Deborah Pearlstein, a constitutional law expert and Director of the Program in Law and Public Policy at Princeton University, dives into Trump’s bold executive actions on his inauguration day. She critiques whether these moves were substantive governance changes or mere spectacles for his supporters. The discussion highlights the implications of Trump's executive orders on birthright citizenship and environmental policies, while also examining the evolving role of advocacy and the judiciary in shaping these controversial policies.
Trump's first day executive orders appeared more as political theater than substantive policy changes, raising questions about their effectiveness.
His controversial measures on immigration and environmental policies sparked immediate legal challenges, highlighting the transient nature of executive actions.
Deep dives
Trump's Executive Orders: A Display of Power
On his first day in office, President Trump engaged in a series of executive orders that were characterized more as a media spectacle than substantive legal change. Much of this was performed in front of an enthusiastic crowd, reminiscent of a campaign rally, where he highlighted his withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and rolled back numerous Biden-era orders. Constitutional law expert Deborah Pearlstein noted that the language of these orders appeared decisive but ultimately served more as 'legal theater' rather than having a significant impact on policy. Many of the actions signed could easily be reversed by subsequent administrations, highlighting the transient nature of executive powers.
Impact of Immigration Executive Orders
Trump's executive orders included controversial measures aimed at immigration, notably challenging birthright citizenship and altering the processes for seeking asylum. The proposed changes suggested that citizenship would not automatically be granted to children of undocumented immigrants born in the U.S., setting the stage for legal battles as organizations like the ACLU swiftly filed lawsuits against these moves. Additionally, limitations on asylum seekers at the border raised concerns about violations of both U.S. and international law. These directives not only change legal interpretations but also instilled fear within immigrant communities, potentially affecting millions.
Environmental and Legal Challenges Ahead
The podcast also examined Trump's environmental executive orders, specifically the halt of funding for climate-related initiatives mandated by the previous administration. By pausing the disbursement of congressionally appropriated funds, Trump aimed to undermine environmental protections while promoting energy exploration on federal lands. However, the long-term effectiveness of these orders is questionable as courts may challenge their legality, especially given the established history of litigation surrounding similar issues. Ultimately, the ability of these orders to enact lasting change depends heavily on legal interpretations and can lead to drawn-out court battles.
On the day he was inaugurated, Donald Trump set about signing executive orders on birthright citizenship, the TikTok ban, and withdrawing from various international bodies, treaties and accords. Has he shown up to test out the awesome powers of the executive branch—or was he just showing off for his fans?
Guest: Deborah Pearlstein, Director, Program in Law and Public Policy and Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor in Law and Public Affairs at Princeton.
Want more What Next? Join Slate Plus to unlock full, ad-free access to What Next and all your other favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the What Next show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.
Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme and Rob Gunther.