Project 2025 is a plan to gut America’s system of checks and balances in order to enact an extreme, far-right agenda that would hurt all Americans.1
Donald Trump, running mate JD Vance, and MAGA Republicans have tried to distance themselves from the extremely unpopular proposal, but their ties to Project 2025 and its authors at the Heritage Foundation are clear:
- Donald Trump rode a private jet with Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts in 2022 to a conference where Trump said in a speech that the think tank was going to “lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do.”2
- Sen. Vance (R-OH) wrote the forward to Roberts’ forthcoming book and called the Heritage Foundation the most “influential engine of ideas for Republicans.”3
- Roberts said that he had personally talked to Trump about Project 2025.4
- Russ Vought, one of Project 2025’s coauthors, has said that Trump’s disavowals of Project 2025 were “politics” and that the former president had “blessed” and was “very supportive” of Vought and his organization’s work.5
- The Heritage Foundation brought in 100 right-wing groups involving at least 140 top Trump administration allies to help build consensus for Project 2025.6
Trump and Vance are trying to hide their connections to Project 2025, but they are not running away from the proposals in the right-wing playbook. In fact, their policy proposals and statements on the campaign trail are frequently even more radical than those housed in Project 2025.
Here are five examples of how their plans and comments are even more extreme than Project 2025.
Eroding democracy
Project 2025
Project 2025 lays out a plan to consolidate power in the presidency by destroying the U.S. system of checks and balances and weakening the independence of public agencies. For example, Project 2025 proposes replacing tens of thousands of nonpartisan civil servants with far-right lackeys who are loyal to MAGA ideology.7
Moreover, Project 2025 would end the independence of law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice. Under Project 2025, the president would have the power to use all the resources of the federal government to investigate and to prosecute whomever the president wants.8 In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. United States—which declared that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for official acts—the risk of a commander-in-chief using their unchecked power to act illegally is a huge danger to democracy.9 This is a page directly out of the playbook of authoritarian regimes, where dictators will exploit or create loopholes to act above the law, and it has been a hallmark of democracies sliding into authoritarianism.10
Trump
Trump’s policy plan, called Agenda 47, and his comments on the campaign trail in many instances go further than what is outlined in Project 2025.11 Trump would:
- Use the government to go after anyone who disagrees with him or MAGA Republicans. While Project 2025 calls for a weakening of the independence of government agencies such as the Department of Justice and for the president to be able to fire civil servants and replace them with political lackeys, Trump has taken it further with his proposals and comments. Trump’s plans would give him the authority to prosecute any of his enemies.12 In recent weeks, Trump has pledged to jail election workers, donors, and others who don’t do his bidding if he wins the 2024 election and has also said that critics of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade should be thrown in jail.13Trump’s short list for attorney general reportedly includes Judge Aileen Cannon, who threw out Trump’s classified documents case in Florida over the Department of Justice’s appointment of special counsel Jack Smith, despite the fact that similar arguments have been dismissed many times before, and Jeffrey Clark, an election denier and an attorney who worked in the environmental division of the Department of Justice who Trump considered appointing acting attorney general during his final alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election results in key swing states such as Georgia.14A disciplinary panel has recommended Clark face a two-year suspension from practicing law over his actions to try to overturn the 2020 election.15 These are the types of political loyalists who likely won’t hesitate to do Trump’s bidding if he is reelected. The Atlantic recently reported Trump said he wanted generals like the ones Hitler had, and Trump has also said he plans to deploy the U.S. military against “the enemy within”—including his perceived domestic political opponents, such as Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) as well as Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and her husband, who was attacked in 2022 by an assailant who was drawn to right-wing conspiracies. This highly illegal move would destabilize democracy and its longstanding political norms.16 Under a future Trump administration, millions of ordinary Americans could be at risk of surveillance, arrest, or imprisonment if they dare speak out against Trump on any issue.
International case studies: Russia, Venezuela, Egypt, and Turkey
Using the government to assail political opponents is a trademark of authoritarian regimes. Russian President Vladimir Putin is notorious for doing this: He jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny on dubious fraud and parole violation charges. Navalny died in a Russian prison earlier this year.17 In Venezuela, President Nicolas Maduro’s government charged opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez earlier this year over questionable conspiracy allegations and other supposed crimes.18 Egyptian authorities under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt jailed his political opponent and the opponent’s family members in the last presidential race in 2023.19 And Turkish courts in 2022 sentenced President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s political rival Ekrem Imamoglu to jail for speech deemed “insulting.”20
- Suppress the vote and change election rules. Trump’s policy plans would push Republicans to enact laws that make it harder for people, especially in long-marginalized communities, to cast their ballots.21 These efforts are based on the “Big Lie” that Trump won the 2020 election—a lie that Vance recently affirmed he believes—and that reforms are needed to ensure the election isn’t “stolen”’ again in 2024.22 Trump’s plans would nationalize this effort, which has already been ongoing in many states since 2020.23
MAGA Republicans are also following Trump’s marching orders and have changed election rules in many states to make it easier for them to sabotage election results and thwart the will of the people.24 In Georgia, MAGA Republicans on the state’s election board enacted changes that would make it harder to determine who won the 2024 election in the state and easier for partisan officials to subvert election results that they disagree with.25 MAGA Republicans are appealing a recent ruling from a judge in Georgia who said the changes are illegal and unconstitutional.26Nebraska almost made a last-minute change to how its Electoral College votes are tallied to make it easier for Trump to win the 2024 election. Americans can expect more of these efforts if Trump wins a second term.27
International case studies: Venezuela and Hungary
Suppressing the vote and manipulating elections are authoritarian policies that help those looking to amass power. In Venezuela, Maduro and his allies manipulated the election systems to stay in power during the country’s presidential election in 2018, its parliamentary elections in 2020, and the most recent presidential election this year. The United States considers all three elections fraudulent.28 Efforts to make it harder to vote are also a trademark of Hungary Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. He won in 2010 and has overseen electoral redistricting that has allowed him to stay in power ever since.29
International case studies: Germany, Poland, Hungary, and Tunisia
Scapegoating and dehumanizing vulnerable communities has often led to dangerous and catastrophic outcomes. For instance, Adolf Hitler, who said Germany was suffering from “blood poisoning,” went on to use the antisemitism he made official Nazi government policy as a justification for the state-sanctioned murder of at least 6 million Jews and millions ofother religious and racial minorities during the Holocaust.35 In more recent years, authoritarians in Poland and Hungary have repeatedly demonized immigrants to solidify their power and dangerously stoke their supporters.36 And in Tunisia, President Kais Saied has employed the racist “Great Replacement Theory,” which has underpinnings in neofascist movements and anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States and Europe, to mass expel Black immigrants, foment attacks on Black Tunisians, and consolidate power.37
These policy positions could shatter some of democracy’s most important guardrails and put the freedoms and rights of Americans at extreme risk.
Bypassing Congress to consolidate power
Project 2025
Project 2025 would destroy the system of checks and balances upon which the United States was founded.38 Core to its radical vision is an extreme interpretation of a conservative legal concept called the “unitary executive theory.”39
In the 1930s, Congress created independent specialized agencies that were housed under the executive branch and staffed with experts, career scientists, and other nonpartisan employees who work in the public interest and are in charge of keeping Americans’ water clean, transportation safe, and medicines effective.40 Congress gave these agencies some of its authority on the condition that Congress was not ceding power to the president.41 Unitary executive theory sees the independence of these agencies from the White House as illegitimate.42 Project 2025 would bring these agencies under the direct control of the president, granting the president unprecedented authority.43 Under this theory, a president could tear down the firewalls between the White House and the agencies; fire agency commissioners and career civil servants and replace them with political lackeys; and exert more sway over agencies’ actions by having them submitted to the White House for review instead of the current practice of submitting them to the courts.44
Case study: Politicizing the Federal Reserve
The Federal Reserve is an independent agency that serves as the central bank of the United States and supervises the financial system, drives our monetary policy, and responds to financial conditions.45 It is ultimately accountable to the public and Congress—not to the political whims of a president.46 Project 2025 could change that. Said Vought, one of the architects of Project 2025 who adheres to unitary executive theory: “It’s very hard to square the Fed’s independence with the Constitution.”47 Trump has said before that the president should have a say in interest rates set by the Federal Reserve.48 Project 2025 would make it easier for a future president to try and change interest rates for their political benefit, which would have profound ramifications for the United States and global economies.49 In the 1970s, President Richard Nixon successfully berated his Federal Reserve chairman—a Republican loyal to Nixon—into lowering interest rates before an election. The move ultimately sent the United States into nearly a decade of high prices and a stagnant economy until Paul Volcker became Federal Reserve chairman and raised interest rates 20 percent to tame inflation.50 The United States could find itself in a similar scenario if the firewalls between the White House and the Federal Reserve are torn down.
Project 2025’s reforms could also make it easier for a future president to exert more power and control over other independent agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Communications Commission—which oversees the press in the United States—and more.51
Trump
Trump goes a step further than what is outlined in Project 2025. In addition to implementing this extreme version of the unitary executive theory, Trump has also said that he won’t spend money as the laws passed by Congress require, even though the Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse.52 Project 2025 is ambiguous on this process—called impoundment—but it is clear that Trump views this process as another way to consolidate power and dismantle our system of checks and balances.53
Impoundment would let the president unilaterally change most spending laws and ignore spending they do not support. That means that Trump could try to gut the entire U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the “environmental agencies” through the impoundment process, as he’s suggested he would do in recent months.54He might also withhold funds from states and localities with which he has policy disagreements or which voted against his election to be president. These plans are a violation of the Impoundment Act and could break the law, as the Government Accountability Office said after Trump had withheld congressionally appropriated funds to Ukraine in 2019 to pressure the country into launching a bogus investigation into Joe Biden.55 These actions resulted in Trump’s first impeachment.56
Yet Donald Trump continues to broadcast his plans to challenge Congress’ authority if he’s reelected.57 This is a threat that needs to be taken even more seriously after the Supreme Court made the president a “king above the law,” as Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in her dissent in Trump v. United States.58 If elected, Trump could argue he was acting in an official capacity to ignore congressionally appropriated funding in the future and throw the country into unchartered territory.59
Education
Project 2025
Project 2025 calls for drastic reforms that would significantly harm education in America and set the country back. Specifically, the plan proposes:
- Abolishing the Department of Education
- Getting rid of Head Start, a no-cost child care program currently serving roughly 833,000 people living in poverty
- Ending Title I programs that provide federal funding to schools serving low-income children. These reforms would eliminate 180,000 teaching positions that serve 2.8 million students
- Eliminating the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which provides debt relief to individuals serving their communities, such as teachers, first responders, and other public servants60
Project 2025 would also censor academic learning, make book banning in schools a federal priority, and criminalize librarians who allow students to choose banned books. It would also restrict LGBTQI+ policies that benefit all students, leading to increased rates of bullying and lower educational outcomes.61
Trump
Once again, Trump has taken his plan a step further in recent months, saying that, if reelected, he would cut federal funding for public schools that have vaccination requirements.62 Not only are all public schools subjected to state-mandated vaccination requirements for communicable diseases, but the public overwhelmingly supports them.63 Trump’s plan would leave local public school districts with an impossible choice: lose all federal funding—which, in some, cases may make up nearly 20 percent of their education budget, according to recent estimates from the 2021 school year—or eliminate vaccine requirements and risk wave after wave of preventable illnesses that would harm or even kill their students and potentially bring previously eliminated diseases such as measles or polio back into American communities.64
- According to a 2022 survey from Texas A&M University, public support for vaccination requirements for K-12 students was as high as 90 percent for diseases such as diphtheria, rubella, measles, and polio. Support for COVID-19 vaccination requirements was near 70 percent, and support for hepatitis and HPV vaccination requirements were 84 percent and 75 percent, respectively.65
- According to KFF, as of 2023, all states and the District of Columbia require children to be vaccinated against certain diseases in order to attend public schools, though exemptions are allowed in certain circumstances. The overwhelming majority of students adhere to the requirements: For example, 93 percent of kindergartners in the United States received all state-mandated vaccines during the 2022–2023 school year.66
Vaccination is considered one of the most cost-effective interventions to prevent infectious disease, disability, and death—and in some cases eliminate diseases altogether.67School vaccination requirements are an effective way to keep children and the public safe.68 Because of scientific advancements and childhood vaccination programs, 508 million cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations, and more than 1 million deaths have been prevented over the past 30 years. These steps have resulted in $540 billion in direct savings and larger societal savings of $2.7 trillion.69
However, Trump and his allies such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would take Americans back to a world where children are sicker and at risk of dying from preventable illness, all while undermining their education.70 Kennedy has said that if Trump is reelected, he’s promised him control of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.71 This is someone who has spewed conspiracy theories and lies about vaccines for years.72
Taxes
Project 2025
Project 2025 proposes radical tax policies such as lowering the corporate tax rate 18 percent, which would amount to a $24 billion tax cut for the Fortune 100.73 The plan would raise taxes by $3,000 for a typical family of four and by $950 for a typical single-person household. It also seeks, in the longer term, to replace the individual and corporate taxes with a flat consumption tax such as a national sales tax. Changing the tax code in this way would increase taxes for the middle 20 percent of households by $5,900 on average and would cut taxes on the top 0.1 percent by $2 million on average.74
Trump
Trump has said that he wants to lower the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, which amounts to about a $50 billion tax cut for the Fortune 100.75 Despite pledging to fight for the middle class, Trump’s tax plan would reward big corporations and the wealthiest Americans while inflation and costs would go up for average American families.76Trump’s entire tax plan can be seen as the first step of Project 2025’s ultimate goal of replacing income taxes with consumption taxes.77 He would cut income and corporate taxes and impose enormous taxes on imported goods that would function like a flat consumption tax.78 If Trump instituted a 20 percent tax on imported goods, as he has suggested he might, it would amount to a nearly $4,000 tax increase for a typical family.79
Workers and the labor movement
Project 2025
Project 2025 would undermine the right to form and join unions; weaken collective bargaining power; and would make it harder for workers to fight for better wages, benefits, and working conditions.80
Trump
Despite his disingenuous efforts to gain the backing of the labor movement—from seeking out a Teamsters endorsement to falsely suggesting his policies would help the working class—Trump’s disdain for the labor movement goes beyond what is outlined in Project 2025.81 In a recent interview with Elon Musk, Trump praised Musk for his anti-union stances and advocated for firing striking employees.82 Firing striking employees or threatening to do so is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRB), the federal agency that protects workers who seek better wages.83
While in office, Trump passed a tax giveaway that rewarded large corporations and the wealthy, appointed union busters to the NLRB, appointed judges with hostile views toward the labor movement, and rolled back worker protections.84 He also repeatedly voiced support for “right to work” laws, which would take away rights from working people, and pushed Congress to pass this type of legislation at the federal level.85
Conclusion
Project 2025 is a far-right authoritarian playbook that would rip away fundamental rights and enact a plan that would harm all Americans. Donald Trump, JD Vance, and MAGA Republicans have doubled down on the policies in the playbook. And, in several instances, they have gone even further than what Project 2025 calls for.
When it comes to democracy, education, taxes, workers’ rights, and America’s system of checks and balances, Trump’s vision for the future frequently goes beyond what is spelled out in Project 2025. These policy plans put the freedoms and rights that the American people hold dear at extreme risk.
The authors would like to thank Julia Cusick, Colin Seeberger, Mimla Wardak, Cindy Murphy-Tofig, Will Beaudouin, Mike Sozan, Ben Olinsky, Allison McManus, Bobby Kogan, Brendan Duke, Andrea Ducas, Emily Gee, Marquisha Johns, Jared Bass, Karla Walter, David Madland, and many others for their contributions and guidance.