Does 'Public Safety' in Executive Orders Include Product Safety?

What the term public safety means in recent executive orders has gained more importance now that it is one of four criteria to focus Justice Department scrutiny of attorneys who have represented clients against the government in the last eight years. But it is questionable that a target of the March 22 executive order (bit.ly/4l1x5JI) that dictates the scrutiny is those who sued regulators. That is because it lists public safety among military and crime work: "national security, homeland security, public safety, or election integrity."

It also is consistent with more than a dozen recent executive orders with the term public safety (bit.ly/422VplR). The context frequently was matters like the death penalty, terrorism, invasion, and border security. Where such matters were not the context, the term is undefined.

Such usage suggests that public safety might have more the meaning of public order.

Nonetheless, CPSC's duties traditionally have been seen as within the definition of public safety as its mission is to protect the public from safety risks. Assuming a considered and consistent definition across the executive orders:

• If public safety includes product safety, then could eight-year retroactive scrutiny be applied to work against CPSC even if that is outside the initial intent? Moreover, could future scrutiny be possible for those who bring cases that are not only against CPSC but more importantly counter to administration goals like government-wide access to all agencies' records, data, IT systems, etc. (see related story)?

 

• If public safety does not include product safety, how far could CPSC go in protecting staff and functions in following executive orders on cuts? They allow leeway for "public safety" but, again, group it with non-regulatory topics.

For example, a February order for agencies to plan for staffing reductions (PSL, 2/17/25) twice gave leeway for "functions related to public safety, immigration enforcement, or law enforcement" and a third time used "any position…necessary to meet national security, homeland security, or public safety responsibilities."

Online Addendum: A March 28 executive order (bit.ly/428DV7E) explicitly described "quality of life, nuisance, and public-safety laws" (PSL emphasis) as involving public order matters such as "assault, battery, larceny, graffiti and other vandalism, unpermitted disturbances and demonstrations, noise, trespassing, public intoxication, drug possession, sale, and use, and traffic violations." That was in the part of the order that asserted the government will be "deploying a more robust Federal law enforcement presence" in Washington, D.C.