Center for Presidential Transition Report: “Every presidential transition in modern history has been unique and 2024 was no exception. Although the transition of power from the outgoing Biden administration to the incoming Trump administration was peaceful, it was characterized by significant departures from established norms and set a precedent for future transitions to stray from processes that ensure transparency, ethics and security. Indeed, the new administration’s willingness to deviate from existing norms has continued to characterize its approach to governing throughout its first year. Modern transitions rest on the firm foundations of the Presidential Transition Act of 1963 —as amended on a bipartisan basis by Congress over the years—which provides a framework for transition teams, the outgoing administration and federal agencies to work together effectively. These foundations include robust engagement between transition teams, the White House and agencies, maintaining national security, and demonstrating ethical and transparent governance. This framework has rested on the assumption that candidates will voluntarily seek and accept the transition support services to which they are entitled under law, along with the legal protections and conditions tied to those services. The services authorized under the transition law are nonpartisan and designed to help a new administration move seamlessly into its role governing the nation.

The 2024-2025 cycle showed that adherence to processes prescribed by law cannot be assumed. Some departures from established norms may have occurred because president-elect Donald Trump’s team arrived with experience and knowledge from a previous term, or because the incoming administration lacked trust in the outgoing administration or federal agencies. But the question remains whether this will set a precedent for future transitions to forgo additional processes designed to support secure and ethical transitions. This last cycle also exposed the ways in which some traditional practices and support services appear to no longer meet the logistical or political needs of a modern presidential transition. Issues related to office space, information technology and other services referenced in the law deserve scrutiny and modernization. Updates to transition processes can address these issues, with particular attention paid to ensuring that the building blocks are in place so that future transitions are cooperative, nonpartisan, ethical and peaceful. With transitions being relatively few and far between, Congress and the executive branch should approach legislative and regulatory changes to established practices not with an eye toward circumstances or candidates of a particular moment, rather with a focus on long-term applicability and appropriate flexibility for teams to utilize the services that best and most efficiently meet their needs…”

See also The New York Times – A Year Later, Donors to Trump’s Transition Come to Light. A 46-person list includes billionaires and people he went on to appoint to positions of power