Blog

A helpful way to think about the “Mandate for Leadership”—the radical policy blueprint laid out as part of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025—is as a kind of “political time capsule” reflecting the world as conservatives saw it in April 2023, when the document was first published. Bearing this in mind is important, because that world was very different from the one 19 months later, when President Donald Trump secured his reelection—or even the one on his second Inauguration Day, nearly two years after the mandate was released.

Since our last update (April 21), we have seen some important developments regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. So far, three resolutions have become law and four more have cleared both chambers. Although we have not received any information that these will be sent to the president’s desk in the coming days, we continue to monitor their status as they could soon be on the move. The most consequential development is the announcement that House Republicans will press ahead and vote on three resolutions that target waivers granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the state of California to develop vehicle emissions guidelines.

On April 23, the Trump administration formally published a rulemaking proposal in the Federal Register that would lay the legal groundwork for creating a new category of civil service personnel called “Schedule Policy/Career” — better known as “Schedule F.” Long anticipated, this policy would strip civil service employees of century-old employment protections, effectively making them “at will” employees, much like a president’s political appointees.

Since our last update (April 7), we have seen some important developments regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. In addition to the two resolutions signed into law on March 15 (easing protections that will mostly benefit the fossil fuel industry), one more resolution has become law.

During the night of April 9, President Donald Trump continued his administration’s radical assault on our nation’s critical system of regulatory safeguards with three new executive orders and a separate memorandum. These actions build on several previous ones that target regulatory safeguards, and they traffic in a lot of the same false rhetoric about the essential role our regulatory system plays in our society. But what makes these actions different is the manner in which they trample on administrative law and the procedural protections that it is meant to uphold.

Since our last update (March 31), we have seen some movement regarding CRA resolutions. There have been no new resolutions signed into law (only two so far), but two more resolutions have cleared both chambers, so we can expect a signature from the president soon.

As the authors of a book that argues that a combination of government and markets has built a country truest to its fundamental political values, we see plans to radically downsize government as a contradiction of the historical evidence. As our book relates, the country has established a web of laws that interact with markets to build up our infrastructure, protect people, and help the most vulnerable among us.

Since our last update (March 18), we have seen some small changes regarding CRA resolutions. There have been no new resolutions signed into law (only two so far), and there are now seven resolutions that have passed one chamber. This means that in addition to the six resolutions that had already cleared one chamber (you can see our previous update for a detailed description of those resolutions), there have been votes on four other resolutions.

On February 25, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued an interim final rule (IFR) rescinding the CEQ regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). On March 27, we submitted a comment, along with 25 other professors, identifying the severe challenges this rescission will create for critical infrastructure projects and other important federal activities.