Executive Actions — Week of Jun 16, 2025

This week, several government actions raised questions about how executive power is being used in relation to Congress's role and standard government procedures.

The most prominent development involves the ongoing suspension of refugee admissions. A Senate resolution introduced on June 18 (Senate Resolution 287) documented that an executive order issued on January 20, 2025, has left more than 100,000 previously approved refugees stranded, including 12,000 who had already booked flights. The resolution also noted that the administration has selectively resettled some groups while blocking others. This might matter because Congress created the Refugee Act of 1980 specifically to establish an orderly, fair process for admitting refugees—and an indefinite executive suspension that selectively admits some groups over others could undermine that congressional framework and the legal protections it was designed to provide. It's worth noting that presidents have significant legal authority to set refugee admissions levels, and prior administrations have also substantially reduced admissions. The administration may have specific justifications for its resettlement decisions that are not reflected in the documents reviewed. However, the scale—over 100,000 stranded—and the selectivity described in the resolution go beyond typical adjustments.

A new executive order on wildfire prevention (Empowering Commonsense Wildfire Prevention and Response) included a provision directing the Attorney General to ensure that government lawsuits involving utility companies align with the order's policy goals. The order's stated purpose is to improve efficiency and reduce barriers in wildfire response, and presidents regularly set priorities for the Justice Department. Still, this kind of directive may limit prosecutors' independent judgment on specific cases.

A presidential proclamation celebrating the Army's 250th anniversary (250th Anniversary of the Founding of the United States Army) also announced several military policy changes, including reinstating service members dismissed over COVID vaccine refusals and eliminating DEI programs. These policy changes may have been authorized elsewhere, and the proclamation may be intended to consolidate previously announced policies for public clarity. But when substantive policy appears in ceremonial documents, it may be more difficult for the public to track how and when binding decisions are made.

Limitations: This analysis is based on AI-assisted review of public documents and may miss important context, such as prior directives or legal authorities supporting these actions. The Senate resolution reflects the views of one group of senators and does not have the force of law.