President Donald Trump expressed skepticism about Project 2025 during his campaign—a detailed and often debated conservative policy framework developed by the Heritage Foundation. However, just days into his second term, many of Trump’s early actions appear to resonate closely with the objectives outlined in Project 2025.

Recent insights from TIME indicate that nearly two-thirds of Trump’s executive actions so far align, at least in part, with recommendations found in the comprehensive 900-page document. These initiatives range from aggressive deregulation measures to tough immigration reforms.

During the election, Democrats pointed out Trump’s connections to Project 2025, highlighting that many individuals involved in its creation had previously collaborated with him or were part of his inner circle. Trump, however, maintained that he had “no idea who is behind” the conservative blueprint, dismissing some of its proposals as “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” Yet, after his election victory, he seemed to soften his stance, telling TIME in November, “I don’t disagree with everything in Project 2025, but I disagree with some things.”

Despite his earlier disavowals, several key figures associated with Project 2025, such as Russell Vought and Brendan Carr, have been appointed to important positions within his administration. Vought has been nominated to lead the Office of Management and Budget, while Carr has been appointed to head the Federal Communications Commission. The Heritage Foundation chose not to comment on this matter.

A White House spokesperson informed TIME that Trump “had nothing to do with Project 2025” and emphasized that his first series of executive orders “fulfilled the promises that won him a significant mandate from the American people—securing the border, restoring common sense, reducing inflation, and unleashing American energy.”

When Project 2025 was launched in April 2023, it was designed to serve as a strategic playbook for future Republican presidential administrations, aiming to realign the federal government with conservative, market-driven principles. The agenda encompasses aggressive deregulation, stricter immigration enforcement, challenges to civil rights protections, and a significant downsizing of the federal workforce—all geared toward reducing government size and reinforcing executive power.

While many of Trump’s executive actions mirror the proposals in Project 2025, not all of them are directly aligned with the framework. For example, some initiatives, such as declaring an energy emergency and contesting birthright citizenship, are not explicitly mentioned in the document. Nevertheless, numerous executive actions introduced by the new administration reflect the fundamental objectives of Project 2025, particularly in areas like immigration reform, governmental restructuring, and deregulation.

“I suspect many liberal think tanks are envious that a conservative think tank has this level of influence over the policy agenda,” remarks Bill Galston, chair of the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies program and a former advisor to President Bill Clinton. He adds that while think tank influence is notable, it “is likely to diminish once the President and the Republican majority in Congress start working together on legislation.”

By embracing elements of the Heritage Foundation’s framework, Trump’s second term appears to be shaped by a vision established prior to his return to the White House. Skye Perryman, chief executive of Democracy Forward—a legal organization that recently launched Democracy 2025, a resource center monitoring the new administration’s actions—comments, “This is a strategy we’ve seen before and anticipated would be implemented. The real disappointment lies in the fact that, during his campaign, Trump did not level with the American people. He did not attempt to convince them that this was his agenda, instead acting as if he had no connection to Project 2025, when it’s clear he is attempting to fast-track that agenda.”

Let’s delve into some of the parallels between Trump’s executive actions and Project 2025.

Immigration and Border Security

Trump’s early actions concerning immigration and border security align closely with Project 2025’s vision for a more assertive and militarized approach to immigration enforcement. The framework suggests deploying active-duty military personnel and National Guardsmen to aid in border security operations, including arrests. On his first day in office, Trump promptly signed an executive order directing National Guard troops to be deployed to the southern border.

Moreover, Trump issued an executive order suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, mirroring Project 2025’s recommendation for an “indefinite curtailment” of refugee admissions. He has also sought to extend restrictions on asylum seekers and halt certain immigration pathways—policies that align with Project 2025’s calls to restrict refugee and asylum programs as part of a broader immigration control strategy.

Environment and Energy Policy

Trump’s initial actions regarding environmental regulations and energy policy resonate with recommendations from Project 2025, particularly its opposition to climate change initiatives perceived by some Republicans as overly burdensome for American businesses.

On the first day of his second term, Trump signed an executive order to promote the use of Alaska’s rich energy resources, echoing Project 2025’s call for expanding oil and gas drilling in the area. The document argues for the exploration of Alaska’s energy resources to enhance national security, emphasizing the need to unlock natural resources “as a counter to growing Russian and Chinese interests in Antarctic resources.” Trump’s order established a policy for resource extraction in Alaska and instructed federal agencies to expedite permitting, leasing, and development, focusing particularly on liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects.

Additionally, Trump re-signed an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, a significant move from his first term that aligns directly with Project 2025’s perspective. The blueprint advocates for exiting international climate agreements to enhance national sovereignty and economic competitiveness by removing restrictions on industries. “The next conservative Administration should rescind all climate policies from its foreign aid programs (specifically USAID’s Climate Strategy 2022–2030); eliminate agency offices, programs, and directives supporting the Paris Climate Agreement; and narrowly limit funding to traditional climate mitigation efforts,” states Project 2025.

Read More: What Happened the Last Time Trump Withdrew From the Paris Agreement

Trump has also sought to limit offshore wind development, which Project 2025 identifies as a part of an agenda that would restrict significant portions of the ocean from commercial activities.

Government Reform and Bureaucratic Restructuring

A key goal of Project 2025 is to reform the federal bureaucracy by reducing its size and influence while bolstering the executive branch. Trump initiated several executive orders on his first day in office that reflect these aims.

He reinstated the Schedule F executive order—a policy first proposed in 2020 designed to reclassify certain federal employees as political appointees, making it easier to terminate them. Project 2025 had advocated for this policy’s revival. This action has raised alarms among Democrats and civil service advocates, who view it as a threat to the independence of the federal workforce. Trump defends it as essential for eliminating political bias and inefficiency within government agencies, a point central to both his agenda and the broader objectives of Project 2025.

Project 2025 also advocates for substantial reductions in the federal workforce, focusing on cutting regulations and eliminating agencies deemed unnecessary or counterproductive. Trump’s early actions indicate he is pursuing this direction by streamlining government operations, implementing a hiring freeze for all federal civilian employees, and aiming to shrink the size and scope of regulatory agencies. Although these actions do not precisely match Project 2025’s specific proposals—such as abolishing the Departments of Homeland Security and Education—they reflect the overarching philosophy of minimizing government presence.

Cultural Issues

Trump has also adopted several social policy changes that echo Project 2025’s positions, particularly regarding gender identity and diversity initiatives. One of his first executive orders reversed protections instituted during the Biden administration for transgender individuals in the military, reinstating a ban on transgender service members, which aligns with Project 2025’s recommendation to “proudly state that men and women are biological realities” and eliminate policies that conflate gender identity with biological sex.

Furthermore, Trump has taken steps to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within the federal government. One executive order rescinded policies that required federal contractors to promote affirmative action and diversity programs, consistent with Project 2025’s call to eliminate initiatives that advocate for racial or gender-based quotas.

Foreign Relations

Trump’s early actions also indicate a shift back to a more isolationist and unilateral foreign policy approach, reflecting Project 2025’s views on international agreements and alliances. He signed an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the World Health Organization, signaling a return to foreign policy positions prevalent during much of his first term. Project 2025 explicitly called for this withdrawal, condemning the WHO as an ineffective and politically biased entity that undermines American sovereignty.

In addition to withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, Trump has taken measures to distance the U.S. from other international collaborations, consistent with the isolationist philosophy outlined in Project 2025. One executive order states, “no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States,” asserting that the “foreign aid industry and bureaucracy do not align with American interests and often contradict American values.”