Who are the principal named architects of Project 2025 and what positions did they hold in government?
Executive summary
Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation–led blueprint for a second Trump administration whose named architects include a mix of former Trump officials and conservative operatives; the most repeatedly identified figures in reporting are Russell Vought, Stephen Miller, Peter Navarro, Brendan Carr, John Ratcliffe, Tom Homan and Paul Atkins, each of whom has held senior federal posts or advisory roles [1] [2] [3] [4]. Reporting shows these individuals were authors or contributors to Project 2025 and then moved into — or were nominated for — consequential government positions in the early months of the second Trump administration [4] [5].
1. Russell Vought — the OMB architect who became budget director
Russell Vought is repeatedly described in coverage as a lead architect or chief intellectual inspiration behind Project 2025 and authored the project’s chapter on the Executive Office; he was nominated and confirmed to return as Director of the Office of Management and Budget, a post he previously held in Trump’s first term and which he has called the “nerve center” of presidential power [4] [2] [5]. Vought’s role in drafting the first-180-days playbook and his advocacy for policies like Schedule F are central to how reporters characterize his influence on the blueprint and his capacity to push its priorities across the federal government [6] [4].
2. Stephen Miller — immigration architect and Project 2025 contributor
Stephen Miller, a senior advisor widely credited with shaping the Trump administration’s immigration policies, is flagged in Project 2025 reporting as a major figure whose prior role in crafting hardline immigration measures positions him among the plan’s named architects [1]. Public accounts linking Miller to Project 2025 emphasize continuity between his earlier policy work in the White House and the immigration-related prescriptions included in the Heritage-backed document [1].
3. Peter Navarro — trade author and informal adviser
Peter Navarro, who wrote Project 2025’s trade chapter advocating more restrictive trade policies, was reported to be tapped as a senior counselor for trade and manufacturing in the second administration; his selection illustrates the pattern of Project 2025 authors moving into roles that map directly to their authored sections [4]. Navarro’s prior tenure as Trump’s trade adviser and his ongoing informal influence are cited by outlets tracking Project 2025 implementation [4].
4. Brendan Carr — FCC contributor turned regulator
Brendan Carr is named as an author of Project 2025’s recommendations on communications and has been placed in a position of regulatory authority at the Federal Communications Commission, where reporting notes he has exerted influence consistent with Project 2025 priorities [7] [5]. Journalistic accounts single him out as an example of how the project’s drafters were elevated to agencies they had proposed to reshape [7].
5. John Ratcliffe, Tom Homan and Paul Atkins — other named contributors moved into posts
UK and U.S. coverage lists other Project 2025 authors who were nominated or installed in roles: John Ratcliffe (listed among authors and later associated with the CIA director role in reporting), Tom Homan (characterized as Trump’s “border czar” in media accounts), and Paul Atkins (reported as a nominee to head the SEC), each cited as a direct line from Project 2025 authorship to government appointment or nomination [3] [4].
6. Heritage Foundation’s central role and the limits of public reporting
Multiple outlets identify the Heritage Foundation as the primary organizer of Project 2025 and note that more than a hundred contributors fed into the 900–920 page plan, meaning the roster of “architects” extends well beyond the widely named figures; reporting also documents that Project 2025 trackers and advocacy groups are monitoring dozens of appointments tied to the project, underscoring that the named architects above are representative but not exhaustive [1] [4]. Sources differ on framing — some emphasize ideological threat and Christian-nationalist aims, while others focus on personnel continuity — and President Trump publicly distanced himself from the plan during the campaign even as he later nominated several contributors [7] [5] [4].
7. Who benefits and what to watch next
Journalists and advocacy groups cited in the coverage warn that placing Project 2025 authors in agency leadership positions allows the document’s prescriptions to be operationalized quickly, particularly via OMB-directed budget and personnel moves, but reporting also shows partisan debate over the nominations and differing characterizations of the project’s intent and popularity [8] [9] [5]. Public-source reporting catalogs the most visible names and their government positions, but it also makes clear that dozens more contributors exist and that tracking implementation requires watching nominations, agency rules and executive actions tied to the authors’ prescriptions [4] [1].