President Donald Trump has made his stance on Project 2025 clear during his campaign, showing skepticism towards this extensive conservative policy blueprint created by the Heritage Foundation. However, just days into his second term, many of his actions appear to resonate closely with the objectives outlined in Project 2025.
A recent examination by TIME indicated that nearly two-thirds of the executive actions Trump has implemented so far reflect or align in part with the proposals found within the comprehensive 900-page document, which includes a range of initiatives from aggressive deregulation to strict immigration policies.
Throughout the campaign, Democrats pointed to Trump’s associations with Project 2025, highlighting that several contributors to this framework had previously worked with him or were part of his network. Although Trump consistently downplayed these connections, claiming he was unaware of who was behind the conservative initiative and labeling some of its proposals as “ridiculous and abysmal,” he softened his tone after the election, admitting to TIME in November, “I don’t disagree with everything in Project 2025, but I disagree with some things.”
Despite his earlier dismissals, several individuals associated with the creation of Project 2025, such as Russell Vought and Brendan Carr, have since been appointed to key positions in his administration. Vought is now leading the Office of Management and Budget, while Carr has taken on the role of chairperson for the Federal Communications Commission. The Heritage Foundation declined to provide a comment for this article.
According to a White House spokesperson, Trump “had nothing to do with Project 2025” and emphasized that his initial executive orders were aimed at fulfilling the promises that garnered him a strong mandate from the American populace—such as securing borders, restoring common sense, reducing inflation, and promoting American energy independence.
Launched in April 2023, Project 2025 serves as a strategic roadmap for future Republican administrations, intending to transform the federal government in accordance with conservative, free-market ideals. The agenda includes aggressive deregulation, stricter immigration policies, challenges to civil rights protections, and substantial cuts to the federal workforce, all aimed at decreasing government size and reinforcing executive authority.
While many of Trump’s executive actions bear similarities to Project 2025’s proposals, not every initiative aligns perfectly with the document’s recommendations. For example, some actions, such as declaring an energy emergency and contesting birthright citizenship, are not explicitly mentioned in the framework. Nonetheless, a significant number of the administration’s executive orders echo the fundamental goals of Project 2025, particularly regarding immigration reform, government restructuring, and deregulation.
“I think many liberal think tanks might feel envious that a conservative think tank wields this much influence over the policy agenda,” observes Bill Galston, chair of the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies program and a former advisor to President Bill Clinton. He notes that while the influence of think tanks is significant, it “is bound to wane once the President and the Republican majority in Congress begin working together on legislation.”
By embracing aspects of the Heritage Foundation’s framework, Trump’s second term appears to be shaped by a vision established prior to his return to the White House. Skye Perryman, CEO of Democracy Forward—a legal organization that recently established Democracy 2025, a resource center tracking the new administration’s actions—states, “This is a playbook we’ve encountered before and expected to be implemented. The genuine disappointment lies in the fact that during his campaign, Trump did not level with the American people. He failed to convey that this was his agenda, instead acting as though he had no ties to Project 2025, even as he clearly works to advance that agenda.”
Let’s delve into some of the notable parallels between Trump’s executive actions and Project 2025.
Immigration and Border Security
Trump’s early actions regarding immigration and border security align with Project 2025’s vision of a more robust and militarized immigration enforcement strategy. For instance, the blueprint recommends deploying active-duty military personnel and National Guardsmen to support border security efforts, including making arrests. Trump acted quickly, issuing an executive order on his first day in office that mandated the deployment of National Guard troops to the southern border.
Furthermore, Trump signed an executive order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, reflecting Project 2025’s suggestion for an “indefinite curtailment” of refugee admissions. He has also sought to prolong restrictions on asylum seekers and halt certain immigration pathways—policies that are in line with Project 2025’s calls for limiting refugee and asylum programs as part of a broader immigration control strategy.
Environmental and Energy Policies
Trump’s initial actions concerning environmental regulations and energy policies resonate with the recommendations of Project 2025, particularly its opposition to climate change initiatives deemed overly burdensome to American businesses.
On the first day of his second term, Trump signed an executive order promoting the utilization of Alaska’s abundant energy resources, echoing Project 2025’s advocacy for expanding oil and gas drilling in the region. The blueprint argues for tapping into Alaska’s energy resources to bolster national security, emphasizing the importance of unlocking natural resources “as a counter to growing Russian and Chinese interest in Antarctic resources.” Trump’s executive order established a framework for resource extraction in Alaska and directed federal agencies to expedite permitting, leasing, and development, particularly for liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects.
Additionally, Trump re-signed an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, a key action from his first term that aligns directly with Project 2025’s recommendations. The framework argues that exiting international climate accords would enhance national sovereignty and economic competitiveness by eliminating industry restrictions. “The next conservative administration should rescind all climate policies from its foreign aid programs (specifically USAID’s Climate Strategy 2022–2030); terminate the agency’s offices and programs supporting the Paris Climate Agreement; and narrowly limit funding to traditional climate mitigation efforts,” Project 2025 asserts.
Read More: What Happened the Last Time Trump Withdrew From the Paris Agreement
Moreover, Trump has taken steps to limit offshore wind development, a move that Project 2025 identifies as part of a broader agenda to restrict significant portions of the ocean from commercial activities.
Government Reform and Bureaucratic Restructuring
One of Project 2025’s key goals is to reform the federal bureaucracy, aiming to diminish its size and influence while empowering the executive branch. Trump initiated several executive orders on his first day that reflect these aims.
He reinstated the Schedule F executive order—a policy initially proposed in 2020 that seeks to reclassify certain federal employees as political appointees, facilitating their dismissal. Project 2025 called for the revival of this measure. This has raised alarms among Democrats and civil service advocates, who view it as an attack on the independence of the federal workforce. Trump defends the policy as essential for eliminating political bias and inefficiencies within government agencies, a theme central to both his agenda and the broader goals of Project 2025.
The framework also advocates for significant cuts to the federal workforce, emphasizing a reduction in regulations and the elimination of agencies seen as unnecessary or counterproductive. Trump’s early actions signal that he is pursuing this direction, including streamlining government operations, instituting a hiring freeze for all federal civilian employees, and seeking to reduce the size and scope of regulatory agencies. While these actions may not precisely match Project 2025’s specific proposals—such as dissolving the Departments of Homeland Security and Education—they embody the overarching philosophy of diminishing the government’s presence.
Cultural Issues
Trump has also adopted several social policy changes that mirror Project 2025’s stance, particularly regarding gender identity and diversity initiatives. One of his first executive orders reversed protections instituted during the Biden administration for transgender individuals in the military, reinstating a ban on transgender service members, which aligns with Project 2025’s recommendation to “proudly assert that men and women are biological realities” and to eliminate policies that conflate gender identity with biological sex.
Additionally, Trump has moved to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within the federal government. One executive order rescinded policies requiring federal contractors to advance affirmative action and diversity programs, consistent with Project 2025’s call to abolish initiatives that promote racial or gender-based quotas.
Foreign Relations
Trump’s early actions also signal a shift towards a more isolationist and unilateral foreign policy approach, mirroring Project 2025’s views on international agreements and alliances. He signed an executive order that withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organization, reinstating the foreign policy positions that characterized much of his first term. Project 2025 explicitly advocated for this withdrawal, describing the WHO as an ineffective and biased organization that undermines U.S. sovereignty.
Alongside his exit from the Paris Agreement, Trump has taken additional steps to distance the U.S. from various international partnerships, aligning with the isolationist philosophy outlined in Project 2025. One executive order asserts that “no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States,” suggesting that the “foreign aid industry and bureaucracy are often misaligned with American interests and, in many instances, contradict American values.”
