Executive Order 14209: Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement To Further American Economic and National Security

What does Executive Order 14209 do?

Justice paused most new matters for the stated review period and revised its enforcement guidance; case decisions required separate action.

Reading the operative provisions of Executive Order 14209

EO 14209 ordered the Attorney General to pause most new Department of Justice investigations and enforcement actions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for an initial 180-day review period. It also directed review of pending matters and development of revised enforcement guidance. The order allowed exceptions, so it was not a direction to close every existing case or to stop every enforcement action regardless of circumstances.

The FCPA remained federal law throughout the pause. It prohibits specified bribery of foreign officials and imposes accounting duties on covered issuers; the order did not repeal those statutory provisions. The Securities and Exchange Commission’s separate civil authority also was not automatically suspended by the DOJ instruction. In June 2025, DOJ issued new guidelines and resumed enforcement under stated priorities. Those guidelines are an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, not a statutory amendment or a court ruling on the meaning of the FCPA.

For a company or individual, the relevant questions include which agency has jurisdiction, when the alleged conduct occurred, what the statute requires, and whether an exception or later guideline applies. DOJ’s current policy can shape charging decisions, but does not create immunity from private claims, SEC action, or prosecution under other laws. Review the Federal Register order and DOJ guidance for EO 14209.

DOJ’s June 2025 guidelines identify how prosecutors should prioritize future matters after the review. They do not bind the SEC, foreign regulators, or private plaintiffs, and they do not change the elements of an FCPA offense. An existing investigation could continue under an exception or after the pause, while a new DOJ matter could be assessed under the new factors. The company’s internal controls and recordkeeping duties also continued under the statute even when DOJ’s charging priorities changed.

The pause also did not suspend corporate books-and-records or internal-controls duties imposed on covered issuers. Those obligations are distinct from DOJ’s decision whether to open or pursue a bribery investigation. Companies should continue to check the current statute, SEC rules, DOJ guidance, and any applicable settlement obligations when evaluating conduct. The EO changed enforcement priorities for a defined period; it did not grant a safe harbor for foreign payments.