The text of the document states that “while we can make policing safer and more effective by strengthening trust between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve, we must also reform our broader criminal justice system so that it protects and serves all people equally.” This statement of purpose prefaces a set of provisions intended “to increase public trust and enhance public safety and security by encouraging equitable and community-oriented policing.”

The provisions of the executive order mostly cover federal law enforcement agencies, over which the president has control. The order includes many provisions for federal agencies, including mandating body cameras, changing recruitment procedures and standards and heavily restricting tactics such as chokeholds and no-knock warrants. The order also establishes guidelines for facilitating civil rights violations and other injustices committed by law enforcement and mandates the creation of a national database to track “police misconduct.”

The Associated Press reports that the details of the order came from extensive negotiations conducted by the Biden administration and its congressional allies. Important officials involved included lead Domestic Policy Advisor Susan Rice, Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Rep. Karen Bass (D-FL). These administration surrogates engaged with representatives of police departments and unions and civil rights organizations. The results of these negotiations were a carefully-worded document.

The final draft kept a statement within the order to “acknowledge the legacy of systemic racism in our criminal justice system and work together to eliminate the racial disparities that endure to this day.” At the same time, the document also included language aimed at satisfying law enforcement agencies, such as a declaration that “reinforcing the partnership between law enforcement and communities is imperative for combating crime and achieving lasting public safety.”

Despite the long process of negotiation that went into crafting Biden’s executive order, reactions to the document have been mixed.  Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), who previously clashed with the Biden administration over the failure of police reform legislation in Congress, took credit for some of the provisions within the Biden order, such as tracking police misconduct.

At the same time, Scott criticized other provisions of the order, claiming that Biden is “making it harder for police to do their jobs to the best of their ability.” The conservative Heritage Foundation objected to provisions of the order that gather data on police misconduct, limit the transfer of military-grade equipment to police departments and promote hiring practices that weed out officers with biases rooted in race, gender, religion, sexual orientation and other aspects of identity. The GOP-friendly think tank labeled these policies “divisive and problematic” and argued that they could be used to target officers with conservative political or religious views.

Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for American Progress judged that the executive order “offers a starting place, but does not go far enough.” These organizations approved of the measure as far as it goes while adding that Congress needed to expand the list of police actions that can be considered civil rights violations. They also argue that Congress must end qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that protects officers from lawsuits filed because of their actions.

With the changes that the Biden executive order will put into place and the reforms that are not covered by the order, the campaign to enact meaningful and wide-ranging police reform will continue for some time. The latest action taken by the Biden administration will likely make some difference while also fueling the continuing debates and disputes over how to change policing in this country.