Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Executive Order on Deregulation Issued — President Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order 14192 on January 31, 2025, mandating that for each new federal regulation, at least ten existing regulations must be repealed. This order aims to reduce regulatory burdens and promote economic growth by ensuring that the total incremental cost of new regulations is less than zero. The Office of Management and Budget is tasked with overseeing the implementation and providing guidance to federal agencies.
• Trump issues executive order on deregulation — President Donald Trump issued an executive order titled "Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation" on January 31, 2025. The order mandates that for every new regulation proposed, at least ten existing regulations must be identified for elimination. This initiative aims to reduce the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals, promoting economic growth and national security. The order also sets a regulatory cap for fiscal year 2025, requiring that the total incremental cost of new regulations be significantly less than zero. The Office of Management and Budget is tasked with overseeing the implementation of these directives.
• White House issued executive order establishing 10-for-1 regulatory offset requirement — The White House published an executive order titled "Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation" directing federal agencies to identify and eliminate at least 10 existing regulations for each new regulation proposed or finalized. For fiscal year 2025, the order requires that the total incremental cost of all new regulations be "significantly less than zero." The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is charged with implementation, guidance, and enforcement. The order revokes OMB Circular A-4 (2023) and reinstates the 2003 version, and reinstates a 2018 Treasury-OMB memorandum on tax regulation review.
• White House issues fact sheet on 10-to-1 deregulation executive order — The White House published a fact sheet on January 31, 2025, announcing that President Trump signed an executive order requiring federal agencies to repeal at least 10 existing regulations for each new regulation issued. The order directs the Office of Management and Budget to standardize measurement of regulatory costs and requires that for fiscal year 2025, the total incremental cost of all new regulations be significantly less than zero. The fact sheet claims the Biden Administration imposed $1.7 trillion in regulatory costs and asserts that Trump's first term achieved a 5.5-to-1 repeal ratio.

Supporting reports

• Treasury official resigns over Musk's demands — David Lebryk, a senior Treasury Department official, resigned following Elon Musk's demands for access to sensitive payment systems. Lebryk, a non-political civil servant, had refused Musk's repeated requests for access. His resignation raises concerns about the integrity and independence of federal financial systems.
• Access granted to Treasury Department systems — Reports indicate that Marko Elez, a 25-year-old engineer with previous ties to Elon Musk's companies, has gained direct access to Treasury Department systems that manage significant government payments. This access allows him to potentially alter critical financial operations, raising concerns about the security and integrity of government payment systems. The implications of such access could affect various federal programs, including veterans' benefits and Social Security.

Supporting reports

• Ex-senator Bob Menendez sentenced to 11 years in prison for bribery — Former US Senator Bob Menendez was sentenced to 11 years in prison by US District Judge Sidney Stein in New York City for his 2024 conviction on bribery charges. Menendez was found guilty of accepting bribes, including gold bars, in exchange for political favors for Egypt and New Jersey businessmen. The sentencing follows his conviction on 16 felony charges, including bribery and fraud. Menendez, who served nearly 19 years in the Senate, resigned last August after his conviction. He plans to appeal the sentence.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration offers federal workers resignation deal — On January 27, the Trump administration sent an email titled “Fork in the Road” to federal workers, offering them the option to resign while keeping their pay until September. This move is seen as an attempt to clear positions for loyalists within the federal workforce.
• Trump administration offers buyouts to federal workers — The Trump administration has offered buyouts to nearly all federal employees, encouraging them to resign by February 6, 2025. This move, communicated via an email from the Office of Personnel Management, is part of an effort to significantly reduce the federal workforce. The email outlined new standards for employee conduct and warned of agency downsizing. The offer includes more than seven months' salary for those who choose to resign. Unions and some politicians have criticized the move, arguing it pressures workers to leave and could disrupt federal programs.
• Trump administration offers mass resignation to federal workers — The Trump administration, through the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM), sent an email to nearly 3 million federal employees offering them "deferred resignations" effective at the end of September. The email warned that those who choose to stay might face layoffs or reassignment. This move, linked to efforts by Elon Musk to downsize federal agencies, has been criticized for its potential impact on government services and its questionable legality. The offer excludes postal and military service members and those in immigration enforcement and national security roles.
• Trump administration issues "deferred resignation" offer to federal employees — The Trump administration has issued a "deferred resignation" offer to 2 million federal employees, allowing them to resign effective September 30, 2025, while remaining exempt from in-person work requirements until then. This offer is not a "buyout," as it does not guarantee a lump sum payment. Instead, employees may be placed on paid administrative leave, but this is not assured. The offer has been criticized for potentially violating federal law, which caps voluntary resignation incentives at $25,000, and for misleadingly being described as a severance offer by Elon Musk.
• Trump proposes buyout for federal employees — The Trump administration proposed an inducement for federal employees to resign, which was reportedly sent without approval from the White House, leading to confusion and frustration among federal workers.

Supporting reports

• Trump administration halts federal grants and loans — On January 27, the Trump administration ordered a pause on all federal government grants and loans, requiring that they ban diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This directive affects a wide range of federal programs and funding.
• Trump freezes federal grants, loans, and payments — President Trump ordered an immediate freeze on federal grants, loans, and payments to millions of Americans, citing a need to review their appropriateness and potential ties to DEI initiatives. This action, which affects funds previously allocated by Congress, has been criticized as illegal under the 1974 Impound Control Act. The freeze has caused widespread confusion and concern, with reports of Medicaid portals being down nationwide and various federal programs in disarray.
• Trump administration freezes federal funding for DEI and environmental programs — The Trump administration announced a freeze on federal grants targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and environmental initiatives, described as "illegal DEI programs" and "green new scam" initiatives. This funding pause, set to activate on the evening of January 28, 2025, could impact trillions of dollars in grants and loans, affecting programs such as school meals for low-income students and wildfire preparedness. The Office of Management and Budget has requested details from federal agencies about over 2,600 programs that could be affected.
• White House rescinds spending freeze on federal loans and grants — The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rescinded a policy that temporarily paused federal loans and grants, reversing a decision made earlier in the week. This policy had initially halted funding for various programs, including Medicaid. The rescission followed a federal judge's restraining order against the funding freeze, which was issued due to conflicting messages from the White House. Despite the rescission, the White House press secretary stated that the executive orders on federal funding remain in effect.
• Trump administration memo orders freeze on federal financial assistance — The Trump administration issued a memo directing federal agencies to freeze the disbursement of all federal financial assistance, effective January 30, 2025. The memo, authored by acting OMB Director Matthew J. Vaeth, requires agencies to submit detailed information about their financial assistance programs by February 10, 2025. The freeze will remain until the Office of Management and Budget reviews and approves each program. The memo excludes direct assistance to individuals, such as Social Security and Medicare. The stated purpose is to prevent federal resources from advancing certain policies deemed wasteful by the administration.
• Trump administration rescinds federal funding freeze memo — The Trump administration rescinded a memo that froze federal funding after it caused widespread chaos and legal challenges. The initial freeze had paused federal grants and loans, affecting public programs and government spending.
• Case update — National Council of Nonprofits v. Office of Management and Budget (D.D.C.) 1:25-cv-00239 — The Government submitted a Notice that the OMB had rescinded the challenged memo. On the same day, the White House Press Secretary stated , “This is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The President's EO's on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
• Case update — State of New York v. Trump (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00039 — The Government submitted a notice that the OMB had rescinded the challenged memo. On the same day, the White House Press Secretary stated , “This is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The President's EO's on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”
• Trump administration sued over funding freeze — The Trump administration faced a lawsuit from multiple states over a funding freeze memo. Despite rescinding the memo, the administration argued in court for the lawsuit's dismissal. However, a judge ordered the release of funds, citing conflicting statements from the administration's press secretary, which suggested the freeze was still in effect.
• Reports of Medicaid portal outages following funding freeze — Following the Trump administration's memo to freeze federal financial assistance, reports emerged of Medicaid portal outages across all 50 states. Senator Ron Wyden confirmed the outages, describing them as a "blatant attempt to rip away health insurance from millions of Americans." The White House attributed the outages to technical issues, but the Medicaid website cited delays due to executive orders on grant payments. Medicaid provides health insurance to nearly a fifth of all Americans.
• Trump administration freezes federal funding — The Trump administration announced a freeze on all federal funding and grants, claiming it would ensure the removal of "Marxist" diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This decision affects various programs, including Meals on Wheels and Medicaid, which are essential for many Americans. The Office of Management and Budget later issued a memo to rescind the freeze, but the press secretary contradicted this, indicating the cuts were still in effect. The situation has led to significant public outcry and legal scrutiny.
• Trump issues executive order freezing government grants — Former President Trump issued an executive order freezing government grants, which was described as illegal and a direct assault on congressional authority. The order was rescinded after two days due to public outrage and pressure from lawmakers. The freeze caused significant disruption and uncertainty for millions of Americans dependent on government benefits and payments. The swift public and political response highlighted the power of civic engagement in countering executive overreach.
• Trump’s administration freezes federal grants — The Office of Management and Budget under Trump sent out a memo freezing all federal grants and loans without prior approval from the White House, leading to concerns about a constitutional crisis.
• Court issues injunction against Trump Administration — U.S. District Court Judge Jack McConnell issued an injunction against the Trump Administration, preventing it from impounding federal funds intended for states. The court found that the Executive's pause in disbursement of federal funding would cause irreparable harm to states' ability to provide vital services. The injunction ensures that federal financial assistance to states remains uninterrupted.
• Preliminary injunction ruling — State of New York v. Trump (D.R.I.) 1:25-cv-00039 — Judge McConnell issued a temporary restraining order against the OMB policy to allow the states to file their motion for a preliminary injunction. Judge McConnell's order notes that the case is not moot because “the alleged rescission of the OMB Directive was in name only and may have been issued simply to defeat the jurisdiction of the courts.” The judge also wrote, "the States are likely to succeed on the merits of some, if not all, their claims."

Supporting reports

• Eric Adams faces federal indictment for corruption — Eric Adams, the Mayor of New York City, has been indicted on federal corruption charges. The indictment alleges that Adams accepted bribes and illegal campaign contributions from foreign sources. These charges were filed in September, and Adams has pleaded not guilty. The indictment has raised questions about his ability to effectively lead the city, especially as he is also running for re-election. The trial is scheduled to begin in April, and Adams has defended his actions, claiming political targeting by the Biden administration.