Theocratic Bills Trump has signed
Executive summary
Coverage in the provided sources does not use the phrase “theocratic bills,” nor do they identify laws signed by President Trump in 2025 as explicitly theocratic; available sources instead catalogue a large number of executive actions (roughly 214–217 EOs) and specific bills he signed, including a government funding bill H.R. 5371 and H.R. 1 described by a House Republican [1] [2] [3] [4]. Reporting about the November 12, 2025 funding bill focuses on ending the shutdown and provisions for federal pay and SNAP benefits, not on religiously based lawmaking [5] [6].
1. What the record shows: volumes of executive action vs. named statutes
The most consistent factual threads in the available material are counts and lists: the Federal Register and White House pages record dozens to hundreds of presidential executive orders and proclamations in 2025, with numbers reported in the low 200s for EOs (214–217 by late November) and 109 proclamations [1] [2] [7] [8]. These sources provide granular EO listings but do not frame them as “theocratic” legislation [1] [8].
2. Bills signed into law that are cited in the reporting
News and official releases in the supplied set name specific enacted measures: H.R. 5371, the continuing appropriations/funding package that reopened the government on Nov. 12, 2025, and which guaranteed pay for federal workers and SNAP funding, is explicitly documented as signed into law [3] [6] [9]. A House Republican’s site reports H.R. 1, “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” was signed on July 4, 2025, but that is a partisan press posting rather than neutral statutory text [4]. Major news outlets likewise emphasize the funding bill as the event ending the shutdown [5] [6].
3. What “theocratic” would imply — and what sources actually say
The term “theocratic” implies laws primarily based on explicit religious doctrine or establishing a state religion. None of the provided White House, Federal Register, Ballotpedia, or news items in the collection describe the signed executive orders, proclamations, or the named bills (H.R. 5371, H.R. 1) as instituting religious governance or deriving from specific religious doctrine; the coverage emphasizes policy areas like funding, immigration, trade, and designations relating to foreign organizations [1] [2] [10]. Therefore, available sources do not mention that any of these actions are “theocratic.”
4. Examples reporters highlight instead: funding, policy and organizational actions
Media accounts of the Nov. 12 funding signature focus on practical outcomes — ending a 43‑day federal shutdown, resuming pay for federal employees, and maintaining SNAP benefits — and on political reactions in Congress, not religious policy content [5] [6] [9]. The White House executive‑orders index and Federal Register list substantive policy directives and designations (e.g., designations of foreign organizations), again without labeling them religiously motivated [10] [8].
5. Partisan and institutional framing you should note
When interpreting claims about a president signing “theocratic bills,” readers should watch two potential sources of framing bias in the documents provided: partisan communications (e.g., a House member’s press release celebrating H.R. 1) and institutional tallies that focus on quantity (law firm or Federal Register lists) rather than motives or ideology [4] [11] [1]. The partisan release celebrates enactment; neutral registries enumerate actions — neither equates those enactments to establishing religious rule [4] [1].
6. Limits of the available reporting and next steps for verification
Available sources in this search set do not identify or substantiate any statute or executive order from 2025 as explicitly theocratic; they instead document the identity and volume of orders and the signing of funding and other bills [1] [2] [3]. If you want a definitive inventory of laws or orders with religious content or effects, the next steps would be: (a) request full texts of specific EOs or statutes listed on the Federal Register or White House site and examine their language for religious tests or explicit doctrinal mandates [8] [10]; and (b) consult neutral legal analyses or court challenges not present in the current set to see whether any measures have been characterized or adjudicated as religiously coercive (not found in current reporting).
If you’d like, I can pull the full titles and texts of the specific EOs and statutes listed in the Federal Register or the White House index from these sources and flag any language that could be read as religious or that has prompted legal scrutiny [8] [10].