US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Última edición por un moderador:
She defended the creature of the black lagoon Rosie O Donnel. Unpardonable sin. My guy. I remember her because my dad had fox on 24/7 as a kid. Worst segment. Hated her. O'Reilly stomped her until he got shitcanned. I just don't like her bro.
Well, that’s fine, but if Bannon is on her show and wants to say DeSantis is gunning for secdef, at least hear him out. Dude did time, didn’t get a pardon and still never said anything bad about Trump
 
Ver archivo adjunto 7268194



Tulsi Gabbard doesn't give names, but says it relates to the Washington Post leak. Let's see if Pam Bondi will actually charge anyone with a crime for once.
Lmfao you mean the same group chat Pete Hegseth drunkenly added the reporter into? Imagine getting thrown in prison for being an unwitting participant to some deranged Kiwi’s furry inflation DM group chat.
 
It doesn't even make sure though now, does it? Lot of kids just up and leave or give up.
What's the saying about leading a horse to water? You can't make it drink? The opportunity should be there. If i pay taxes, yeah my kids deserve a basic education from it. Just not federal.
 
We get common core math (that is getting more absurd and complex for the younger generation) and a lot of middleman (filler) knowledge just to fill out teacher unit packets to last for 10 months yearly. Not basic education. Education should be a tree. Not an inconsistent mess that lingers as long as a bolt of lightning.

If we had basic education, payed with taxes, we wouldn't have to sink so much money into a 12 year long shitfest just so our children can get a plaque that may as well equate to "CONGRATULATIONS!". If we had basic education, I wager it'd be over within ~8 years.
 
We get common core math (that is getting more absurd and complex for the younger generation) and a lot of middleman (filler) knowledge just to fill out teacher unit packets to last for 10 months yearly. Not basic education. Education should be a tree. Not an inconsistent mess that lingers as long as a bolt of lightning.
Wait why are you against the crab bucket education model? It's the same one used by our European allies.
 
We get common core math (that is getting more absurd and complex for the younger generation) and a lot of middleman (filler) knowledge just to fill out teacher unit packets to last for 10 months yearly. Not basic education. Education should be a tree. Not an inconsistent mess that lingers as long as a bolt of lightning.
And thats why the STATE, not FEDS should be in charge. Utah managed to ditch common core when i was in high school and it got so much fucking better.
Well, that’s fine, but if Bannon is on her show and wants to say DeSantis is gunning for secdef, at least hear him out. Dude did time, didn’t get a pardon and still never said anything bad about Trump
Bannon's just been out of the loop. Might be right, might not. IDK on him.
 
I'm tired of political institutions having any form of control over the internet. Astroturfing especially. I'm tired of corpos being in bed with Republicans and Democrats. The pendulum swing is meaningless. Our quality of life remains the same while the big guys stay at the top. Objectively speaking, nothing at all has changed for my family. Rome wasn't built in a day but I don't see 2018 ever happening again.
Ah, sweet! New doomerpasta!
 
Lil' Ben is in Ugayne interviewing another lil' friendo, buddy. Con Inc. desperate to retain power as it thrashes around with its head underwater:
Ver archivo adjunto 7267878
FTk6-y6-sPPNpuYB.mp4

Some gay glowie is running for Congress, if this is the new democrat template for taking on MAGA they're still going to lose:
Ver archivo adjunto 7267875

gaysullivan.mp4
Wasn’t there a Mormon glowie that tried to flip Utah from Trump in 2016? But failed?
 
Trump issued a series of Executive Orders relating to education today:

REFORMING ACCREDITATION TO STRENGTHEN HIGHER EDUCATION​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. A group of higher education accreditors are the gatekeepers that decide which colleges and universities American students can spend the more than $100 billion in Federal student loans and Pell Grants dispersed each year. The accreditors’ job is to determine which institutions provide a quality education — and therefore merit accreditation. Unfortunately, accreditors have not only failed in this responsibility to students, families, and American taxpayers, but they have also abused their enormous authority.

Accreditors routinely approve institutions that are low-quality by the most important measures. The national six-year undergraduate graduation rate was an alarming 64 percent in 2020. Further, many accredited institutions offer undergraduate and graduate programs with a negative return on investment — almost 25 percent of bachelor’s degrees and more than 40 percent of master’s degrees — which may leave students financially worse off and in enormous debt by charging them exorbitant sums for a degree with very modest earnings potential.

Notwithstanding this slide in graduation rates and graduates’ performance in the labor market, the spike in debt obligations in relation to expected earnings, and repayment rates on student loans, accreditors have remained improperly focused on compelling adoption of discriminatory ideology, rather than on student outcomes. Some accreditors make the adoption of unlawfully discriminatory practices a formal standard of accreditation, and therefore a condition of accessing Federal aid, through “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or “DEI”-based standards of accreditation that require institutions to “share results on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the context of their mission by considering . . . demographics . . . and resource allocation.” Accreditors have also abused their governance standards to intrude on State and local authority.

The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council), which is the sole federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs, has required law schools to “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion” including by “commit[ting] to having a student body [and faculty] that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.” As the Attorney General has concluded and informed the Council, the discriminatory requirement blatantly violates the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023). Though the Council subsequently suspended its enforcement while it considers proposed revisions, this standard and similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated.

The Liaison Committee on Medical Education, which is the only federally recognized body that accredits Doctor of Medicine degree programs, requires that an institution “engage[] in ongoing, systematic, and focused recruitment and retention activities, to achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes among its students.” The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, which is the sole accreditor for both allopathic and osteopathic medical residency and fellowship programs, similarly “expect[S]” institutions to focus on implementing “policies and procedures related to recruitment and retention of individuals underrepresented in medicine,” including “racial and ethnic minority individuals.” The standards for training tomorrow’s doctors should focus solely on providing the highest quality care, and certainly not on requiring unlawful discrimination.

American students and taxpayers deserve better, and my Administration will reform our dysfunctional accreditation system so that colleges and universities focus on delivering high-quality academic programs at a reasonable price. Federal recognition will not be provided to accreditors engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of Federal law.

Sec. 2. Holding Accreditors Accountable for Unlawful Actions. (a) The Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, hold accountable, including through denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition, accreditors who fail to meet the applicable recognition criteria or otherwise violate Federal law, including by requiring institutions seeking accreditation to engage in unlawful discrimination in accreditation-related activity under the guise of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives.

(b) The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools that is advanced by the Council, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards. The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law.

(c) The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American medical schools or graduate medical education entities that is advanced by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education or the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or other accreditors of graduate medical education, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards. The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Committee’s or the Accreditation Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law or take other appropriate action to ensure lawful conduct by medical schools, graduate medical education programs, and other entities that receive Federal funding for medical education.

Sec. 3. New Principles of Student-Oriented Accreditation. (a) To realign accreditation with high-quality, valuable education for students, the Secretary of Education shall, consistent with applicable law, take appropriate steps to ensure that:

(i) accreditation requires higher education institutions to provide high-quality, high-value academic programs free from unlawful discrimination or other violations of Federal law;

(ii) barriers are reduced that limit institutions from adopting practices that advance credential and degree completion and spur new models of education;

(iii) accreditation requires that institutions support and appropriately prioritize intellectual diversity amongst faculty in order to advance academic freedom, intellectual inquiry, and student learning;

(iv) accreditors are not using their role under Federal law to encourage or force institution to violate State laws, unless such State laws violate the Constitution or Federal law; and

(v) accreditors are prohibited from engaging in practices that result in credential inflation that burdens students with additional unnecessary costs.

(b) To advance the policies and objectives in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of Education shall:

(i) resume recognizing new accreditors to increase competition and accountability in promoting high-quality, high-value academic programs focused on student outcomes;

(ii) mandate that accreditors require member institutions to use data on program-level student outcomes to improve such outcomes, without reference to race, ethnicity, or sex;

(iii) promptly provide to accreditors any noncompliance findings relating to member institutions issued after an investigation conducted by the Office of Civil Rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) or Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);

(iv) launch an experimental site, pursuant to section 487A(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094a(b)), to accelerate innovation and improve accountability by establishing new flexible and streamlined quality assurance pathways for higher education institutions that provide high-quality, high-value academic programs;

(v) increase the consistency, efficiency, and effectiveness of the accreditor recognition review process, including through the use of technology;

(vi) streamline the process for higher education institutions to change accreditors to ensure institutions are not forced to comply with standards that are antithetical to institutional values and mission; and

(vii) update the Accreditation Handbook to ensure that the accreditor recognition and reauthorization process is transparent, efficient, and not unduly burdensome.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)

TRANSPARENCY REGARDING FOREIGN INFLUENCE​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose and Policy. Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 1011f, requires institutions of higher education to report significant sources of foreign funding. But, because section 117 has not been robustly enforced, the true amounts, sources, and purposes of foreign money flowing to American campuses are unknown. From 2010 to 2016, according to one study, universities failed to disclose more than half of reportable foreign gifts. Even when foreign funding is reported, its true sources are often hidden.

Protecting American educational, cultural, and national security interests requires transparency regarding foreign funds flowing to American higher education and research institutions. During my first term, the Department of Education opened investigations on 19 campuses from 2019-2021, which led universities to report $6.5 billion in previously undisclosed foreign funds. Yet the prior administration undid this work, moving the Department of Education’s specialized investigatory work on foreign funds to a unit ill-equipped to perform it, undermining investigations, and hindering public access to information on foreign gifts and contracts.

It is the policy of my Administration to end the secrecy surrounding foreign funds in American educational institutions, protect the marketplace of ideas from propaganda sponsored by foreign governments, and safeguard America’s students and research from foreign exploitation.

Sec. 2. Robust Enforcement to Prevent Harm to American Interests. The Secretary of Education (Secretary) shall take all appropriate actions to enforce the requirements of section 1011f of title 20, United States Code, including by working with the Attorney General and the heads of other executive departments, agencies, and offices, where appropriate, to require complete and timely disclosure by higher education institutions of foreign funding. These actions shall include the following:

(a) the Secretary shall take appropriate steps to reverse or rescind any actions by the prior administration that permit higher education institutions to maintain improper secrecy regarding their foreign funding;

(b) the Secretary shall take appropriate steps to require universities to more specifically disclose details about foreign funding, including the true source and purpose of the funds;

(c) the Secretary shall provide the American people with greater access to information about foreign funding to higher education institutions; and

(d) the Secretary and the Attorney General shall hold accountable higher education institutions that fail to comply with the law concerning disclosure of foreign funding. In furtherance of this directive, the Secretary shall work with the heads of other executive departments, agencies, and offices, where appropriate, to conduct audits and investigations as appropriate and where necessary to ensure compliance with the law concerning disclosure of foreign funding and shall seek enforcement through appropriate action by the Attorney General.

Sec. 3. Compliance by Federal Funding Recipients. The Secretary of Education and the heads of other appropriate executive departments and agencies shall take appropriate action, as consistent with applicable law, to prospectively ensure that certification of compliance by higher education institutions with 20 U.S.C. 1011f and any other applicable foreign funding disclosure requirements is material for purposes of 31 U.S.C. 3729 and for receipt of appropriate Federal grant funds, which shall not be provided in cases of noncompliance with 20 U.S.C. 1011f and any other applicable foreign funding disclosure requirements.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d) If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any agency, person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other agencies, persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)

WHITE HOUSE INITIATIVE TO PROMOTE EXCELLENCE AND INNOVATION AT HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) remain integral to American students’ pursuit of prosperity and wellbeing, providing the pathway to a career and a better life. This order will continue the work begun during my first Administration to elevate the value and impact of our Nation’s HBCUs as beacons of educational excellence and economic opportunity that serve as some of the best cultivators of tomorrow’s leaders in business, government, academia, and the military.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of my Administration to support HBCUs in: advancing America’s full potential; fostering more and better opportunities in higher education; providing the highest-quality education; obtaining equal opportunities for participation in Federal programs; ensuring college-educated Americans are empowered to advance the common good at home and abroad; and making our Nation more globally competitive.

Sec. 3. White House Initiative on HBCUs. (a) There is hereby established the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (Initiative), housed in the Executive Office of the President and led by an Executive Director designated by the President.

(b) The Initiative shall work with executive departments and agencies (agencies), the President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities established in section 4 of this order, private-sector employers, educational associations, philanthropic organizations, and other partners to increase the capacity of HBCUs to provide the highest-quality education to an increasing number of students. The Initiative shall have two primary missions:

(i) increasing the private-sector role, including the role of private foundations, in:

(A) strengthening HBCUs through enhanced institutional planning and development, fiscal stability, and financial management;

(B) upgrading institutional infrastructure, including the use of technology, to ensure the long-term viability of these institutions; and

(C) providing professional development opportunities for HBCU students to help build America’s workforce in technology, healthcare, manufacturing, finance, and other high-growth industries; and

(ii) enhancing HBCUs’ capabilities to serve our Nation’s young adults by:

(A) supporting implementation of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (Public Law 116-270), including facilitating the Federal agency plan process required by section 4 of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1063d);

(B) working to advance my Administration’s key priorities related to promoting innovation and excellence throughout HBCUs in consultation with HBCU leaders, representatives, students, and alumni;

(C) fostering private-sector initiatives and public-private and philanthropic partnerships to promote centers of academic research and program excellence at HBCUs;

(D) improving the availability and quality of information concerning HBCUs in the public policy sphere;

(E) sharing administrative and programmatic best practices within the HBCU community;

(F) addressing efforts to promote student success and retention at HBCUs, including college affordability, degree attainment, campus modernization, and infrastructure improvements;

(G) partnering with private entities and elementary and secondary education stakeholders to build a pipeline for students that may be interested in attending HBCUs and promote affordable degree attainment;

(H) encouraging States to provide the required State matching funds for 1890 Land-Grant Institutions;

(I) collaborating with the Department of Agriculture and State governments to establish a framework for addressing barriers to accessing Federal funding to ensure that HBCUs receive the maximum funding to which they may be entitled;

(J) collaborating with agencies to improve the competitiveness of HBCUs for other sources of Federal research and development funding; and

(K) convening an annual White House Summit on HBCUs to address matters related to the Initiative’s missions and functions.

(c) The heads of agencies shall assist and provide information to the Initiative, consistent with applicable law, as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Initiative. Each agency shall bear its own expenses of participating in the Initiative.

Sec. 4. President’s Board of Advisors on HBCUs. (a) There is established in the Department of Education the President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (Board). The Board shall fulfill the mission and functions established by, shall have the structure set forth in, and shall in all other respects be subject to the provisions of section 5 of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (20 U.S.C. 1063e). The Board shall include representatives of a variety of sectors, such as philanthropy, education, business, finance, entrepreneurship, innovation, and private foundations, and current HBCU presidents.

(b) The Board shall advise the President, through the Initiative, on the matters set forth in section 5(c) of the HBCU PARTNERS Act (20 U.S.C. 1063e(c)).

(c) The Department of Education shall provide funding and administrative support for the Board, consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. Insofar as chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act), may apply to the Board, any functions of the President under that Act, except for those in section 6 and section 14 of that Act, shall be performed by the Secretary of Education, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Administrator of General Services.

Sec. 5. Accountability and Implementation. (a) The Executive Director of the Initiative shall submit an annual progress report to the President summarizing the Federal Government’s impact on HBCUs and providing recommendations for improvement.

Sec. 6. Revocations. Executive Order 14041 of September 3, 2021 (White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity Through Historically Black Colleges and Universities), is hereby revoked. Within 14 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions Advisory Council.

Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) For the purposes of this order, “historically black colleges and universities” shall mean those institutions listed in 34 C.F.R. 608.2.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)

PREPARING AMERICANS FOR HIGH-PAYING SKILLED TRADE JOBS OF THE FUTURE​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. To maximize my Administration’s historic investments in America’s reindustrialization and economic growth, my Administration will fully equip the American worker to produce world-class products and implement world-leading technologies. My Administration will also consolidate and streamline fragmented Federal workforce development programs that are too disconnected from propelling workers into secure, well-paying, and high-need American jobs.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to optimize and target Federal investments in workforce development to align with our country’s reindustrialization needs and equip American workers to fill the growing demand for skilled trades and other occupations. My Administration will further protect and strengthen Registered Apprenticeships and build on their successes to seize new opportunities and unlock the limitless potential of the American worker.

Sec. 3. Comprehensive Worker Investment and Development Strategy. Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Education shall review all Federal workforce development programs and submit to the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a report setting forth strategies to help the American worker. That report shall identify the following:

(a) Opportunities to integrate systems and realign resources to address critical workforce needs and in-demand skills of emerging industries and companies investing in the United States as determined, to the extent permissible by law, by prospective employers. The report shall include:

(i) administrative reforms to agency policies and programmatic requirements;

(ii) process improvements to better the experience for program participants; and

(iii) recommendations to further restructure and consolidate programs.

(b) Federal workforce development and education programs, or related spending within these programs, that are ineffective or otherwise fail to achieve their desired outcomes. Each identified program should be accompanied by a proposal to reform the program, redirect its funding, or eliminate it.

(c) Available statutory authorities to promote innovation and system integration in pursuit of better employment and earnings outcomes for program participants.

(d) Opportunities to invest in the upskilling of incumbent workers to meet rapidly evolving skill demands of their industries, including the use of Artificial Intelligence in the workplace.

(e) Strategies to identify alternative credentials and assessments to the 4-year college degree that can be mapped to the specific skill needs of prospective employers.

(f) Efficiencies to streamline information collection, including through:

(i) harmonizing performance measures;

(ii) reducing the burden on grantees; and

(iii) ensuring that performance outcomes are measured using the most reliable data sources.

Sec. 4. Expanding Registered Apprenticeships. Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Education shall submit to the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget a plan to reach and surpass 1 million new active apprentices. That plan shall identify the following:

(a) Avenues to expand Registered Apprenticeships to new industries and occupations, including high-growth and emerging sectors.

(b) Measures to scale this proven model across the country, improve its efficiency, and provide consistent support to program participants.

(c) Opportunities, including through the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education (Perkins V) Act and Federal student aid, to enhance connections between the education system and Registered Apprenticeships.

Sec. 5. Delivering Unprecedented Transparency and Accountability. The Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Education shall improve transparency on the performance outcomes of workforce development programs and credentials supported through Federal investments, including earnings and employment data, for all Federal workforce development programs.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)

REINSTATING COMMON SENSE SCHOOL DISCIPLINE POLICIES​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to ensure safety and order in American classrooms, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose and Policy. The Federal Government will no longer tolerate known risks to children’s safety and well-being in the classroom that result from the application of school discipline based on discriminatory and unlawful “equity” ideology.

In January 2014, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice jointly issued a “Dear Colleague” letter regarding school discipline. In that letter, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice explained that schools could be found to violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — and therefore could lose Federal funding — if their disciplinary decisions ran afoul of a newly imposed disparate-impact framework under which race-neutral disciplinary policies, applied in an even-handed manner, may be improper if members of any racial groups are suspended, expelled, or referred to law enforcement at higher rates than others. The letter effectively required schools to discriminate on the basis of race by imposing discipline based on racial characteristics, rather than on objective behavior alone.

The consequences harmed students and schools. A 2018 report from the Federal Commission on School Safety (Commission) noted evidence that, because of the 2014 letter, “schools ignored or covered up — rather than disciplined — student misconduct in order to avoid any purported racial disparity in discipline numbers that might catch the eye of the federal government.” As a result, students who should have been suspended or expelled for dangerous behavior remained in the classroom, making all students less safe.

As the Commission found: “When school leaders focus on aggregate school discipline numbers rather than the specific circumstances and conduct that underlie each matter, schools become less safe,” and “[r]esearch clearly indicates that the failure of schools to appropriately discipline disruptive students has consequences for overall student achievement.” The Commission’s seemingly obvious conclusion was that “disciplinary decisions are best left in the hands of classroom teachers and administrators” and should be based on student behavior, rather than racial statistics.

Following the Commission’s report on December 18, 2018, the 2014 Dear Colleague letter was rescinded. In 2023, however, the previous administration’s Department of Education and Department of Justice issued new guidance noting that statistical racial disparities in student discipline may indicate violations of law, and encouraging schools to collect, analyze, and adjust their disciplinary policies in light of racial disciplinary data. The 2023 guidance thus effectively reinstated the practice of weaponizing Title VI to promote an approach to school discipline based on discriminatory equity ideology. As a consequence of these policies, teachers and students are suffering increased levels of classroom disorder and school violence.

Sec. 2. Definitions. As used herein:
(a) The definitions in the Executive Order of January 29, 2025 (Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling), shall apply to this order.
(b) “Behavior Modification Techniques” means any school discipline policies or practices that incorporate or are based on discriminatory equity ideology.

Sec. 3. Ensuring Commonsense School Discipline Policies. (a) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall issue new guidance to local educational agencies (LEAs) and State educational agencies (SEAs) regarding school discipline and their obligations not to engage in racial discrimination under Title VI in all contexts, including school discipline.
(b) The Secretary of Education shall take appropriate action with respect to LEAs and SEAs that fail to comply with Title VI protections against racial discrimination in the application of school discipline.
(c) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education and the Attorney General shall initiate coordination with Governors and State Attorneys General regarding the prevention of racial discrimination in the application of school discipline.
(d) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense shall issue a revised school discipline code that appropriately protects and enhances the education of the children of America’s military-service families.
(e) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall, in coordination with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, regarding the status of discriminatory-equity-ideology-based school discipline and behavior modification techniques in American public education . The report shall include:
(i) an inventory and analysis of the nature and consequences of all Title VI discipline-related investigations since 2009;
(ii) an assessment of the role of non-profit organizations that are Federal grant recipients in promoting discriminatory-equity-ideology-based discipline and behavior modification techniques, and recommendations to ensure that Federal taxpayer funds do not flow to programs or activities, including those of non-profit organizations, that promote discriminatory-equity-ideology-based discipline and behavior modification techniques;
(iii) an assessment of discipline-related policies and curricular options that do not promote discriminatory equity ideology; and
(iv) model school discipline policies that promote common sense, protect the safety and educational environment of students, do not promote unlawful discrimination, and are rooted in American values and traditional virtues.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.



DONALD J. TRUMP



THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)

ADVANCING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE EDUCATION FOR AMERICAN YOUTH​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Background. Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the modern world, driving innovation across industries, enhancing productivity, and reshaping the way we live and work. To ensure the United States remains a global leader in this technological revolution, we must provide our Nation’s youth with opportunities to cultivate the skills and understanding necessary to use and create the next generation of AI technology. By fostering AI competency, we will equip our students with the foundational knowledge and skills necessary to adapt to and thrive in an increasingly digital society. Early learning and exposure to AI concepts not only demystifies this powerful technology but also sparks curiosity and creativity, preparing students to become active and responsible participants in the workforce of the future and nurturing the next generation of American AI innovators to propel our Nation to new heights of scientific and economic achievement.
To achieve this vision, we must also invest in our educators and equip them with the tools and knowledge to not only train students about AI, but also to utilize AI in their classrooms to improve educational outcomes. Professional development programs focused on AI education will empower educators to confidently guide students through this complex and evolving field. Educators, industry leaders, and employers who rely on an AI-skilled workforce should partner to create educational programs that equip students with essential AI skills and competencies across all learning pathways. While AI education in kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) is critical, our Nation must also make resources available for lifelong learners to develop new skills for a changing workforce. By establishing a strong framework that integrates early student exposure with comprehensive teacher training and other resources for workforce development, we can ensure that every American has the opportunity to learn about AI from the earliest stages of their educational journey through postsecondary education, fostering a culture of innovation and critical thinking that will solidify our Nation’s leadership in the AI-driven future.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to promote AI literacy and proficiency among Americans by promoting the appropriate integration of AI into education, providing comprehensive AI training for educators, and fostering early exposure to AI concepts and technology to develop an AI-ready workforce and the next generation of American AI innovators.

Sec. 3. Definition. For the purposes of this order, “artificial intelligence” or “AI” has the meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).

Sec. 4. Establishing an Artificial Intelligence Education Task Force. (a) There is hereby established the White House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence Education (Task Force).
(b) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall be the Chair of the Task Force.
(c) The Task Force membership shall consist of the following members:
(i) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(ii) the Secretary of Labor;
(iii) the Secretary of Energy;
(iv) the Secretary of Education;
(v) the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF);
(vi) the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy;
(vii) the Special Advisor for AI & Crypto;
(viii) the Assistant to the President for Policy; and
(ix) the heads of other such executive departments and agencies (agencies) and offices that the Chair may designate or invite to participate.
(d) The Task Force shall be responsible for implementing the policy stated in section 2 of this order and coordinating Federal efforts related to AI education, including the actions outlined in this order.

Sec. 5. Establishing the Presidential Artificial Intelligence Challenge. (a) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Task Force shall establish plans for a Presidential Artificial Intelligence Challenge (Challenge), and the agencies represented on the Task Force shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, implement the plans by holding the Challenge no later than 12 months from the submission of the plan. The Challenge shall encourage and highlight student and educator achievements in AI, promote wide geographic adoption of technological advancement, and foster collaboration between government, academia, philanthropy, and industry to address national challenges with AI solutions.
(b) The Challenge shall feature multiple age categories, distinct geographic regions for competition, and a variety of topical themes of competition to reflect the breadth of AI applications, encouraging interdisciplinary exploration.
(c) The Task Force and, as appropriate, agencies represented on the Task Force shall collaborate with relevant agencies and private sector entities to provide technical expertise, resources, and promotional support for implementing the Challenge, including through existing funding vehicles.

Sec. 6. Improving Education Through Artificial Intelligence. (a) To provide resources for K-12 AI education, agencies represented on the Task Force shall seek to establish public-private partnerships with leading AI industry organizations, academic institutions, nonprofit entities, and other organizations with expertise in AI and computer science education to collaboratively develop online resources focused on teaching K-12 students foundational AI literacy and critical thinking skills. The Task Force shall promptly announce such public-private partnerships on a rolling basis as they are formed.
(i) The Task Force shall seek to utilize industry commitments and identify any Federal funding mechanisms, including discretionary grants, that can be used to provide resources for K-12 AI education. To the extent practicable and as consistent with applicable law, agencies shall prioritize funding for such purposes when it would further the aims of the program for which funding is available.
(ii) The Task Force shall work to ensure the resources funded as described in subsection (i) of this section are ready for use in K-12 instruction within 180 days following the Task Force’s formal announcement of the first slate of public-private partnerships.
(b) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Task Force shall identify existing Federal AI resources on which agencies may rely, such as the NSF- and Department of Agriculture-sponsored National AI Research Institutes, to support partnerships with State and local educational agencies to improve AI education.
(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall issue guidance regarding the use of formula and discretionary grant funds to improve education outcomes using AI, including but not limited to AI-based high-quality instructional resources; high-impact tutoring; and college and career pathway exploration, advising, and navigation.
(d) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall identify and implement ways to utilize existing research programs to assist State and local efforts to use AI for improved student achievement, attainment, and mobility.

Sec. 7. Enhancing Training for Educators on Artificial Intelligence. (a) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Education shall take steps to prioritize the use of AI in discretionary grant programs for teacher training authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10), as amended, and Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-329), as amended, including for:
(i) reducing time-intensive administrative tasks;
(ii) improving teacher training and evaluation;
(iii) providing professional development for all educators, so they can integrate the fundamentals of AI into all subject areas; and
(iv) providing professional development in foundational computer science and AI, preparing educators to effectively teach AI in stand-alone computer science and other relevant courses.
(b) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Director of the NSF shall take steps to prioritize research on the use of AI in education. The Director of the NSF shall also utilize existing programs to create teacher training opportunities that help educators effectively integrate AI-based tools and modalities in classrooms.
(c) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Agriculture shall take steps to prioritize research, extension, and education on the use of AI in formal and non-formal education through 4-H and the Cooperative Extension System. The Secretary of Agriculture shall also utilize existing programs to create teacher and educator training opportunities that help effectively integrate AI-based tools and modalities into classrooms and curriculum.

Sec. 8. Promoting Registered Apprenticeships. (a) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor shall seek to increase participation in AI-related Registered Apprenticeships, including by:
(i) Prioritizing the development and growth of Registered Apprenticeships in AI-related occupations. The Secretary of Labor shall establish specific goals for growing Registered Apprenticeships in AI-related occupations across industries; and
(ii) Using apprenticeship intermediary contracts and allocating existing discretionary funds, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to engage industry organizations and employers and facilitate the development of Registered Apprenticeship programs in AI-related occupations. In doing so, the Secretary of Labor shall support the creation of industry-developed program standards to be registered on a nationwide basis, enabling individual employers to adopt the standards without requiring individual registry.
(b) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor shall encourage States and grantees to use funding provided under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) (Public Law 113-128), as amended, to develop AI skills and support work-based learning opportunities within occupations utilizing AI by:
(i) issuing guidance to State and local workforce development boards encouraging the use of WIOA youth formula funds to help youth develop AI skills;
(ii) clarifying that States can use Governor set-asides to integrate AI learning opportunities into youth programs across the State; and
(iii) consistent with applicable law, establishing AI skills training and work-based learning as a grant priority in all Employment and Training Administration youth-focused discretionary grant programs.
(c) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor, through the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training, and in collaboration with the Director of the NSF, shall engage with relevant State and local workforce development boards, industry organizations, education and training providers, and employers to identify and promote high-quality AI skills education coursework and certifications across the country. Through such engagement, the Secretary of Labor shall:
(i) identify applicable funding opportunities to expand access to high-quality AI coursework and certifications;
(ii) set performance targets for youth participation through any grants awarded for this purpose; and
(iii) utilize industry and philanthropic partnerships to the extent practicable.
(d) Within 120 days of the date of this order, and in consultation with the Secretary of Education and the Director of the NSF, the Secretary of Labor shall support the creation of opportunities for high school students to take AI courses and certification programs by giving priority consideration in awarding grants as appropriate and consistent with applicable law to providers that commit to use funds to develop or expand AI courses and certification programs. The Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Education shall encourage recipients to build partnerships with States and local school districts to encourage those entities to consider offering high school students dual enrollment opportunities to take courses to earn postsecondary credentials and industry-recognized AI credentials concurrent with high school education.
(e) Within 120 days of the date of this order, all agencies that provide educational grants shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consider AI as a priority area within existing Federal fellowship and scholarship for service programs.

Sec. 9. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)


He also issued an Executive Order to get rid of Disparate Impact Theory:

RESTORING EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND MERITOCRACY​

Executive Orders
April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. A bedrock principle of the United States is that all citizens are treated equally under the law. This principle guarantees equality of opportunity, not equal outcomes. It promises that people are treated as individuals, not components of a particular race or group. It encourages meritocracy and a colorblind society, not race- or sex-based favoritism. Adherence to this principle is essential to creating opportunity, encouraging achievement, and sustaining the American Dream.
But a pernicious movement endangers this foundational principle, seeking to transform America’s promise of equal opportunity into a divisive pursuit of results preordained by irrelevant immutable characteristics, regardless of individual strengths, effort, or achievement. A key tool of this movement is disparate-impact liability, which holds that a near insurmountable presumption of unlawful discrimination exists where there are any differences in outcomes in certain circumstances among different races, sexes, or similar groups, even if there is no facially discriminatory policy or practice or discriminatory intent involved, and even if everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed. Disparate-impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability. It not only undermines our national values, but also runs contrary to equal protection under the law and, therefore, violates our Constitution.
On a practical level, disparate-impact liability has hindered businesses from making hiring and other employment decisions based on merit and skill, their needs, or the needs of their customers because of the specter that such a process might lead to disparate outcomes, and thus disparate-impact lawsuits. This has made it difficult, and in some cases impossible, for employers to use bona fide job-oriented evaluations when recruiting, which prevents job seekers from being paired with jobs to which their skills are most suited — in other words, it deprives them of opportunities for success. Because of disparate-impact liability, employers cannot act in the best interests of the job applicant, the employer, and the American public.
Disparate-impact liability imperils the effectiveness of civil rights laws by mandating, rather than proscribing, discrimination. As the Supreme Court put it, “[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
Disparate-impact liability is wholly inconsistent with the Constitution and threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream. Under my Administration, citizens will be treated equally before the law and as individuals, not consigned to a certain fate based on their immutable characteristics.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the Constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals.

Sec 3. Revoking Certain Presidential Actions. The following Presidential approvals of the regulations promulgated under 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1 are hereby revoked:
(a) the Presidential approval of July 25, 1966, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (31 Fed. Reg. 10269), as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(2) in full; and
(b) the Presidential approval of July 5, 1973, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (38 Fed. Reg. 17955, FR Doc. 73-13407), as applied to the words “or effect” in both places they appear in 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(3), and as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(6)(ii) and 28 C.F.R. 42.104(c)(2) in full.

Sec. 4. Enforcement Discretion to Ensure Lawful Governance. Given the limited enforcement resources of executive departments and agencies (agencies), the unlawfulness of disparate-impact liability, and the policy of this order, all agencies shall deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate-impact liability, including but not limited to 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2, 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(2)–(3), 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(6)(ii), and 28 C.F.R. 42.104(c)(2).

Sec. 5. Existing Regulations. (a) As delegated by Executive Order 12250 of November 2, 1980 (Leadership and Coordination of Nondiscrimination Laws), the Attorney General shall initiate appropriate action to repeal or amend the implementing regulations for Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for all agencies to the extent they contemplate disparate-impact liability.
(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General, in coordination with the heads of all other agencies, shall report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy:
(i) all existing regulations, guidance, rules, or orders that impose disparate-impact liability or similar requirements, and detail agency steps for their amendment or repeal, as appropriate under applicable law; and
(ii) other laws or decisions, including at the State level, that impose disparate-impact liability and any appropriate measures to address any constitutional or other legal infirmities.

Sec. 6. Review of Current Matters. (a) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall assess all pending investigations, civil suits, or positions taken in ongoing matters under every Federal civil rights law within their respective jurisdictions, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that rely on a theory of disparate-impact liability, and shall take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.
(b) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission, and the heads of other agencies responsible for enforcement of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Public Law 93-495), Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the Fair Housing Act (Public Law 90-284, as amended)), or laws prohibiting unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices shall evaluate all pending proceedings that rely on theories of disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.
(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, all agencies shall evaluate existing consent judgments and permanent injunctions that rely on theories of disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.

Sec. 7. Future Agency Action. (a) In coordination with other agencies, the Attorney General shall determine whether any Federal authorities preempt State laws, regulations, policies, or practices that impose disparate-impact liability based on a federally protected characteristic such as race, sex, or age, or whether such laws, regulations, policies, or practices have constitutional infirmities that warrant Federal action, and shall take appropriate measures consistent with the policy of this order.
(b) The Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall jointly formulate and issue guidance or technical assistance to employers regarding appropriate methods to promote equal access to employment regardless of whether an applicant has a college education, where appropriate.

Sec. 8. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any individual or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its other provisions to any other individuals or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 9. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: 
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or 
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. 
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. 
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. 


DONALD J. TRUMP


THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 23, 2025.
Source (Archive)
 
Última edición:
Wasn’t there a Mormon glowie that tried to flip Utah from Trump in 2016? But failed?

There was a House Representive that got elected in midterms if i remember right. He got booted, and with redistricting, Dems are basically banished for 10 years.
I think you're thinking of Evan McMullin. He was floated as a "conservative" alternative to Trump but only managed to pull in a little over 20% of the vote. Glowed so bright he could be seen from space and was probably gay.
 
Tulsi Gabbard doesn't give names, but says it relates to the Washington Post leak. Let's see if Pam Bondi will actually charge anyone with a crime for once.
Apparently Kristi Noem has been polygraphing members of the DHS and everyone she can, because the Deep State is real and she's rooting them out.
 
What will replace the Department Of Education? You failed to answer.
You do realize federal education funding only made up like 8% of the total including special education and such, right? It's not like there will be states who can't afford textbooks or electricity in the building. They'll be fine. The threat of losing federal funding, however, is how shit like common core came got pushed on everyone along with other retarded initiatives that did fuck all to improve actual literacy, math, and science scores.

With doe gone, the states will have full control over their curriculum without the threat of federal funding being yanked hanging over their head.
Competent states will provide competent education. Incompetent states will flounder. But even in that case because it's at a state and local level parents will have more say over what is or isn't in the curriculum and how it's done. At worst, they can leave the state to somewhere with better education instead of a uniform pile of shit being available across the country. This in itself forces a form of competition as some states become the states of "good education" and others are avoided like the plague.
Use your fucking brain.
Tulsi Gabbard doesn't give names, but says it relates to the Washington Post leak. Let's see if Pam Bondi will actually charge anyone with a crime for once.
Has Bondi done anything at all? The only things I can think of is complete floundering and dumb bitch behavior, and going after tesla domestic terrorists. Not sure if it's just the impression she gives off but she seems pretty worthless to me so far.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo