Mariya Mujahid
Associate Editor
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2026
On February 18, 2025, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14216, titled “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” mandating that independent federal agencies route their rules and new actions through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The order aims to enhance presidential oversight over agencies that traditionally operate with a degree of autonomy, like as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The order signifies a substantial shift in the dynamics of the American regulatory state.
Breaking down Executive Order 14216
The executive order expands the President’s authority over the executive branch, including independent regulatory agencies, to ensure “accountability” and alignment with the Trump administration’s policy priorities. It also critiques previous administrations for allowing independent agencies to operate with minimal oversight, stating that regulatory agencies have undermined their accountability and have prevented a “unified and coherent execution of Federal law.”
The order mandates that all executive agencies submit significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review before publication. It also establishes the process by which the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will oversee these agencies, which involves setting performance standards, reviewing financial apportionments, and requiring regular consultations with White House offices. Additionally, independent regulatory agencies must appoint White House Liaisons to facilitate coordination.
The order explicitly extends OIRA review to independent agencies, except for the Federal Reserve in its monetary policy role. It also declares that the President and the Attorney General have the final say on legal interpretations within the executive branch, which ensures that federal employees cannot contradict the Trump administration’s final say in official actions.
Implications for the American regulatory state
This executive order represents a significant reconfiguration of the American regulatory framework, with several potential implications. First, independent agencies were established by Congress to operate free from political influence, allowing for unbiased regulation based on expertise. Some agencies have, by presidents in the past, been required to submit rules or proposed actions to the OMB. However, these agencies were not ones set up by Congress to act independent of the White House. Congress has enacted laws that set agencies like the SEC and the FTC apart from other administrative agencies, granting them more independence such that presidential interference could be avoided as much as possible.
This executive order represents a significant expansion of presidential oversight over independent agencies, potentially reducing their autonomy and subjecting them to greater political influence. This expansion of presidential authority is an expected, but worrying move. The president’s recent actions, like firing a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and dismissing the head of the Office of Special Counsel, whose position was protected by statute, point to a clear disregard of the important roles independent regulatory agencies play.
The executive order has elicited varied responses. Democratic leaders have expressed concern over potential encroachments on agency independence. Senator Elizabeth Warren, for instance, has urged nominees to affirm their commitment to maintaining the Federal Reserve’s autonomy amidst fears of increased political influence. The National Law Review noted that the order “tees up potential legal challenges regarding the extent of presidential authority over independent agencies.”
Historically, independent agencies have functioned with a degree of separation from the executive branch to prevent undue political influence and ensure decisions rooted in expertise. Executive Order 14216 challenges this tradition, potentially setting a precedent for future administrations to exert greater control over regulatory bodies.
The long-term effects of this order will depend on its implementation and the outcomes of anticipated legal challenges. If upheld, it could lead to a more political meddling and conflicts of interest, particularly considering the fact this administration is clearly business friendly. This executive order, along with the existence and actions of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) point to the Trump administration’s effort to greatly expand and solidify presidential power. Already, the regulatory framework built by these independent agencies is suffering from budget cuts that affect their regulatory ability. By extending executive oversight to independent agencies, the order stomps on the principles of agency independence, the separation of powers, and the importance of effective and impartial governance.