Trump Signs Executive Order to Curb Regulations
FIRST ON FOX: President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order on Wednesday that mandates federal agencies to scrutinize their regulations for potential constitutional violations. This initiative reflects Trump’s administration ongoing pursuit to reduce government bureaucracy and increase accountability.
New Executive Order Details
Dubbed as a groundbreaking move by senior administration officials, the order aims to bolster protections against governmental overreach. It will require federal agencies to compile a comprehensive report of regulations that may infringe upon constitutional rights or pose potential harm to citizens. This inventory is to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) within a 60-day timeframe.
Oversight of this process will be jointly handled by OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and the recently established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). These entities will work collaboratively to assess the regulations across all federal agencies.
Implementation Timeline
Under this new framework, officials at DOGE will begin acquiring an inventory related to constitutional violations from various federal agencies. Following the 60-day reporting period, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will examine this list, identify unconstitutional regulations, and initiate a case-by-case repeal process as necessary.
The Context of the Order
This executive order aligns with recent judicial trends. The U.S. Supreme Court has recently curtailed federal agencies’ expansive interpretations of their own regulatory authority. Notably, in May 2023, the Court ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the case of Sackett v. EPA, a landmark decision that has implications for regulatory enforcement nationwide.
Case Study: Sackett v. EPA
The case involved Mike and Chantell Sackett, who purchased a plot of land in Priest Lake, Idaho, in 2005 with plans to build a house. As they began their construction, the EPA intervened, claiming that the land was situated on federally protected wetlands under the Clean Water Act of 1972. This designation threatened the Sacketts with substantial fines unless they halted their construction activities.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, in the majority opinion, expressed concern over the EPA’s classification of the wetlands on the Sackett property as “waters of the United States.” He articulated that the Clean Water Act should only govern “relatively permanent, standing, or continuously flowing bodies of water,” a significant narrowing of the EPA’s regulatory scope.
A Pattern of Deregulation
The executive order aligns with a series of deregulation efforts initiated by the Trump administration during his initial term. These initiatives included a previous executive order from January that required federal agencies to eliminate two regulations for every new one introduced. Trump boasted at the World Economic Forum on January 23 of launching “the largest deregulatory campaign in history, far exceeding even the record-setting efforts of my last term.”
During his first term, Trump’s administration claimed to have successfully cut an average of five and a half regulations for every new regulation implemented. This aggressive regulatory rollback aimed to diminish the constraints faced by businesses and provide a more favorable economic environment.
Future Implications
As Trump prepares to sign this new order, it underscores his administration’s commitment to ongoing deregulation and aims to reinforce the notion that government should not be weaponized against American citizens. With the emphasis on scrutinizing and eliminating regulations that overreach constitutional bounds, Trump’s administration hopes to not only curtail unnecessary regulatory burdens but also enhance individual rights.
Conclusion
This executive order is poised to be a key component of Trump’s broader strategy to streamline federal regulation and enhance government accountability. By enforcing an administration-wide evaluation of regulatory frameworks, the potential exists for significant changes in how laws and regulations are applied, as well as an increased advocacy for personal freedoms and reduced government intervention in American lives.
