Early in President Donald Trump’s second term, he signed Executive Order (E.O.) 14186, “Iron Dome for America,” to create a cutting-edge missile defense system for the United States. President Trump’s goal for the Golden Dome project is to protect the United States from the “most catastrophic threats” posed by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles and he framed the project as a component of the administration’s “peace through strength” strategy. (Note: the initiative was renamed as the “Golden Dome,” rather than “Iron Dome.”)
Shortly after the EO was signed, members of Congress introduced legislation to support the initiative. Sens. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND) introduced the Increasing Response Options and Deterrence of Missile Engagements (IRON DOME) Act (S.435) to strengthen and expand the U.S. missile defense system and work in concert with President Donald Trump’s EO, “Iron Dome for America.” The IRON DOME Act aims to enhance domain awareness, bolster the U.S. missile defense capacity to meet peer and near-peer threats, and accelerate the development of new capabilities to counter future threats. The IRON DOME Act would authorize up to $18.6 billion for the expansion, modernization, research or procurement of munitions, missile defense components and other related material. Sen. Jim Banks (R-IN) is also a cosponsor of the legislation. No similar legislation was introduced in the House.
Congress has proposed roughly $25 billion in initial funding for the Golden Dome project in the reconciliation package. This initial round of funding aims to jumpstart the construction and deployment of the missile defense system. The House Armed Services Committee’s (HASC) approved reconciliation package agreed on a final number of $25 billion, but the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) is still finalizing their version of the package. However, costs for the Golden Dome project are expected to eventually reach hundreds of billions of dollars given that proposals include both comprehensive ground and space layers. We anticipate that once reconciliation is resolved, there will be more funding opportunities for Golden Dome in the annual defense appropriations and other future funding packages. President Trump recently announced in the “skinny” budget that the FY 2026 national defense budget of $1.01 trillion includes funding to boost the Golden Dome. The full budget is expected to be released sometime in May.
This client alert will focus on the structure and implementation of the Golden Dome initiative, issues for industry and what to watch for as Congress looks to pass reconciliation, the National Defense Authorization Act and defense appropriations.
President Trump’s Executive Order
President Trump’s Golden Dome for America project requires the secretary of defense to conduct an Allied and Theater Missile Defense Review to identify ways in which the United States and its allies and partners can work to increase missile defense cooperation and capabilities. The EO also directs the secretary of defense to submit a reference architecture, capabilities-based requirements and an implementation plan for the missile defense system.
The reference architecture from the secretary of defense will include:
- Defense of the United States against ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles and other next-generation aerial attacks from peer, near-peer and rogue adversaries;
- Acceleration of the deployment of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor layer;
- Development and deployment of proliferated space-based interceptors capable of boost-phase intercept;
- Deployment of underlayer and terminal-phase intercept capabilities postured to defeat a countervalue attack;
- Development and deployment of a custody layer of the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture;
- Development and deployment of capabilities to defeat missile attacks before launch and in the boost phase;
- Development and deployment of a secure supply chain for all components with next-generation security and resilience features; and
- Development and deployment of non-kinetic capabilities to augment the kinetic defeat of ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles and other next-generation aerial attacks.
The secretary of defense is also directed to review relevant authorities and organization of the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop and deploy capabilities at the “necessary speed” to develop the “Iron Dome for America.” The secretary of defense will also work with the director of the Office of Management and Budget to submit a plan to fund the directive and allow for sufficient time for consideration before finalization of the fiscal year 2026 budget. The secretary of defense will also work with U.S. Northern Command on an assessment of strategic missile threats to the U.S. homeland and a set of locations to prioritize for defense against a countervalue attack by nuclear adversaries.
Department of Defense Actions and Review of Industry Proposals
On Jan. 31, the Missile Defense Agency posted a Request for Information (RFI) to conduct market research on innovative missile defense technologies, including “system-level, component level, and upgrades, architectures, concepts, and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) to detect and defeat the threat of attack by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks.” This also includes any industry capabilities to address President Trump’s EO “The Iron Dome for America.” The request was structured to seek input on details on what capabilities can be delivered in two-year “epochs”: not later than Dec. 31, 2026; Dec. 31, 2028; Dec. 31, 2030, and “beyond” Dec. 31, 2030. The Missile Defense Agency’s RFI process ended on Feb. 28.
On March 19, Steven J. Morani, who was performing the duties of undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment at the Pentagon, discussed the review of the Golden Dome acquisition process and noted that that they intend to move quickly and “streamline and remove red tape,” and that building this air defense system will require “ layers of architecture working together at all group level elevations … to protect the United States.” The Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will work with the Missile Defense Agency and the military services to manage this project.
On April 10, Space Force Chief Gen. Chance Saltzman said the Golden Dome program will not be a single procurement program, but rather a complex network of systems that have to work together. This likely means there will not be a single contract vehicle but the process will consist of multiple programs.
Press reports indicate that U.S. Space Command has already finalized and presented its options for the Golden Dome missile defense program to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, with some additional reports stating that Secretary Hegseth and President Trump already discussed three proposals in late March.
Congressional Action on Golden Dome
The Golden Dome project received strong support from a number of members of the Senate and the House, especially among the Republican Party. Some members of Congress have expressed their interest in expanding U.S. missile defense capabilities and discussed policies that need to be considered for the Golden Dome project. For example, Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) discussed concerns about any negative impacts that spectrum auctions could have on the Golden Dome’s network, especially if the auctions were to involve DOD-controlled spectrum. While HASC Chairman Mike Rogers (R-AL) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), among others, have recognized that the Golden Dome project is a necessary step in evolving U.S. missile defense capabilities.
Congress is also looking to finalize the 2025 budget reconciliation bill, which is expected to include a focus on defense programs and border security. HASC and SASC released a joint statement to unveil their reconciliation legislation to invest $150 billion in defense priorities, which the House and Senate Armed Services committees developed together. On April 29, HASC conducted their markup of reconciliation and passed the bill. The HASC reconciliation package includes roughly $25 billion for missile defense systems and the Golden Dome project, primarily for THAAD batteries and missile interceptors. SASC has not conducted a markup of the defense portion of the reconciliation bill, but it has released the joint statement (as noted above) with HASC and developed the legislative language in tandem with HASC.
We also anticipate that Sens. Sullivan, Cramer and Banks are working on a provision similar to the IRON DOME for America Act for inclusion in the national defense authorization bill that will be under consideration later this year.
Next Steps
We recommend paying close attention as Congress looks to finalize the budget reconciliation bill, which could include additional priorities for specific technology procurement and final funding levels. Congress will also consider the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (FY26 NDAA) later this summer, and the FY 26 defense appropriations bill by the end of this year.
After the Defense Department receives Hegseth’s and Trump’s feedback, we expect the Trump administration will start working on next steps after the RFI on Golden Dome. The Trump administration will need to draft requests for proposal (RFPs) as well as requirements as they move forward in the development of the Golden Dome. President Trump is also expected to release the full budget sometime in May, which will likely include specifics about funding for Golden Dome.
We will continue to monitor Congress and the administration as they move forward with the Golden Dome including policy implications as well as issues and timelines relevant for industry.
THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE YOU WITH GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE GOLDEN DOME MISSLE SYSTEM. THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE SPECIFIC LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT OR IF YOU NEED LEGAL ADVICE AS TO AN ISSUE, PLEASE CONTACT THE ATTORNEYS LISTED OR YOUR REGULAR BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP ATTORNEY. THIS COMMUNICATION MAY BE CONSIDERED ADVERTISING IN SOME JURISDICTIONS.