TRUMP'S FLURRY OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS

(...are they even Constitutional??)

I want to dive into some of the executive orders President Trump signed on his very first day. There are dozens to analyze, but I highlighted just a few in my video above. Stay tuned for a deep dive into other orders later, especially the ones I believe will significantly impact our lives.

When you visit WhiteHouse.gov, click on the “News” section to find the executive orders. These “Presidential Actions” are being published at lightning speed, so you can read through them yourself if you’re curious.

One of the standout actions involves restoring names that honor American greatness. You might recall that before his inauguration, Trump promised to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. Later, I’ll also touch on executive orders—what they are and whether they’re even constitutional. But for now, let’s look at some specifics:

Restoring the Name of Mount McKinley

First up, Trump’s plan to rename Mount Denali back to Mount McKinley. For context, Denali National Park and Preserve will keep its name, but North America’s highest peak will officially revert to honoring President William McKinley.

This name change overturns a decision made by President Obama’s administration in 2015, which had reinstated the traditional Alaskan name “Denali,” meaning “The Great One.” This debate has apparently been ongoing for a long time. Charles Sheldon, one of the park’s founding advocates, had even petitioned for the name Denali to be preserved. Personally, I find this back-and-forth fascinating, but I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Renaming the Gulf of Mexico

Another controversial move is Trump’s proposal to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. Citing legal authority under 43 U.S. Code 364, which pertains to uniformity in geographic nomenclature, Trump believes this change is within the bounds of law. However, international recognition isn’t guaranteed. Will Mexico and other countries adopt this change as well?

Reforming Federal Hiring Practices

Trump has also signed an order titled “Reforming the Federal Hiring Process and Restoring Merit to Government Service.” This aims to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. In a related order, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferences,” Trump outlines efforts to counter gender ideology extremism and restore what he calls “biological truth” to federal policies. While this is quite controversial (which is strange because it’s not controversial in God’s eyes), this directive has drawn applause from many, myself included, for its straightforward definitions of male and female.

Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

Here’s where things get eyebrow-raising: the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Yes, its name feels like a joke — and to add to the intrigue, Vivek has reportedly stepped down from his involvement with this department. (Watch my previous video expressing my concerns about DOGE.)

This temporary department will focus on reducing government waste by modernizing federal technology and increasing AI integration. However, I’m concerned this could lead to replacing human jobs with artificial intelligence, something I’m firmly against.

Stay tuned for my deep-dive into my concerns because DOGE is less about reducing bloated government and more about increasing AI and enriching Musk, if his companies will be involved.

Are Executive Orders Legal?

Finally, let’s address the elephant in the room: the legality of executive orders.

According to the Supreme Court, executive orders must be supported by the Constitution, either through a specific clause or by authority delegated from Congress.

This means they can be challenged—and indeed, lawsuits are already emerging, including one against the Department of Government Efficiency.

Executive orders are meant to direct the executive branch in carrying out existing laws, not to create new laws.

Article II of the Constitution outlines the powers of the executive branch, but it does not grant the President the authority to create, modify, or repeal laws—that power resides solely with Congress under Article I, Section 1. The President’s role is to enforce laws passed by Congress, not to legislate through executive orders.

In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952), the Supreme Court ruled that President Truman exceeded his authority when he issued an executive order to seize and operate steel mills during the Korean War.¹ Majority opinion emphasized that the President’s power must stem from either an explicit act of Congress or the Constitution itself. This case remains a cornerstone in limiting the scope of executive power and serves as a critical reminder that executive orders are not a substitute for legislation.

I’m keeping a sharp eye on these presidential actions and will continue to provide updates. Let me know what you think of these changes—applause, outrage, or somewhere in between?

Read Next:

NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THIS

How the President is Elected

Constitutional Republic vs Democracy

How to Spot the Fakes, Frauds and Phonies

1. Federal Judicial Center. (n.d.). Judicial review of executive orders. Retrieved January 22, 2025, from https://www.fjc.gov/history/administration/judicial-review-executive-orders