During the last six weeks, over 100 presidential executive orders have been signed and issued resulting in a whirlwind of change. To unpack the implications, the University of Houston Law Center and the Hobby School of Public Affairs hosted a webinar, bringing together 13 legal and policy experts to dissect how these orders are reshaping key policies.
The half-day virtual event, “Key Policy Considerations for the Administration,” featured panel discussions in four key areas: Economic Policy, Higher Education, Immigration, and Energy and Environmental Policy.
Energy and the Environment Policy
Energy policy is an important policy area for the new administration. UHLC Professor Tracy Hester highlighted that the administration is employing various tools to bypass traditional rulemaking processes and drive policy changes, including executive orders, emergency authorities, budget reconciliation, and direct final rules.
The EPA is reconsidering California's fuel waiver, which permits stricter emissions regulations, and the Biden administration's methane emissions rule. Both actions could lead to significant regulatory shifts.
"Put all those together and what you have is a way to essentially jumpstart sweeping change in a way that may not stick, but that may not matter,” Hester said. “Simply because once you've got a new status quo, it's possible to get different types of essentially legislative ratification after the fact, or other types of enforcement tools that let you memorialize and set in some form of administrative concrete."
Dean Marcilynn Burke, from Tulane University's Law School, also weighed in on the broader implications of these changes, emphasizing that environmental, natural, and cultural protections will continue to be contested.
"This is a roller coaster – so whether…you're the person over here that's like, ‘Whee, this is great! These are the changes that were long overdue,’ or the person that is horrified by what is going on…I say for sure that we all need to buckle up," Burke said. “Because the political dynamics that are at play here, we don't know what the end will be.”
Trade and Economic Policy
Elizabeth Trujillo, UHLC professor and expert in international trade law, opened the discussion on trade policy by illustrating the broader global context. "World trade has grown from 25% in the 1960s to about 60% today," she said, pointing to decades of
declining tariffs — from an average of 40% in the 1940s to around 2-4% today. This shift, she noted, underpins the current interconnected economy.
She noted that Mexico is now the leading trading partner of the U.S., with $840 billion in goods exchanged, making up 15.8% of total trade. Canada is next at 14.3%, followed by China at 10.9%. Despite this, China has the largest trade deficit with the U.S., amounting to $295.4 billion.
“The focus is on trade deficit reduction,” Trujillo added. “We’re seeing increased use of trade tariffs as some form of economic tools, sometimes coercive in their nature.”
UHLC Professor Bret Wells added that the budget deficit is a large problem and that neither of the political parties are fully addressing the issues at the heart of it.
“The tough love conversation we need to have with the public is that you can’t shift this problem to only one instrument to solve the budget deficit,” Wells said. “There’s not a happy answer. It’s going to require someone to feel unhappiness about the resulting compromise.”
Immigration Policy
Panelists also dove into immigration — one of the most hotly contested areas of the new administration’s early policy moves.
Charles Foster, a partner at Foster LLP, noted that many deportations involved individuals with long-term undocumented status rather than criminals, the cancellation of several immigration programs, and the expansion of expedited removal.
“Our greatest concern is the H-1B program is under attack…and most people do not realize how critical that is,” Foster said. “People want people to be legal, but the H-1B has been the primary [legal] pathway used by people [to go] from being a student with work authorization to getting temporary work through visa status… [followed] by a much lengthier process…for permanent residency.”
The discussion also touched on the potential impact of immigration policies on industries like construction and hospitality, which rely heavily on undocumented workers. Foster warned that harsh immigration policies could lead to significant pushback from the business community, particularly if employers face increased prosecutions for harboring undocumented workers.
UHLC Associate Professor Daniel J. Morales agreed with Foster and said that about 40% of workforce in the Texas construction industry is undocumented. Other news outlets, such as NPR and the Houston Chronicle, report the number to be closer to 60%. “Texas relies on
building a lot of houses to attract people to the state…the ability to build is a huge part of Texas's appeal,” he said. “So even here in Texas, I think there will be some pushback should the numbers actually start getting hit in significant amounts.”
Higher Education Policy
Another panel tackled the volatile landscape of higher education policy. UHLC Professor Seth J. Chandler drew attention to the uncertainty and complexity surrounding the Department of Education. “Can the president even abolish the Department of Education? I think the answer is no. Not on his own. Now, can he defund the Department of Education? That’s a complicated story.”
Jeronimo Cortina, associate professor with UH Department of Political Science, explained that while executive orders have the effect of law, they are not actual laws passed by Congress; and that Congress can challenge executive orders by passing laws to override them, and the judiciary can declare them unconstitutional. He emphasized the need to understand the goals of these policies and measures.
“What is the end goal that we're trying to achieve? Are we trying to achieve a highly educated younger population? Are we trying to achieve something else?” Cortina asked. “I think that the discussion of the goals has to be very important, and those discussions have to be taken by Congress.
“Unfortunately, this Congress doesn't seem to be quite as productive as the ones we have had before,” he added.
The panelists also explored potential shifts in federal financial aid programs for students, research funding, funding for public universities, and the role of states in shaping education policy if the federal government scales back its involvement.
“The problem that I sort of see in society is that we are …lurching from extreme position to extreme position. We are doing it too fast in a way that is possibly going to make the airplane crash,” said Cathy Horn, dean of the College of Education at UH. “And that's not in anybody's interest.”
Conclusion
The panels provided a detailed glimpse and context into how the new administration’s early policy moves are reshaping the nation’s economic, social, and environmental landscape.
This event was approved for 4 hours of Texas MCLE credit provided through the University of Houston Law Center.
For more information about the University of Houston Law Center, visit https://www.law.uh.edu/
Original source can be found here.