Why Key Executive Orders Remain Intact Despite the Biden Administration’s Desire to Revoke Them

Introduction

Despite significant policy shifts under the Biden administration, several executive orders issued during President Trump’s term remain in force due to their legal, operational, and national security significance. This report examines why these particular orders—Executive Order 13818 (targeting human rights and corruption), Executive Order 13848 (sanctions for election interference), and Executive Order 13959 (sanctions on Chinese military-linked companies)—continue to be enforced, even though they appear to conflict with the Biden administration's broader policy objectives.

1. Executive Order 13818 – Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption

Executive Order 13818, issued in December 2017, is rooted in the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act and empowers the U.S. government to impose sanctions on foreign individuals and entities involved in serious human rights abuses or corruption. The continuation of this order under the Biden administration highlights its importance to U.S. foreign policy and its international commitments to human rights.

Reasons for Its Continuation:

• International Legal Obligations: The U.S. is a signatory to various international treaties and agreements aimed at combating human rights abuses and corruption. Revoking this order could strain diplomatic relations with allies and partners who share these commitments.
• Bipartisan Consensus: Combating global corruption and human rights abuses is a bipartisan issue in the U.S. Congress. Attempting to rescind this order would likely draw sharp criticism from both political parties.
• Institutional Momentum: Agencies such as the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the State Department have developed systems for identifying and sanctioning violators under this order. These processes are deeply embedded in the U.S. government’s foreign policy framework.

2. Executive Order 13848 – Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election

Signed in September 2018, Executive Order 13848 is a critical national security measure that allows the U.S. to impose sanctions on foreign actors who interfere in U.S. elections through cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, or other means. The order has been extended under the Biden administration, indicating its relevance in safeguarding electoral integrity.

Reasons for Its Continuation:

• National Security Imperatives: Election security is a fundamental national security issue. The Biden administration cannot afford to weaken protections against foreign interference, particularly as cyber threats from adversaries like Russia and China continue to grow.
• Legal Basis in Emergency Powers: This order is tied to a national emergency declaration regarding foreign interference, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Terminating the order would require ending the underlying emergency, which could open the U.S. to vulnerabilities in future elections.
• Public Trust and Electoral Integrity: Given the political climate surrounding election integrity, the administration risks significant public backlash if it attempts to weaken or roll back protections against foreign interference.

3. Executive Order 13959 – Addressing the Threat from Securities Investments that Finance Communist Chinese Military Companies

Executive Order 13959, issued in November 2020, restricts U.S. investments in companies linked to China’s military-industrial complex. The Biden administration has expanded the scope of this order, signaling a shared concern over China’s growing influence and the potential threat it poses to U.S. national security.

Reasons for Its Continuation:

• National Security Concerns: China’s military buildup, supported by state-controlled companies, is seen as a direct threat to U.S. interests. Cutting off U.S. capital to these companies is a key strategy in countering China’s global military ambitions.
• Legal Authority under IEEPA: Similar to Executive Order 13848, this order is grounded in the president’s emergency powers under IEEPA, which grants broad authority to restrict financial transactions during a national emergency.
• Financial Oversight: The order has prompted the Treasury Department, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and Department of Defense (DoD) to monitor U.S. investment firms and financial institutions for compliance. Rolling back this order could disrupt these ongoing efforts and signal weakness in countering Chinese economic influence.

Why These Orders Remain Untouchable

1. Legal Protections Under Emergency Powers

All three executive orders are grounded in emergency powers, specifically under the National Emergencies Act and International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). These laws grant the president significant authority to act during times of national emergency, particularly when addressing foreign threats. Rescinding these orders would require ending the national emergencies they are tied to, which could lead to legal and security vulnerabilities.

2. Bipartisan and International Consensus

While the Biden administration has overturned many Trump-era policies, the executive orders related to human rights, election interference, and national security enjoy broad bipartisan support. Additionally, the U.S. has international obligations, particularly in combatting human rights abuses and curbing foreign interference in its elections. Any move to revoke these orders would face strong domestic and international opposition.

3. Institutional Safeguards and Oversight

Federal agencies, including the Treasury, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), and the State Department, have built extensive enforcement mechanisms around these orders. This institutional momentum makes it challenging to dismantle the orders without disrupting ongoing national security operations. Moreover, oversight mechanisms such as Congressional committees, Inspector Generals, and whistleblower protections ensure that the enforcement of these orders continues, even amid potential political pressures.

4. Political and Diplomatic Ramifications

Given the sensitivity of the issues involved—human rights, election security, and national defense—attempting to revoke these executive orders would carry significant political and diplomatic risks. Domestically, the administration could face backlash from both sides of the political spectrum, as well as from the public, who view these orders as critical to U.S. security and integrity. Internationally, the U.S. would risk damaging relationships with allies who share these priorities.

Conclusion

Despite significant shifts in policy under the Biden administration, Executive Orders 13818, 13848, and 13959 remain in force due to their legal foundations in emergency powers, their bipartisan support, and their role in protecting U.S. national security. The administration has found that rescinding these orders would pose too great a risk to U.S. interests, both domestically and internationally. Therefore, they remain vital tools in combating human rights abuses, foreign interference, and the growing influence of adversarial nations like China.