<\/p>\n
While the pace of the news and the rapid freefall into kleptocracy[1]<\/a> may be a bit much to keep up with, it is worth focusing in on an early and ongoing maneuver by the Trump administration to force through its self-serving agenda, the Executive Order. Think back to the sepia-toned past of January 2025 and the barrage of EO\u2019s<\/a>, some with real policy effects<\/a>, others mere political bluster<\/a>. What were all those? Are they still in play now? The legal team here at CLDC has reviewed all 240 Executive Orders issued by the administration<\/a> since it took power for the second time, as well as other unilateral presidential actions<\/a>, and analyzed them for their civil liberties implications.<\/p>\n First, a refresher on Executive Orders. Trump himself behaves as if an EO is some sort of kingly proclamation. He is the \u201cexecutive\u201d and he has made an \u201corder.\u201d In the parlance of present right-wing thought, this view is roughly in keeping with the \u201cunitary executive<\/a>\u201d theory, however this framing distorts how an executive order actually functions.<\/p>\n Far from a royal decree, the president cannot use an Executive Order to direct Congress or the Judiciary to do or not do anything in particular. Likewise, the president cannot create or strike down laws unilaterally through executive order because lawmaking falls to the legislative branch and is outside the purview of the executive. Reminder: there are 3 equal branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. An Executive Order sets the priorities for administrative agencies<\/a> falling under executive control. For example, if a president feels energy policy is a high priority, she can use the mechanism of an Executive Order to direct a regulatory agency to investigate the issue and provide recommendations. Executive Orders are tools used to direct the entire executive branch<\/em>; they are not a personal perk of the presidency.<\/p>\n The following is our review of presidential actions that most directly impact the right to protest. We will address further presidential actions touching this important right when\/if they arise.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Executive Order 14341: Prosecuting Burning of the American Flag<\/a><\/p>\n Risk Level: LOW<\/p>\n The controversy surrounding the burning of an American Flag as an act of protest<\/a> is not a recent development, and the caselaw litigating the issue is well-trod territory. This Executive Order is more vibe setting than policy making. It remains legal to burn a flag as a symbol, although burning anything<\/em> in public may expose a protester to a fire-related regulation independent of what is being burned. Be smart, plan for safety and legality but smoke \u2018em if you got \u2018em<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Executive Order 14333: Declaring a Crime Emergency in the District of Columbia<\/a><\/p>\n Risk Level: MEDIUM<\/p>\n If you live in an area governed by the federal government such as Washington, DC or federal property within a state, the president can<\/em> direct policy applying to that area. The president has the authority to declare emergencies so the question is less \u201cis an emergency actually happening?\u201d and more \u201chas the president declared it to be so?\u201d This is the legal justification Trump used to deploy the national guard in DC<\/a>, a cartoonish failure<\/a> of an operation that nevertheless still threatened the civil liberties<\/a> of the residents of DC and was a testing ground for future military deployments in other US cities. A change in crime-emergency status may pose a risk to protesters resisting federal government actions in affected areas.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Executive Order 14321: Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets<\/a><\/p>\n Risk Level: MEDIUM<\/p>\n This EO sets federal priorities regarding responses to homelessness. It sets out a plan to \u201c[shift] homeless individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment through the appropriate use of civil commitment.\u201d If you read that and thought, \u201cWait a minute, that sounds a lot like camps,\u201d you would be correct. The federal government has a pattern of beta testing barbaric repression tactics<\/a> on the poor, immigrants, the sick or any other class without power or representation<\/a>. If they are coming for the homeless and you do not speak up because you are not homeless, we have bad news for you.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Presidential Document FR Doc. 2025-18709: Designating Antifa as a Domestic Terrorist Organization<\/a><\/p>\n Risk Level: LOW<\/p>\n This EO made a bit of a splash when it was announced. CLDC even addressed it at the time<\/a>. Yet, despite all the coverage, this order essentially does nothing. Notice the use of \u201corder\u201d rather than Executive Order, this document is classified as a Presidential Document and contains the words Executive Order, however it is not listed in the Federal Register\u2019s roll of Executive Orders. Legally speaking, this order has about as much value as money printed off a home computer, which is to say, none at all. Even though the order holds no legal weight the intention it signals, to target people as \u201cterrorists\u201d based on their political beliefs, does. While the order itself poses no risk, its motivations absolutely do.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n NSPM 7: Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence<\/a><\/p>\n Risk Level: HIGH<\/p>\n Amidst all the saber rattling and bellicose moaning, NSPM 7 represents perhaps the most material threat to civil liberties and protest. It harnesses the lunacy of Trump\u2019s order regarding Antifa and turns it into an operational plan. Enacted in November of 2025, it\u2019s likely the full effects of the priority restructuring required by NSPM 7 have not yet been felt. The 7 in NSMP 7 is significant as well. This is only the 7th<\/sup> National Security Presidential Memorandum issued not just by Trump, but ever in the history of the US. The memo directs a variety of federal agencies to coordinate their data and efforts towards an organized attack on a political belief (or a label that will be used to target anyone the regime wants\u2014think \u201ccommunist\u201d during the Red Scare). This will result in bogus prosecutions<\/a>, increased charges and punishments, lawfare<\/a> and increased state repression<\/a>, including infiltration and surveillance. When protesters face a militarized federal response in the streets, NSPM 7 is partly to blame.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Hopefully what this review makes clear is that an executive order can do little more than set the tone when it comes to curtailing essential Constitutional rights. However, tone setting is not for nothing, especially when it results in actual structural changes to the organization and priorities of federal law enforcement agencies. As far as the streets go, not one of these orders has reduced your right to assemble and protest. The state response you encounter may look different than it has in the past as a result of some of these policy changes; and the money and resources poured into state surveillance and infiltration will have real impact. Learning more about the federal agencies active and engaging with protests in your area can help you make informed choices. Check out CLDC\u2019s \u201cRights & Risks Protesting ICE\u201d<\/a> and other training webinars<\/a> for updated legal information. The most important thing is to keep going. If we do not embrace active solidarity in the face of rapidly accelerating authoritarianism, we risk surrendering our Constitutional rights entirely. <\/p>\n SOURCES:<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/FR-2025-09-10\/pdf\/2025-17507.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/FR-2025-09-10\/pdf\/2025-17508.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.federalregister.gov\/presidential-documents\/executive-orders\/donald-trump\/2026<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/wex\/unitary_executive_theory_(uet)<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.uscourts.gov\/about-federal-courts\/educational-resources\/educational-activities\/first-amendment-activities\/texas-v-johnson\/facts-and-case-summary-texas-v-johnson<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/groups\/public_education\/publications\/teaching-legal-docs\/what-is-an-executive-order-\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/FR-2025-08-28\/pdf\/2025-16616.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/content\/pkg\/FR-2025-08-14\/pdf\/2025-15550.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/wjla.com\/news\/local\/national-guard-troops-washington-dc-army-trump-federal-law-enforcement-police-security-mission-crime-criticism-controversy-local<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/washingtonian.com\/2026\/01\/21\/an-anonymous-dc-national-guardsman-tells-all\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/world\/us\/us-judge-halts-trumps-national-guard-deployment-washington-dc-2025-11-20\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.federalregister.gov\/documents\/2025\/07\/29\/2025-14391\/ending-crime-and-disorder-on-americas-streets<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/independentlens\/blog\/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/presidential-actions\/2025\/09\/designating-antifa-as-a-domestic-terrorist-organization\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/cldc.org\/the-u-s-cannot-designate-domestic-groups-or-political-ideologies-as-terrorists\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/presidential-actions\/2025\/09\/countering-domestic-terrorism-and-organized-political-violence\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/talkingpointsmemo.com\/news\/guilt-by-association-first-antifa-case-sweeps-anti-trump-activists-into-one-terrorism-conspiracy<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.opb.org\/article\/2026\/01\/28\/ice-protest-eugene-oregon\/<\/a><\/p>\n https:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/presidential-actions\/<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n
\n<\/u><\/p>\n