tariff from everyone else while an appeal proceeds.14American Society of International Law. The U.S. Court of International Trade Invalidates Trump’s 10% Global Tariff
Tariffs imposed under other statutory authorities were not affected. Section 301 tariffs covering steel, aluminum, automobiles, semiconductors, and other goods, and Section 232 tariffs, remain in force.15Sidley Austin LLP. US Supreme Court Issues International Emergency Economic Powers Act Tariff Decision
Energy and Climate
The executive order titled “Unleashing American Energy,” signed January 20, 2025, revoked 12 Biden-era orders on climate and environmental protection and established a federal policy prioritizing fossil fuel production on public lands and waters. It disbanded the interagency working group that calculated the social cost of carbon, directed the Council on Environmental Quality to propose rescinding its NEPA regulations to speed permitting, paused disbursement of Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funds pending review, and terminated the American Climate Corps. The Secretary of Energy was directed to restart reviews of liquefied natural gas export applications.16The White House. Unleashing American Energy
Trump also declared a national energy emergency, the first president to do so, to accelerate pipelines, refineries, and mines, and opened areas including wilderness land in Alaska for drilling. He ordered regulations promoting electric vehicles repealed, halted new wind farm approvals on federal waters, and withdrew the United States from the Paris climate agreement.17The New York Times. Trump Emergency Oil Gas
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Executive Order 14151 directed agencies to terminate all DEI offices, positions, equity plans, and related contractor and grantee performance requirements within 60 days. Executive Order 14173 went further. It rescinded Executive Order 11246, the longstanding affirmative action requirement for federal contractors, and required funding recipients to certify they operate no illegal DEI programs, with compliance defined as material to government payment decisions. That framing potentially subjects violators to False Claims Act prosecution. The Attorney General was instructed to identify up to nine potential civil compliance investigations per agency targeting large corporations, nonprofits, universities, and professional associations.18The White House. Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing In March 2026, a further order required all federal contractors to include anti-DEI contract clauses, with noncompliance potentially triggering contract cancellation and False Claims Act liability.19The White House. Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors
The legal picture is mixed. A Maryland federal court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against three provisions of EO 14173 in February 2025, finding the certification and enforcement threat provisions likely violated the First and Fifth Amendments. The Fourth Circuit vacated that injunction in February 2026, holding the plaintiffs’ facial challenges were disfavored while leaving as-applied challenges available.20Jackson Lewis. Fourth Circuit Vacates Preliminary Injunction Against Trump DEI EOs In National Urban League v. Trump, Judge Timothy Kelly denied an injunction, noting that the False Claims Act “does not create liability for good-faith but mistaken beliefs that DEI programs comply with federal law.”21Seyfarth Shaw LLP. Federal Court Declines to Block DEI Executive Orders Cases in Illinois, California, and Washington remain on appeal, leaving contractors and grantees uncertain about what diversity-related activities are permissible.
Gender Identity and the Military
Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism,” defined sex as an “immutable biological classification as either male or female,” directed agencies to remove policies “inculcating gender ideology,” and instructed the Attorney General to clarify that Title VII does not require gender identity-based access to single-sex spaces.
A separate order signed January 27, 2025, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” revoked a Biden-era order allowing transgender individuals to serve openly and characterized gender dysphoria as inconsistent with military readiness standards.22The White House. Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness The Defense Department implemented a policy in February 2025 generally disqualifying anyone with a current or prior diagnosis of gender dysphoria or who has undergone related medical treatment.23SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Allows Trump to Ban Transgender People From Military A lawsuit was filed the day after the order was signed on behalf of six active-duty service members and two prospective enlistees.24NPR. Trump Executive Order Transgender Military District Judge Benjamin Settle characterized the policy as a “de facto blanket ban” and blocked it. On May 6, 2025, the Supreme Court paused that injunction in an unsigned order, allowing the ban to take effect while the appeal proceeds in the Ninth Circuit. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson indicated they would have left the injunction in place.
The Federal Workforce: DOGE and Schedule Policy/Career
On Inauguration Day, Trump established the Department of Government Efficiency by renaming the U.S. Digital Service and creating DOGE Teams of engineers, HR specialists, and attorneys inside every agency. Agency heads were required to give DOGE “full and prompt access to all unclassified agency records, software systems, and IT systems.”25The White House. Establishing and Implementing the President’s Department of Government Efficiency A February 2025 follow-up order directed large-scale reductions in force, prioritizing elimination of functions not mandated by statute, with DEI offices singled out.26The White House. Implementing the President’s DOGE Workforce Optimization Initiative
On June 3, 2026, Trump signed an executive order reclassifying approximately 8,000 high-ranking career federal employees, primarily GS-15 and senior-leader positions, into a new category called Schedule Policy/Career. Affected employees include agency division heads, chiefs of staff, program managers, regulation drafters, and senior public affairs officers. They became effectively at-will: fireable without cause and stripped of the right to appeal adverse actions before the Merit Systems Protection Board.27NPR. Trump Federal Employees Civil Service Job Protections Schedule F OPM Director Scott Kupor framed it as an accountability measure. OPM had previously estimated that up to 50,000 positions could eventually be reclassified.28Government Executive. Trump Federal Employees Schedule F
Federal employee unions challenged the policy immediately. PEER et al. v. Trump, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, consolidates claims by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, AFGE, AFSCME, and the AFL-CIO. Plaintiffs allege the reclassification exceeds presidential authority, violates the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act and the Administrative Procedures Act, and strips employees of due process protections.29Democracy Forward. Public Service Organizations and Unions File Updated Legal Challenge The case is pending, and observers expect it will reach the Supreme Court.
Federal Funding Freezes
Shortly after inauguration, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo ordering a temporary pause on nearly all federal financial assistance, a freeze that affected over $3 trillion in congressionally appropriated funds for healthcare, education, public safety, and other services.30Jurist. US Appeals Court Blocks Trump Administration Federal Agency Funding Freeze The administration separately froze $4 billion in foreign aid, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio ordering a review of all State Department and USAID assistance programs.
A lawsuit by 22 state attorneys general produced a First Circuit ruling in March 2026 finding the domestic pause likely unlawful. Chief Judge David Barron wrote that OMB had “directed the agency defendants to freeze such funds without considering an obvious aspect of the problem — namely, the reliance interests of the recipients.”30Jurist. US Appeals Court Blocks Trump Administration Federal Agency Funding Freeze On the foreign aid side, the Supreme Court in September 2025 allowed the freeze to continue, accepting the administration’s argument that the Impoundment Control Act limited challengers’ ability to sue. Justice Kagan, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson, dissented, warning the Court’s order would “prevent the funds from reaching their intended recipients — not just now but (because of their impending expiration) for all time.”31SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Withhold Billions in Foreign Aid Funding
Sanctions on Law Firms
Among the more unusual actions were orders targeting specific law firms (Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey) with sanctions including disqualification from government contracts and restrictions on their employees’ access to government buildings. Every federal court that reviewed the orders found them unconstitutional. Judge John Bates in May 2025 struck down the order targeting Jenner & Block as retaliatory, calling it “null and void.”32Mass Lawyers Weekly. DOJ Abandons Defense of Orders Targeting Law Firms On March 2, 2026, the Justice Department dropped its consolidated appeals in the D.C. Circuit without explanation, effectively making permanent the lower court rulings blocking all four orders.33ACLU. ACLU Comment on the Trump Administration Dropping Its Defense of Law Firm Sanctions
Quantum Computing and Cryptographic Security
On June 22, 2026, Trump signed two executive orders on quantum computing. Executive Order 14413, “Ushering in the Next Frontier of Quantum Innovation,” established a national quantum computing development effort, directed the Department of Energy to house at least one quantum computer for scientific research, expanded counterintelligence protections for the domestic quantum ecosystem, and directed the National Science Foundation to create workforce development institutes.34The White House. Ushering in the Next Frontier of Quantum Innovation
Its companion, Executive Order 14412, mandates a government-wide transition to post-quantum cryptography to counter adversaries harvesting encrypted data now for decryption by future quantum computers. Federal agencies must transition all high-value assets and high-impact systems to NIST-approved post-quantum standards for key establishment by December 31, 2030, and for digital signatures by the end of 2031. Federal contractors face parallel requirements, and NIST must complete a migration pilot project by the end of 2027.35The White House. Securing the Nation Against Advanced Cryptographic Attacks36Federal News Network. White House PQC Order Lights a Fire Under Post-Quantum Transition
Where the Courts Stand
The litigation volume is unprecedented. As of June 2026, the Just Security litigation tracker cataloged 803 legal challenges to Trump administration executive actions, with plaintiffs winning 262 cases including temporary and permanent blocks, the government winning 126, and 360 awaiting rulings.37Just Security. Tracker: Litigation and Legal Challenges to the Trump Administration Mandatory immigration detention alone generated a striking number: by late November 2025, at least 225 judges had ruled in over 700 individual cases that the policy likely violated due process rights.
The Supreme Court handled at least 24 emergency-docket cases in 2025 alone, siding with the administration in 20. Those stays covered reductions in the federal workforce, termination of Temporary Protected Status for Venezuelans, revocation of parole for nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, military exclusion of transgender individuals, deportations to South Sudan, firing of agency officials, reinstatement of federal grants, ICE stop-and-frisk procedures, and passport gender documentation.38SCOTUSblog. Looking Back at 2025: The Supreme Court and the Trump Administration The tariff decision in Learning Resources, together with the pending birthright citizenship argument in April 2026, mark the moments where the Court has been willing to reach the underlying legal questions rather than just decide who gets to keep enforcing what while the litigation continues.