Statement by the President – Presidential Actions

12/18/2025

Briefings & Statements

View Original

Action Summary

Overview of the Act: Signed into law S. 1071, the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026,” providing fiscal year appropriations for key departments including the Department of War, Energy national security programs, State, Homeland Security, and the Intelligence Community.
Strategic Objectives: Supports the President’s “Peace Through Strength” agenda, enhances warfighter lethality, protects the homeland from domestic and foreign threats, and reinforces the defense industrial base by eliminating wasteful programs.
Codification of Executive Actions: Incorporates elements from over a dozen Executive Orders and actions, addressing missile defense (Golden Dome for America), airspace sovereignty, and Federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.
Emerging Security Measures: Introduces the SAFER SKIES Act, empowering state and local law enforcement to counter unmanned aircraft threats and establishing a felony offense for repeated violations of national defense airspace.
Border and Immigration Security: Allocates resources to secure the southern border against illegal immigration and transnational criminal organizations.
Constitutional Concerns: Raises issues over several provisions that may restrict the President’s authority in foreign affairs and military command, especially regarding the submission of sensitive national security information and control over military operations and personnel.
Requirements and Notifications: Details numerous sections requiring the President to notify or seek certification from Congress before undertaking certain military or diplomatic actions, with the Administration asserting that these will be implemented in line with constitutional authority.

Risks & Considerations

The Act’s focus on national defense and security could potentially shift federal resources away from higher education, affecting funding opportunities for research and development at Vanderbilt University, especially in areas related to peace, security, and defense policy.
Provisions related to national security and the control of sensitive information might limit Vanderbilt’s ability to engage in research collaborations with federal agencies, particularly those involving classified or sensitive topics.
The emphasis on strengthening the defense industrial base and eliminating funding for programs deemed wasteful could impact existing partnerships or funding streams that Vanderbilt relies on, especially those tied to defense contracts or grants.
Potential changes in federal policies on foreign affairs and military missions could influence international collaborations and educational exchange programs, affecting Vanderbilt’s global engagement strategies.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering may face changes in funding for defense-related research, necessitating adaptation in its research agenda and partnerships.
The College of Arts and Science could see impacts on political science and international relations programs, especially if the geopolitical landscape or foreign policy priorities shift significantly.
Peabody College might need to explore new areas of research related to national security education and policy development.
The Office of Federal Relations may need to enhance its advocacy efforts to mitigate potential funding reductions and to navigate the evolving legislative environment.

Financial Impact

Potential reallocation of federal funds towards national defense could reduce financial support for educational institutions, impacting Vanderbilt’s funding landscape.
Vanderbilt might need to adjust its grant application strategies to align with newly prioritized federal spending areas, potentially increasing competition for non-defense-related grants.
Opportunities may arise for securing funding through defense-related research initiatives, but this could require strategic shifts in focus and expertise.
Changes in international policies may affect tuition revenue from international students and influence financial aid strategies.

Relevance Score: 4 (The Act presents significant risks that could necessitate major strategic adjustments at Vanderbilt University.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Office of Federal Relations should closely monitor developments in the National Defense Authorization Act that impact federal recognition of Native American tribes, such as the Lumbee Tribe. This could provide opportunities for enhanced educational and partnership programs with tribal communities.
The School of Engineering should explore potential collaborations with the Department of Energy on national security programs as outlined in the Act. Engaging in research and development partnerships could secure funding and advance innovative projects in energy security.
Vanderbilt’s Law School may consider examining the legal implications of the SAFER SKIES Act and its impact on unmanned aircraft regulations, which could be an area for new courses or research initiatives focused on technology and national security law.
The Center for Technology Transfer and Commercialization should evaluate the potential for commercializing technologies related to airspace sovereignty and defense, as the Act supports advancements in these areas.
The Department of Political Science could conduct research on the implications of the Act’s foreign policy and defense provisions, contributing to scholarly discourse and policy recommendations.

Opportunities

The Act’s emphasis on strengthening the defense industrial base presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Owen Graduate School of Management to develop programs focused on defense industry business strategies and innovation.
The focus on homeland missile defense and airspace sovereignty could enable Vanderbilt’s Department of Physics and Astronomy to pursue research grants and projects related to missile detection and aerospace technologies.
The provision for federal recognition of the Lumbee Tribe offers Vanderbilt’s Center for Native American Studies a chance to expand outreach and academic programs that support Native American students and communities.
By engaging in dialogues and collaborations with defense and national security entities, Vanderbilt can position itself as a leader in addressing technological challenges and national security needs.

Relevance Score: 3 (Some adjustments are needed to processes or procedures to align with security and defense changes.)

Average Relevance Score: 3.2

Timeline for Implementation

N/A: The text does not specify any explicit deadlines or enforceable timelines for the implementation of these directives, instead focusing on policy clarifications and legislative interpretations.

Relevance Score: 1

Impacted Government Organizations

Department of War (DoW): Authorized funding to support defense, reinforcing the President’s Peace Through Strength agenda.
Department of Energy (National Security Programs): Provisioned funding for programs critical to national security.
Department of State: Provided funding to support diplomatic and foreign affairs responsibilities.
Department of Homeland Security: Received appropriations to enhance domestic security and border protection measures.
Intelligence Community: Benefited from funding to support national security and intelligence operations.
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force: Subject to specific funding restrictions and notification requirements regarding national defense and organizational realignment.

Relevance Score: 3 (Six Federal entities or closely related agencies are impacted by the Act.)

Responsible Officials

President – Oversees the overall implementation of the Act’s provisions and ensures that all executive branch actions are consistent with constitutional authority.
Secretary of War – Directs defense-related policies and funding as authorized by the Act (noting that the Act refers to the “Department of War” to support the “Peace Through Strength” agenda).
Secretary of Energy – Manages national security programs within the Department of Energy as provided in the Act.
Secretary of State – Implements aspects relating to U.S. foreign affairs and military/diplomatic actions as addressed by the legislation.
Secretary of Homeland Security – Responsible for domestic security measures including border security and countering emerging threats.
Director of National Intelligence – Oversees aspects of the Intelligence Community as funded and directed by the Act.
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force – Required to take specific organizational actions and provide certifications and notifications to Congress in relation to nuclear and airspace security matters.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives impact top-level executive branch and Cabinet officials responsible for national security and foreign affairs.)