View the Original .pdfThe 1-Minute Brief
What: Executive Order 14150 directs the Secretary of State to align the Department of State's policies, programs, and personnel with an "America First" foreign policy, prioritizing core American interests and citizens.
Money: The order does not specify any new appropriations or detailed costs. It is to be implemented subject to the availability of existing appropriations.
Your Impact: The most likely direct effect on an average American would be a shift in international relations, potentially altering trade dynamics, foreign aid distribution, and the country's posture in global alliances and conflicts.
Status: This Executive Order was signed by the President on January 20, 2025, and filed for public inspection.
What's Actually in the Bill
Executive Order 14150 establishes a new guiding principle for United States foreign policy. It mandates that the nation's diplomatic efforts, as executed by the Department of State, must be centered on a philosophy of "America First." This means that all policies, programs, and operations are to be re-evaluated and reshaped to prioritize the interests of the United States and its citizens above all else.
Core Provisions:
- The Secretary of State is required to issue new guidance to ensure the Department of State aligns with the "America First" principle as soon as practicable. (Sec. 2)
- The order stipulates that it does not impair the existing legal authority of executive departments or the budgetary functions of the Office of Management and Budget. (Sec. 3)
- Implementation is contingent upon applicable law and the availability of appropriations. (Sec. 3)
Stated Purpose (from the Sponsors):
- To champion core American interests through the nation's foreign policy. (Sec. 1)
- To ensure that the foreign policy of the United States consistently puts America and its citizens first. (Sec. 1)
Key Facts:
Affected Sectors: Foreign Affairs, International Trade, Defense, Foreign Aid.
Timeline: The Secretary of State is to issue guidance "as soon as practicable" after the order date of January 20, 2025. (Sec. 2)
Scope: This is a comprehensive directive affecting all policies, programs, personnel, and operations of the U.S. Department of State worldwide.
The Backstory: How We Got Here
Timeline of Events:
The "America First" Slogan (Early 20th Century):
The phrase "America First" has a long history in U.S. political discourse. It was notably used by President Woodrow Wilson during his 1916 reelection campaign to underscore his policy of neutrality in World War I. Following the war, the slogan was adopted by figures like newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst to oppose U.S. participation in the League of Nations. In the period leading up to World War II, it became the banner for the America First Committee, a non-interventionist group that opposed U.S. entry into the war and included controversial figures like Charles Lindbergh. The slogan was also associated with nativist and xenophobic movements, including the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s.
Post-World War II Internationalism (1945-2016):
Following World War II, the dominant U.S. foreign policy consensus shifted toward internationalism. This approach emphasized multilateral agreements, collective security through alliances like NATO, and active U.S. leadership in global institutions. This era was characterized by a belief that American interests were best served by promoting a stable, democratic, and economically interconnected world order.
Trump Administration and the Revival of "America First" (2017-2021):
Donald Trump made "America First" the "major and overriding theme" of his 2016 presidential campaign and subsequent administration. This marked a significant departure from the post-war consensus. Policies during this period included withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the Iran nuclear deal. The administration also engaged in trade wars, imposing tariffs on goods from countries like China, and pushed NATO allies to increase their defense spending.
Why Now? The Political Calculus:
- Fulfillment of Campaign Promise: The issuance of this executive order on the first day of a new presidential term signals a clear and immediate intent to reinstate the foreign policy doctrine of the previous administration. It is a direct appeal to a political base that responded positively to the "America First" message.
- Reversal of Preceding Policies: The order is a direct counterpoint to the foreign policy of the immediately preceding administration, which had emphasized rebuilding alliances, rejoining international agreements like the Paris accord and the WHO, and leading through multilateral coalitions.
- Economic and Social Pressures: The directive taps into a sentiment among some Americans that the U.S. has been shouldering an unfair burden in international commitments and that a focus on domestic issues and national interest is overdue.
Your Real-World Impact
The Direct Answer: This directly affects industries involved in international trade and defense, as well as specific groups like military families and citizens living abroad, but its indirect effects on the economy and international relations could be felt by most Americans.
What Could Change for You:
Potential Benefits:
- Proponents argue that a focus on bilateral trade deals over multilateral ones could result in agreements more favorable to specific U.S. industries and workers.
- A reduction in foreign aid and spending on international organizations could, in theory, lead to more federal funds being available for domestic priorities.
- Supporters believe a more assertive, transactional foreign policy can deter adversaries and command greater respect on the world stage, enhancing national security.
Possible Disruptions or Costs:
Short-term (1-2 years):
- Increased friction with traditional allies could disrupt diplomatic and security cooperation.
- The imposition of new tariffs could lead to retaliatory tariffs from other countries, increasing the cost of imported goods for American consumers and hurting U.S. exporters.
Long-term:
- A sustained withdrawal from international leadership could create power vacuums that are filled by rival nations like China and Russia.
- A decline in multilateral cooperation could hinder progress on global challenges that affect Americans, such as climate change, pandemics, and terrorism.
Who's Most Affected:
Primary Groups: U.S. diplomats and federal employees in the State Department, service members deployed abroad, and businesses that rely heavily on international trade and supply chains.
Secondary Groups: Taxpayers (due to shifts in federal spending), consumers (due to potential price changes from tariffs), and industries competing with foreign imports.
Regional Impact: The impact could be significant in states with large manufacturing sectors, agricultural exporters, or a heavy military presence.
Bottom Line: This executive order sets the stage for a foreign policy that prioritizes domestic concerns, which could reshape America's relationships with other countries and impact the cost of goods and international stability.
Where the Parties Stand
Republican Position: "Peace Through Strength"
Core Stance: The Republican platform generally advocates for a foreign policy centered on American interests, a strong national defense, and a willingness to act unilaterally when necessary.
Their Arguments:
- ✓ They support prioritizing the American homeland, borders, and economic prosperity in all foreign policy decisions.
- ✓ They argue for increasing military spending and modernizing the armed forces to ensure the U.S. remains the world's preeminent power.
- ⚠️ While supporting alliances, they insist that allies must meet their own defense spending obligations and not "free-ride" on U.S. security guarantees.
- ✗ They often express skepticism toward international organizations and treaties that they believe could constrain U.S. sovereignty.
Legislative Strategy: Generally supportive of the "America First" approach, their strategy involves promoting policies that strengthen the military, secure the border, and use economic leverage, such as tariffs, to achieve foreign policy goals.
Democratic Position: "Strengthen American Leadership Worldwide"
Core Stance: The Democratic platform typically favors a multilateral approach to foreign policy, emphasizing diplomacy, international cooperation, and alliances to address global challenges.
Their Arguments:
- ✓ They support leading through international partnerships and strengthening traditional alliances to enhance collective security.
- ✓ They advocate for using diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement tools over military force to address threats, and want to end "forever wars."
- ⚠️ They express concern that an "America First" approach alienates allies and weakens U.S. influence and moral standing.
- ✗ They oppose withdrawing from international agreements on critical issues like climate change and public health, viewing it as detrimental to U.S. interests.
Legislative Strategy: Their strategy focuses on restoring funding for diplomacy and foreign aid, re-engaging with international institutions, and using congressional oversight to challenge policies they view as isolationist or harmful to alliances.
Constitutional Check
The Verdict: ✓ Constitutional
Basis of Authority:
The President's authority in foreign affairs is primarily rooted in Article II of the Constitution.
Article II, Section 1: "[T]he executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."
Article II, Section 2: The President is granted the power to make treaties (with Senate consent) and appoint ambassadors.
Article II, Section 3: The President has the duty to "receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers."
Constitutional Implications:
[Legal Principle]: The Supreme Court has long recognized the President as the nation's "sole organ" in its external relations. This gives the President broad authority to direct the executive branch, including the Department of State, on matters of foreign policy.
[Precedent]: In cases like United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), the Supreme Court affirmed the President's expansive powers in foreign affairs, suggesting a distinction between domestic and foreign policy authority.
[Federalism]: This Executive Order directs the actions of a federal executive department. It does not directly command state governments and therefore does not raise immediate federalism concerns.
Potential Legal Challenges:
Legal challenges to this executive order are unlikely to succeed. The text itself contains a standard clause stating it does not create any new enforceable right or benefit for any party against the United States. (Sec. 3c) Courts are generally reluctant to intervene in the President's direction of foreign policy, a domain where the executive branch has significant discretion. The order is structured as an internal directive to a part of the executive branch, falling squarely within the President's constitutional authority as chief executive.
Your Action Options
TO SUPPORT THIS BILL
5-Minute Actions:
- Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121. "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to support the President's 'America First' foreign policy directive outlined in Executive Order 14150."
30-Minute Deep Dive:
- Write a Detailed Email: Contact your representatives and the White House to express your support for a foreign policy that prioritizes American workers, national security, and domestic interests.
- Join an Organization: Look into conservative think tanks and advocacy groups that promote an "America First" foreign policy.
- The Heritage Foundation
- Hoover Institution
- Center for the National Interest
TO OPPOSE THIS BILL
5-Minute Actions:
- Call Your Rep/Senators: Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121. "I'm a constituent from [Your City/Town] and I urge [Rep./Sen. Name] to oppose the 'America First' approach in Executive Order 14150 and support a foreign policy based on international cooperation and alliances."
30-Minute Deep Dive:
- Write a Letter to the Editor: Submit a letter to your local newspaper arguing that an "America First" policy isolates the U.S. and is detrimental to solving global issues that affect all Americans.
- Join an Organization: Consider supporting think tanks and advocacy groups that favor multilateralism and diplomacy.
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
- Center for International Policy
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft