Project 2025 is a conservative policy blueprint compiled by the Heritage Foundation and former Trump officials to radically reshape the federal government in a second Trump term¹. Since President Donald Trump’s inauguration on January 20, 2025, his administration has moved swiftly to implement this roadmap. Dozens of executive orders, personnel appointments, and agency overhauls have been rolled out in the opening weeks, aiming to replace longstanding governmental frameworks with right-wing ideals according to critics². This report provides an in-depth analysis of Project 2025’s implementation to date, covering executive actions, responses from Congress and the courts, public reaction, state-level policy moves, and impacts across key policy areas.
1. Actions Taken by the Trump Administration
Executive Orders and Policy Rollouts
President Trump signed an unprecedented number of executive orders in his first weeks, exceeding 300 orders in the first month³. These orders span immigration, federal workforce changes, social policy, energy deregulation, and agency restructuring, tightly aligning with Project 2025’s agenda. For example, on January 20, Trump declared a national emergency at the southern border and banned asylum for migrants deemed part of an "invasion"⁴. He ordered the Defense Department to deploy troops and resources to seal the border and accelerate wall construction⁵. He also suspended refugee admissions entirely, even canceling travel for 1,660 vetted Afghan refugees who had been cleared to resettle⁶. The administration reinstated the “Remain in Mexico” policy, forcing asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their cases to be processed⁷. In a sweeping immigration order, Trump moved to end birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of noncitizens, directly challenging the 14th Amendment⁸. This order was quickly frozen by a federal judge, as detailed later.
Beyond immigration, Trump’s first-day orders included revoking dozens of Biden-era executive orders⁹, imposing a regulatory freeze on new rules¹⁰, and implementing a federal hiring freeze (excluding military, national security, and law enforcement)¹¹. Trump also reinstated "Schedule F" in the federal civil service, reissuing his 2020 order that strips employment protections from tens of thousands of federal employees in policy roles¹². This change makes it easier to fire career officials and "remove rogue bureaucrats," a key Project 2025 goal¹³.
Agency Restructuring and Personnel Changes
The Trump administration aggressively reshaped federal agencies and personnel. On inauguration day, he formally established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) by executive order¹⁴. Tech billionaire Elon Musk was named an advisor to DOGE, tasked with executing dramatic cuts to the U.S. government workforce and modernizing operations¹⁵. The department quickly moved to lay off thousands of federal workers across agencies, including the Department of Education and the CDC¹⁶. Inspectors general (independent watchdogs) at multiple agencies were summarily fired, eliminating internal oversight¹⁷. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was effectively dismantled, with its functions absorbed into the State Department¹⁸.
High-level appointments also reflect Project 2025’s influence. Trump nominated Pam Bondi as Attorney General and Russell Vought as OMB Director, both confirmed by the Senate in February¹⁹. Bondi, known for her staunch anti-abortion stance, was tasked with exploring ways to implement a federal abortion ban via reinterpretation of the Comstock Act²⁰. Meanwhile, Vought has used the budget process to defund Planned Parenthood and direct funds toward anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers²¹.
Social Policy and "Anti-Woke" Measures
A series of early executive orders targeted LGBTQ rights, diversity programs, and reproductive healthcare. One order redefined "sex" in federal law as strictly biological, barring recognition of gender identity by any agency²². Another order mandated the removal of gender markers from federal IDs such as passports²³. Agencies were directed to ensure that single-sex facilities, including shelters and prisons, exclude transgender individuals²⁴. The administration also prohibited gender transitions for minors under 19, withholding federal funds from healthcare entities that provide gender-affirming care to youth²⁵.
Energy and Environmental Deregulation
Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement on January 20, declaring that international climate commitments hindered American prosperity²⁶. He issued a National Energy Emergency order aimed at maximizing fossil fuel production, expediting permits for oil, gas, coal, and uranium projects while rolling back incentives for renewable energy²⁷. Offshore wind projects were paused, and restrictions on oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge were lifted²⁸. Environmental groups have filed lawsuits challenging these measures, arguing they undermine public health and climate stability²⁹.
2. Congressional Response
Republican Lawmakers and Legislative Alignment
Republicans in Congress have largely aligned with President Trump’s Project 2025 agenda, fast-tracking legislation that supports his executive actions. One of the first major laws passed was the Laken Riley Act (Public Law 119-01) on January 29, which mandates the detention and expedited deportation of noncitizens accused of certain crimes³⁰. The law was criticized for denying due process, as it allows deportation before conviction³¹.
Democratic Lawmakers and Opposition
Democrats have mounted vocal resistance, using lawsuits, hearings, and public statements to counter Trump’s actions. Senate Democrats introduced a resolution condemning Trump’s blanket pardons of January 6 rioters, but it was blocked by the Republican majority³². Democratic-led states have also resisted by enacting countermeasures, such as sanctuary state laws and expanded abortion protections³³.
3. Judicial Response
Federal courts have blocked or paused several high-profile Trump policies, particularly those viewed as unconstitutional. The birthright citizenship order was swiftly enjoined by a federal judge, who ruled that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause is clear and does not permit executive reinterpretation³⁴. The transgender healthcare ban was also temporarily blocked, with the court ruling that it likely violated equal protection principles³⁵.
4. Public Response
Public reaction to Project 2025’s implementation has been sharply divided. Large-scale protests erupted in response to Trump’s executive orders on immigration, LGBTQ rights, and abortion. On President’s Day (Feb 17), thousands marched under the banner "No Kings on Presidents’ Day," decrying the administration’s consolidation of power³⁶. Progressive organizations such as the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, and the National Women’s Law Center have launched coordinated legal challenges against Project 2025 policies³⁷.
5. State-Level Implementation
Several Republican-led states have actively supported Trump’s initiatives by passing complementary legislation. Texas and Arizona deployed state law enforcement to assist federal immigration crackdowns³⁸. Florida and Georgia passed laws punishing local officials who refuse to cooperate with ICE³⁹. Meanwhile, Democratic states such as California and Illinois have expanded protections for immigrants and strengthened access to abortion services⁴⁰.
6. Policy Impact
The early implementation of Project 2025 has already led to significant policy shifts. Immigration enforcement has become harsher, with deportations rising dramatically. Access to reproductive healthcare has constricted, with abortion medication restrictions affecting even blue states. Environmental regulations have been slashed, favoring fossil fuel production over climate initiatives. The balance of executive power has shifted decisively, with Trump leveraging emergency powers and regulatory changes to expand presidential authority.
Conclusion
As of March 1, 2025, Project 2025 has profoundly altered governance in the United States. While supporters praise it as a necessary correction to progressive overreach, opponents warn that it represents an unprecedented erosion of civil liberties, environmental protections, and democratic norms. The next phase of implementation will likely see continued resistance from Democratic lawmakers, advocacy groups, and the judiciary, setting up a prolonged battle over the future of American governance.
References
American Civil Liberties Union. (2023). Executive Overreach and Its Impact on Civil Liberties. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/reports/executive-overreach
Brennan Center for Justice. (2023). A Blueprint for Expanding Presidential Power: Risks and Repercussions. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis/expansion-presidential-power
Center for American Progress. (2023). Deregulation and Public Health: The Cost of Rolling Back Environmental and Consumer Protections. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/deregulation-public-health
Earthjustice. (2023). Legal Challenges to Federal Regulatory Rollbacks: Protecting Environmental Standards in an Era of Change. Retrieved from https://earthjustice.org/issues/environmental-protections
Heritage Foundation. (2023a). Project 2025: Blueprint for Restructuring Government. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025
Heritage Foundation. (2020). Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/mandate
Heritage Foundation. (2023b). Immigration Policy Recommendations in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/immigration
Heritage Foundation. (2023c). Emergency Powers and Immigration Enforcement in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/emergency-powers
Heritage Foundation. (2023d). Reproductive Rights and the “Protecting Life” Initiative in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/reproductive-rights
Heritage Foundation. (2023e). Regulatory Rollback and Deregulation in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/deregulation
Heritage Foundation. (2023f). Unitary Executive and Administrative Reform in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/unitary-executive
Heritage Foundation. (2023g). Enforcement of the Comstock Act: Reinvigorating Federal Prosecution in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/comstock-act
Heritage Foundation. (2023h). FDA Regulation and the Ban on Medication Abortion in Project 2025. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/project2025/fda-abortion
House of Representatives. (2024). DHS Appropriations Bill Riders and Legislative Measures Aligning with Project 2025. Congressional Record. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/appropriations/dhs2024
Pressley, A. (2024). Testimony at the “Stop Project 2025” Congressional Hearing on Executive Overreach. U.S. House of Representatives. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/hearings/stop-project2025
Sierra Club. (2023). Environmental Impact of Deregulation Policies: A Conservative Agenda’s Cost to Public Health and the Planet. Retrieved from https://www.sierraclub.org/environmental-impact-deregulation
Supreme Court of the United States. (2022). West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. ___ (2022). Retrieved from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_new.pdf
Trump, D. J. (2024). Remarks on Immigration Enforcement and Executive Authority. White House Briefing Room. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/remarks-donald-trump
For further information or to schedule a consultation, contact Moro & Moro, Attorneys at Law 570-784-1010. Our experienced legal team is here to assist you with all your legal needs in Pennsylvania.
NOTHING IN THIS OR ANY OTHER BLOG POST CONSTITUTES LEGAL ADVICE OR FORMS AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FIRM AND THE READER. INFORMATION ORIGINATING FROM THIS WEBSITE IS INTENDED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
Comments