Trump eliminated a key space advisory committee at the worst time

Maxar Intelligence’s second pair of WorldView Legion satellites launched Aug. 15, 2024 on a SpaceX Falcon 9 from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Fla. (Photo credit: Maxar Intelligence)

The Trump administration has made another misstep in its aggressive government spending cuts, this time targeting a crucial link between public and private sectors in the space industry. On Feb. 28, 2025, the Department of Commerce issued a stop-work order for the Advisory Committee on Excellence in Space (ACES), just days before its scheduled March 5 meeting. This decision is not just an administrative adjustment — it signals a troubling shift away from fostering public-private collaboration in a sector that is essential to both national security and America’s leadership in space.

ACES was a non-authoritative advisory board comprised of 17 appointees from academia, government, and industry designed to bring together key actors across subsectors of the space industry to inform and support US space policy, regulations, and economy. While it did not have direct policy-making power, it played a critical role in ensuring that industry voices supplemented government action. It provided guidance to NOAA’s undersecretary and the director of the Office of Space Commerce on commercial space activities and offered recommendations on fostering innovation, complying with international obligations, and addressing issues like space debris and cybersecurity.

Put simply, the elimination of ACES is a big mistake, as it cuts off a channel of collaboration that strengthens US space capabilities and security. A competitive commercial space industry fosters resilience and innovation. By cutting ACES, the Trump administration is taking a step backward, weakening the government’s ability to ensure that the US maintains technological superiority in space.

The importance of commercial actors in national security is already well-documented. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated how indispensable private-sector space technology can be. American commercial companies, including Maxar, Capella Space, HawkEye 360, Planet Labs, and SpaceX, have provided critical technologies, like remote sensing imagery and satellite communications, that have aided Ukraine’s defense. This reinforces the idea that cutting-edge commercial innovation and participation can make or break national security efforts. The US should learn from this and deepen its engagement with the commercial space sector, not alienate it.

Building strong relationships between the US government and American companies is essential for effective technology acquisition. However, even before the elimination of ACES, it was already challenging for commercial actors to engage with the government due to strict regulations on meetings and collaboration. Removing an advisory board that facilitated dialogue only exacerbates this divide.

Furthermore, this move contradicts stated space policy objectives from the first Trump administration, whose 2020 National Space Policy explicitly emphasized the importance of a “robust, innovative, and competitive commercial space sector” as a cornerstone of US leadership in space. Cutting ACES also directly undermines this goal and Trump’s desire to build a Golden Dome, which could rely heavily on space-based capabilities. If this administration is serious about maintaining American leadership in space, why would it take an action that weakens the very partnerships necessary to achieve it?

Moreover, does this decision signal a shift toward favoring a few dominant players in the industry, such as SpaceX? While SpaceX has undeniably contributed to American space dominance, an over-concentration of government contracts in a single company is risky for national security. This can be seen in the dominance of United Launch Alliance over National Security Space launches throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. With little competition in the sector, ULA was the sole provider of launch services for national security payloads, leading to high costs and a lack of innovation. It was only with the emergence of new players like SpaceX that launch prices dropped and innovation accelerated. However, we are now entering another era of domination with SpaceX conducting five out of six launches in the US. A diverse space industry ensures resilience against supply chain disruptions, technological failures, and geopolitical challenges and ACES was designed to support such diversity.

The US needs a diverse and robust space industry to remain a leader in the global arena. Market concentration is already high in key space industry subsectors, including communications, remote sensing, and launch. Without mechanisms like ACES to encourage industry-wide engagement and competition, there is a risk of further consolidation.

Some might argue that the Office of Space Commerce still exists, and therefore, the elimination of ACES is not a major blow. However, the Office of Space Commerce is primarily focused on leveraging the commercial space industry for economic purposes, not necessarily on fostering public-private partnerships for national security and technological advancement in space. Public-private advisory forums like ACES are rare and necessary across all industries, especially in space, where innovation and security are deeply intertwined.

It is difficult to pinpoint the motivation behind the decision to eliminate ACES. Budget cuts, bureaucratic reshuffling, or shifting political priorities may all play a role. However, the reasoning behind this particular decision is less important than its consequences. What is clear is that this was a decision that will have second and third order effects for the nation’s security and the space economy.

The administration should reconsider its decision and work to strengthen, rather than sever, ties between the government and commercial space actors. The stakes are too high to ignore — the future of American space leadership and national security depends on it.

Kathleen Curlee is a research analyst at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).