Donald Trump signed more than 100 executive orders on his inauguration day.
It has become standard practice for new presidents to use them within hours of taking office – Joe Biden signed 17 on his first day.
They are arguably the president’s most powerful tool for enacting change – as they have the same force behind them as legislation – and bypass both Houses of Congress.
Mr Trump’s inauguration day executive orders included declaring a national emergency at the US-Mexico border, withdrawing US birthrights from migrants’ children, and taking the US out of both the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organisation.
But they do have limits – and can be subject to legal challenges.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:38
Donald Trump’s executive orders
What are they – and how do they work?
Executive orders are official instructions from the president about how US federal agencies, such as government departments and the FBI, should use their resources.
They are enshrined in the second article of the constitution, which states: “The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.”
Effectively, they are a way for the president to dictate how the federal government should be run.
They can take various forms – from laying out major policies and requesting official reports to giving federal employees days off for public holidays.
The president’s role as commander in chief means they can also be used to control what the military does.
Image: Donald Trump signs an executive order on a hiring freeze on inauguration day. Pic: AP
How quickly do they take effect?
It depends on the subject matter – and the work required to achieve the president’s aims.
Executive orders that are relatively straight forward and face no opposition can be acted upon straight away.
For example, one of Mr Trump’s latest ones pardoned all of the 6 January rioters, declaring any still behind bars in federal prisons should be released immediately.
But others that are more abstract will take longer – and require further direction on how to achieve them.
One example from Monday was the order that all agencies should “address the cost-of-living crisis”.
Those that take longer than the four-year presidential term are often overridden if a new president is elected. Many of Mr Trump’s executive orders from his first presidency were focused on undoing the work of President Barack Obama, Mr Biden’s overturned many of Mr Trump’s – and so on.
Image: Pic: AP
Can they be overturned?
Congress and the courts have the power to block executive orders – but this is not absolute.
For example, Congress can pass laws to override them but these can still be vetoed by the president.
Congress can also deny the required funding from being allocated.
However, Congressional opposition is less likely this time around, as the Republican Party has control of the House of Representatives, the Senate – and the White House.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Executive orders are supposed to work within the confines of the law, which means they can also be subject to legal review.
State government officials, campaign groups, and other entities can challenge an executive order if they can prove the president is going beyond his legal powers – or the constitution.
For example, President Harry Truman was stopped from trying to seize steel mills by the Supreme Court during the Korean War after it was argued he lacked the authority to take private property without Congress’s permission.
Image: Member of Trump staff carries his executive orders on inauguration day. Pic: Reuters
Will Trump’s latest orders face opposition?
Many of Mr Trump’s latest executive orders are highly controversial.
Although he is less likely to face political opposition due to Republican majorities in Congress, civil rights groups and Democratic attorney generals have already signalled they will launch legal proceedings.
For example, legal action was lodged within minutes of Mr Trump officially ordering the creation of his new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk on Monday.
Legal action is less likely to be successful when challenging the revocation of Joe Biden’s policies – as these were lawfully approved during his administration.
Opposition groups are more likely to win against the Trump administration’s use of new, untested legal arguments, according to Sky’s US partner network NBC News.
One example is the order rescinding birthrights for children whose parents are not permanent residents or US citizens.
Image: Protesters in Washington DC on Monday. Pic: Reuters
Birthrights – the right of citizenship to anyone born on US soil – come from the 14th amendment of the constitution, which states they apply to anyone “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.
Mr Trump’s executive order argues this means it does not apply to undocumented migrants – but legal experts have already indicated the language only refers to those exempt from US law – such as foreign diplomats.
Another example is Mr Trump’s proposed use of the Alien Enemies Act, which is part of the Alien and Sedition Acts 1798.
It gives the president powers to detain or deport foreign citizens during times of war – and was used during the Second World War.
However, Mr Trump’s order will likely struggle to hold up in court – as the US is currently not at war.
For Ukrainians, the spectacle of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump meeting in Alaska will be repugnant.
The man behind an unprovoked invasion of their country is being honoured with a return to the world stage by the leader of a country that was meant to be their ally.
President Trump had threatened severe sanctions on Russia within 50 days if Russia didn’t agree to a deal. He had seemed close to imposing them before letting Putin wriggle off the hook yet again.
But they are not surprised. At every stage, Trump has either sided with Russia or at least given them the benefit of the doubt.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:44
‘Putin won’t mess around with me’
It is clear that Putin has some kind of hold over this American president, in their minds and many others.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Ukraine wants three things out of these talks. A ceasefire, security guarantees and reparations. It is not clear at this stage that they will get any of them.
Ukrainians and their European allies are appalled at the naive and cack-handed diplomacy that has preceded this meeting.
Vladimir Putin is sending a team of foreign affairs heavyweights, adept at getting the better of opponents in negotiations.
There are, the Financial Times reported this week, no Russia specialists left at the Trump White House.
Instead, Trump is relying on Steve Witkoff, a real estate lawyer and foreign policy novice, who has demonstrated a haphazard mastery of his brief and breathtaking credulity with the Russians.
Former British spy chief Sir Alex Younger described him today as totally out of his depth. Trump, he says, is being played like a fiddle by Putin.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding of the conflict at the heart of the Trump administration’s handling of it. Witkoff and the president see it in terms of real estate. But it has never been about territory.
Vladimir Putin has made it abundantly clear that Ukraine’s existence as a sovereign democratic entity cannot be tolerated. He has made no pretence that his views on that have changed.
Ukrainians know that and fear any deal cooked up in Alaska will be used by Putin on the path towards that ultimate goal
Melania Trump has threatened to sue Hunter Biden for more than $1bn (£736.5m) in damages if he does not retract comments linking her to Jeffrey Epstein.
Mr Biden, who is the son of former US president Joe Biden, alleged in an interview this month that sex trafficker Epstein introduced the first lady to President Donald Trump.
“Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep,” he claimed.
Ms Trump’s lawyer labelled the comments false, defamatory and “extremely salacious” in a letter to Mr Biden.
Image: Hunter Biden. File pic: AP
Her lawyer wrote that the first lady suffered “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” as the claims were widely discussed on social media and reported by media around the world.
The president and first lady previously said they were introduced by modelling agent Paolo Zampolli at a New York Fashion Week party in 1998.
Mr Biden attributed the claim that Epstein introduced the couple to author Michael Wolff, who was accused by Mr Trump of making up stories to sell books in June and was dubbed a “third-rate reporter” by the president.
The former president’s son doubled down on his remarks in a follow-up interview with the same YouTube outlet, Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan, entitled “Hunter Biden Apology”.
Asked if he would apologise to the first lady, Mr Biden responded: “F*** that – that’s not going to happen.”
He added: “I don’t think these threats of lawsuits add up to anything other than designed distraction.”
Ms Trump’s threat to sue Mr Biden echoes a strategy employed by her husband, who has aggressively used legal action to go after critics.
Public figures like the Trumps must meet a high bar to succeed in a defamation suit like the one that could be brought by the first lady if she follows through with her threat.
In his initial interview, Mr Biden also hit out at “elites” and others in the Democratic Party, who he claims undermined his father before he dropped out of last year’s race for president.
This comes as pressure on the White House to release the Epstein files has been mounting for weeks, after he made a complete U-turn on his administration’s promise to release more information publicly.
The US Justice Department, which confirmed in July that it would not be releasing the files, said a review of the Epstein case had found “no incriminating ‘client list'” and “no credible evidence” the jailed financier – who killed himself in prison in 2019 – had blackmailed famous men.
But there are fears they will discuss a deal robbing Ukraine of the land currently occupied by Russia – something Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he won’t accept.
Here’s what three of our correspondents think ahead of the much-anticipated face-to-face.
Putin’s legacy is at stake – he’ll want territory and more By Ivor Bennett, Moscow correspondent, in Alaska
Putin doesn’t just want victory. He needs it.
Three and a half years after he ordered the invasion of Ukraine, this war has to end in a visible win for the Russian president. It can’t have been for nothing. His legacy is at stake.
So the only deal I think he’ll be willing to accept at Friday’s summit is one that secures Moscow’s goals.
These include territory (full control of the four Ukrainian regions which Russia has already claimed), permanent neutrality for Kyiv and limits on its armed forces.
I expect he’ll be trying to convince Trump that such a deal is the quickest path to peace. The only alternative, in Russia’s eyes, is an outright triumph on the battlefield.
Image: Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump meeting in Osaka in 2019
I think Putin‘s hope is that the American president agrees with this view and then gives Ukraine a choice: accept our terms or go it alone without US support.
A deal like that might not be possible this week, but it may be in the future if Putin can give Trump something in return.
That’s why there’s been lots of talk from Moscow this week about all the lucrative business deals that can come from better US-Russia relations.
The Kremlin will want to use this opportunity to remind the White House of what else it can offer, apart from an end to the fighting.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:25
What will Kyiv be asked to give up?
Ukraine would rather this summit not be happening By Dominic Waghorn, international affairs editor, in Ukraine
Ukraine would far rather this meeting wasn’t happening.
Trump seemed to have lost patience with Putin and was about to hit Russia with more severe sanctions until he was distracted by the Russian leader’s suggestion that they meet.
Ukrainians say the Alaska summit rewards Putin by putting him back on the world stage.
But the meeting is happening, and they have to be realistic.
Most of all, they want a ceasefire before any negotiations can happen. Then they want the promise of security guarantees.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:35
Does Europe have any power over Ukraine’s future?
That is because they know that Putin may well come back for more even if peace does break out. They need to be able to defend themselves should that happen.
And they want the promise of reparations to rebuild their country, devastated by Putin’s wanton, unprovoked act of aggression.
There are billions of Russian roubles and assets frozen across the West. They want them released and sent their way.
What they fear is Trump being hoodwinked by Putin with the lure of profit from US-Russian relations being restored, regardless of Ukraine’s fate.
Image: US Army paratroopers train at the military base where discussions will take place. File pic: Reuters
That would allow Russia to regain its strength, rearm and prepare for another round of fighting in a few years’ time.
Trump and his golf buddy-turned-negotiator Steve Witkoff appear to believe Putin might be satisfied with keeping some of the land he has taken by force.
Putin says he wants much more than that. He wants Ukraine to cease to exist as a country separate from Russia.
Any agreement short of that is only likely to be temporary.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:41
Zelenskyy: I told Trump ‘Putin is bluffing’
Trump’s pride on the line – he has a reputation to restore By Martha Kelner, US correspondent, in Alaska
As with anything Donald Trump does, he already has a picture in his mind.
The image of Trump shaking hands with the ultimate strongman leader, Vladimir Putin, on US soil calls to his vanity and love of an attention-grabbing moment.
There is also pride at stake.
Image: Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, where Trump will meet his Russian counterpart. File pic: Reuters
Trump campaigned saying he would end the Russia-Ukraine war on his first day in office, so there is an element of him wanting to follow through on that promise to voters, even though it’s taken him 200-plus days in office and all he’s got so far is this meeting, without apparently any concessions on Putin’s end.
In Trump’s mind – and in the minds of many of his supporters – he is the master negotiator, the chief dealmaker, and he wants to bolster that reputation.
He is keen to further the notion that he negotiates in a different, more straightforward way than his predecessors and that it is paying dividends.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.