Introduction
President Trump’s harmful executive orders (EOs) have begun to impact our most vulnerable communities in Colorado. This page provides updates and analyses about the EOs. This page will be updated weekly.
What is an executive order (EO)?
¿Qué es un ordene ejecutiva (OE)?
Article II of the U.S. Constitution assigns to the President the obligation to make sure that the laws of the country are “faithfully executed.” It is from this instruction in the Constitution that the concept of EOs comes from, though it is not explicitly mentioned. An EO is a written instruction from the President, that tells the government to do things that ensure “the laws are faithfully executed.”
El Artículo II de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos asigna al Presidente la obligación de asegurarse de que las leyes del país sean “fielmente ejecutadas”. De esta instrucción constitucional surge el concepto de OE, aunque no se menciona explícitamente. Una EO es una instrucción escrita del presidente que le dice al gobierno que haga cosas que garanticen que “las leyes se ejecuten fielmente”.
What can EOs do?
¿Qué pueden hacer los OEs?
Executive orders can make a federal agency do things within the scope of their power that do not violate federal law.
Las órdenes ejecutivas pueden obligar a una agencia federal a hacer cosas dentro del alcance de su poder que no violen la ley federal.
What EOs cannot do.
Qué no pueden hacer las OEs.
Executive orders cannot create new law and they cannot violate existing law.
No pueden crear nuevas leyes y no pueden violar las leyes existentes.
Can an EO still cause harm even if lawful?
¿Puede una OE causar daño aunque si es legal?
Sí, puede haber situaciones en las que una OE no sea técnicamente ilegal, pero amenace los derechos o libertades civiles.
How long until EOs are in effect?
¿Cuánto tiempo para que entren en vigor los OEs?
Eso depende. Algunas pueden entrar en vigor inmediatamente, pero incluso aquellas pueden requerir pasos en la agencia que ejecutará la orden. Puede ser necesario un informe, una investigación o nuevas regulaciones emitidas para llevar a cabo una OE. A veces esto puede llevar muchos meses o incluso años. A veces, una OE puede incluir una fecha límite.
Can EOs be stopped?
¿Se les puede parar los OEs?
Congress can pass a law that reverses what the President ordered.
Any future president can issue a new EO that either takes back or amends an earlier EO.
Un tribunal puede dictaminar que una OE es ilegal porque viola la Constitución o el estatuto federal.
El Congreso puede aprobar una ley que revierta lo que ordenó el presidente.
Cualquier futuro presidente puede emitir una nueva OE que recupere o modifique una EO anterior.
Analyses of select presidential executive orders
Análisis de órdenes ejecutivas presidenciales selectas
This page was originally published 02/07/2025.
These analyses were last updated on 03/13/2025.
Our presidential executive orders page will focus on those orders where Colorado has engaged in some response or has been directly targeted or has a direct impact on CCLP focus areas. Just Security has a litigation tracker for all cases involving EOs and related memorandums, etc. that can be accessed here.
Reforming the Federal Hiring Process and Restoring Merit to Government Service (EO 14170)
Summary
This EO states an intention to increase the overall efficiency of processes for selecting and recruiting government employees. Agencies are directed to enact a process that prioritizes candidates committed to government efficiency and the “ideals of our American republic,” without consideration of race, sex or religion.
Implications
- The new Federal Hiring Plan, or FHP, must be distributed to agencies within 120 days.
-
- The stated goal of this FHP will be to bring to the federal workforce only “highly skilled Americans” dedicated to the furtherance of American ideals, values, and interests
-
- FHP shall take into account integrating modern technology to support the recruitment and selection process and the introduction of specific “best practices” for the human resources functions in federal agencies.
- There are concerning elements in this EO. To start, algorithms, which are likely the “modern technology” referenced, that are non-transparent or not validated may have discriminatory impact.
- There is also a question about how the FHP would define “highly skilled,’” in a context where the administration has already laid off highly skilled federal employees at U.S.A.I.D., the National Science Foundation, the Department of Education, and other agencies, in accordance with other EOs. Yet this EO purports to only hire “highly skilled” and aligned with the “furtherance of American ideals.” How American ideals are characterized is highly subjective, and subject to manipulation.
- This EO also emphasizes that federal employees should not be hired based on what it terms impermissible factors, such as one’s commitment to illegal racial discrimination under the guise of “equity,” or one’s commitment to the invented concept of “gender identity” over sex. However, federal laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disability Act of 1990, continue to prohibit discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, and other factors.
Colorado response & impacts
This EO as written does not appear to have an immediate impact on Coloradans, as the FHP still has to be developed. However, there is an implication that the skill sets of terminated federal employees in Colorado – many of whom have extensive experience and are highly skilled – were not recognized in the waves of terminations that have already occurred. This EO seems to contemplate that qualities other than experience and expertise will be prioritized if those positions are re-filled.
Sources
Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies (EO 14215)
Summary
This EO puts forward measures to ensure Presidential supervision and control of the entire executive branch by requiring independent agencies to “submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Executive Office of the President before publication in the Federal Register.” In other words, the EO seeks to put all independent agencies under the purview and direction of the President.
Implications
- The implementation of this EO can result in a significant restructuring of the U.S. regulatory system, a system that has been in place in one way or another since the 1930s and more significantly from the New Deal.
- This EO challenges long-standing interpretation of the separation of powers and creates questions surrounding what to expect from the future actions of independent regulatory agencies created by Congress as defined in 44 U.S.C. § 3502(5), including the SEC, CFTC, FERC, EPA, FTC, FCC, NLRB, CFPB, and the ITC.
- By implementing this EO, the President can exercise power over agencies such as:
-
- The Consumer Safety Product Commission – issues recall and safety warnings
-
- Securities and Exchange Commission – overseas markets
-
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation – insures bank deposits
- More specifically this EO:
-
- Creates significant oversight and review of regulatory actions; “submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) [a presidential office] . . . before publication in the Federal Register”
-
- Provides for the interpretation of law (a judicial branch power), stating that the President and Attorney General “shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch” which will be “controlling” on executive branch employees and who may not “contravene[]” those opinions, including any “regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation” unless “authorized” in writing by the President or Attorney General
-
- Requires agencies to establish a White House liaison and consult with the White House liaison and the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) personnel on an ongoing basis to ensure the agencies’ activities are consistent with and advance the President’s policies and priorities.
Colorado Response and Impact
- Timelines to finalize regulations is likely to be longer, due to the additional requirement that the White House review regulations prior to publication. When regulation would benefit Colorado consumers, whether it involves air quality or consumer protections, relief will be delayed.
- Empowering the President and Attorney General to interpret the law for the executive branch, rather than relying on the expertise of experienced agency staff, may result in regulation that is unpredictable or unworkable, and that serves narrow political aims rather than implementing the goals of the legislative branch. This uncertainty and variability will affect Colorado businesses and consumers.
- Suit was filed on Feb. 28, 2025, by the Democratic National Committee. The case is ongoing.
Implementing the President's "Department of Government Efficiency" Workforce Optimization Initiative (EO 14210)
Summary
This EO gives the Department of Government Efficiency the directives to reduce the federal workforce, decrease hiring rations, and give final approval to agency heads on whether they can hire for a position. Specifically, the EO directs agency leaders to prioritize the reduction of forces not mandated by statute or other law. The EO points out agency diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives as an example. It also mandates that the reduction plans include a parameter that the agency is to not hire more than one person for every four that leave. This 1:4 ratio does not apply to public safety, immigration, or law enforcement positions. The EO also orders that agency heads may not fill vacancies that the DOGE team lead assesses should not be filled; however, can override DOGE’s assessment if necessary. The EO does not apply to military personnel and agency heads can exempt positions they identify as “necessary to meet national security, homeland security, or public safety responsibilities.”
Implications
- This EO can impact more than 2 million civilian federal workers.
- Will require DOGE team leads to provide a monthly hiring report for each agency.
- Agency heads have 30 days within the date of the order (02/11/2025) to submit their reduction in force plans.
Colorado Response and Impact
The National Treasury Employees Union has brought suit against President Trump for this EO, alleging that it violates the separation of powers, and asking for agency heads to be prevented from implementing reductions in force. Read the complaint here.
Colorado has roughly 57,000 federal employees, the 16th most federal workers of any state. Federal agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Health and Human Services (HHS), and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have regional offices in Denver and Boulder, meaning that many workers in Colorado will probably be affected by this EO. Functioning of these agencies and Colorado’s ability to conduct joint state-federal activities will also be adversely affected.
In preparation for these layoffs, both the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment and the Statewide Workforce System are working to support Coloradans affected. If you are impacted, you can visit https://cdle.colorado.gov/unemployment to file an unemployment claim.
February 26, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget released a memorandum providing guidance on these reduction in force plans, with a deadline of March 13, 2025. This memo outlines the timeframes and tasks to execute this EO.
Sources
- EO on Implemening the DOGE Workforce Optimization Initiative, Economic Policy Institute, published February 12, 2025.
- President Trump Issues Executive Order to Advance “Large-Scale” Reductions in Federal Workforce, Latham & Watkins, LLP, published February 14, 2025.
- How many federal employees are there in Colorado?, Fox 31 Denver, published February 26, 2025.
Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (EO 14151)
Summary
This EO has to do with federal agencies, of which Colorado has many, and federal grantees, including “environmental justice” grantees. The Director of Office of Management and Budget and other agencies are directed to terminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs in the federal government as well as “equity-related” grants and contracts. Funding for environmental projects is also specifically targeted. See full order here.
Implications
- Directs agencies to place all employees of DEIA offices on administrative leave while the agencies take steps to end all DEIA offices and programs.
- Agencies have been directed to send agency-wide notice to all employees informing them of closure of these offices and asking them if they know of “any efforts to disguise these programs by using coded or imprecise language.”
- Agencies must report to OMB director a list of all employees in DEI and “environmental justice” positions, as well as related committees, programs, activities, services and budgets.
- Per the EO, terminations are limited by current law. Non-discrimination laws remain in effect and employers need to follow them.
Colorado Response & Impacts
The effects of this EO towards Colorado are extremely broad. The executive order affects all federal funding that goes to state agencies including to municipal, county, or local governments, to colleges and universities, and to nonprofit entities. It will also affect operations of federal entities in Colorado, such as the U.S. Air Force Academy, other military installations, and federal regional offices headquartered in Denver.
In addition to the $13 billion in federal dollars received by the state directly that could be affected by the executive order, Colorado received $12.9B in defense spending, $1.1B in environmental spending, and an unknown amount of funding went directly to other entities. Many Colorado institutions and organizations receive federally funded awards for their work and would be directly impacted. Per the Joint Budget Committee Appropriations Report Fiscal Year 2024-25, Colorado will receive about $13 billion dollars, which is almost 1/3 of the States revenue.
Colorado is a plaintiff in a case filed on January 28, 2025, that seeks to prevent an immediate freeze on funding under the authority of this executive order and others. State of New York v. Trump (D.R.I.). The court issued a Temporary Restraining Order on January 31, 2025 that prevents federal agencies from taking action to withhold funding on the basis of the executive order. See complaint here. See order here.
A second case that could affect Colorado was filed in Maryland on February 3, 2025. Plaintiffs include the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and the American Association of University Professors. Do note that this case, while not directly challenging the EO, is related as it challenges a memorandum issued to effectuate this order. See complaint here. Update: On March 10, 2025, the federal district of Maryland clarified the scope of the national injunction and confirmed that certain provisions are likely unconstitutional.
Most recent actions
- There are 9 cases filed in federal court that challenge this EO. The one linked above led to a preliminary injunction on February 19, 2025.
- The government appealed on February 27, 2025.
- On March 10, 2025, the court clarified the preliminary injunction saying the government can’t pause, freeze, block, cancel, or terminate any awards, contracts, or obligations under the termination provision.
Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship (EO 14160)
Summary
This EO interprets the 14th Amendment in a manner where birthright citizenship is no longer extended to all persons born in the United States. It is radical departure from the historical interpretation of the 14th amendment, which has been to guarantee citizenship at birth in almost all instances under the concept of “jus soli” which means that citizenship is acquired based on where a person is born. See full order here.
Implications
Effective 30 days after issuance of the order.
- Creates a new standard for citizenship
- Person does not acquire citizenship if: Mother was unlawfully present, and their father was not a citizen or lawful permanent resident at time of birth OR Mother’s presence was lawful but temporary (tourist, student, temporary worker) and the father was not a citizen or lawful permanent resident at time of birth
- EO prohibits the departments and agencies of the US government from issuing documents recognizing citizenship to persons born under those circumstances
- Prohibits departments and agencies from accepting document issued by state, local or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship
- This EO if in effect, would create a whole category of individuals stateless and without rights.
Colorado Response & Impacts
Colorado is one of many states who have joined together in a lawsuit against this EO Complaint, calling it unconstitutional.
There are seven lawsuits filed across the county against this EO and on two of the matters nationwide injunctions have been granted stopping the implementation of the order. Update 3/13/2025: A third appellate court has upheld a block on Trump’s EO limiting birthright citizenship.
Most recent actions
- A preliminary injunction was issued on February 13, 2025.
- The Government appealed the injunction.
- On March 11, 2025, the court declined to stay (lift) the injunction while the court takes up the appeal. The full docket is here.
Protecting the American People Against Invasion (EO 14159)
Summary
This EO is very broad and impacts many immigration initiatives, programs, and enforcement actions. It calls for the immediate removal of those in the United States (U.S.) without legal status. It orders agencies to enforce removal orders, criminalize unauthorized entry into the U.S., extend Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s presence in all 50 states, and construct detention facilities for those awaiting removal proceedings. This EO changes what had been the focus of immigration enforcement on prioritizing those who present a threat to national security or public safety to assuming all undocumented individuals present that threat. See the full order here.
Implications
Effective immediately; agencies must report on progress and conditions in 90 days.
- Requires any person who lacks an immigration status to “register” with the U.S. government, or be subject to criminal penalties, and those who fail to register will become priorities for immigration enforcement, regardless of criminal record. This sets the stage to turn all undocumented individuals into criminals for the “crime” of failing to register. This is similar to the post 9/11 National Security Entry Exit Registration System (NSEERS) that was ended in 2016 due to being ineffective, and resulted in abuses due to racial, ethnic and religious profiling.
- Limits the use of parole authority and temporary protected status.
- Prohibits work permits from being issued to persons without an immigration status.
- Directs the Office of Management and Budget to ensure all agencies identify and stop any person who lacks an immigration status from getting any public benefits. With few exceptions, people who have no immigration status are already unable to get public benefits.
- Directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) and DHS to review all federal funds provided to non-governmental organizations that may provide services to people without an immigration status, and to terminate the contracts and try to recoup the funds.
- Directs DOJ and DHS to withhold federal funds from state and local jurisdictions that have policies directing law enforcement to not cooperate with DHS (also called santuary jurisdictions.)
- Expands the program known as 287(g), which permits local law enforcement to do immigration enforcement functions.
- Directs DHS to expand the available detention facilities, to “construct, operate, control, or use” and mandates that migrants be detained while removal is pending. To do this would require a considerable expansion of detention facilities.
Colorado response & impacts
One challenge has been brought by non-profit immigrant advocacy groups, including Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, a local Colorado organization, challenging the cessation of federal funding for non-profits who provide services to undocumented individuals. See the full complaint here.
U.S. Representative Jason Crow, representing the 6th District of Colorado, has stated DHS confirms that the Buckley Space Force Base will not be used as a detention facility. Sentinel Colorado reported on this matter here.
There is no official designation of Colorado as a sanctuary state, however, Colorado laws, including House Bill 19-1124, protect immigrants from federal overreach and violations of the Fourth Amendment, which includes constitutional protections against unlawful imprisonment and detention. The state may be threatened with loss of funding due to refusal to comply with DHS.