The First 100 Days of an Anthony Hudson Presidency: What the Record Suggests

Photo: w_lemay, Wikimedia Commons

01 The record and the scenario

Anthony Hudson is the Libertarian candidate for governor of Michigan in the November 3, 2026 election, a blue-collar truck driver and small business owner from Grand Blanc Township who won the party's nomination at its June 28, 2026 convention after his challenger conceded the final ballot. Born and raised in Texas, he moved to Michigan in 2012, and spent roughly twenty years on the road as a trucker — a biography his campaign wears deliberately, positioning him against what he calls hand-picked establishment candidates. His path to the Libertarian ticket was itself a departure: he left the Republican Party on February 19, 2026, telling journalist Dave Bondy that Republicans "hand-select their candidates" before ballots are printed, and sought the LP nomination through its convention process instead.

The Hudson platform, published in full on his campaign site, is a dense list of state-level eliminations: eliminate property taxes, eliminate the state income tax, eliminate the state transportation department's budget in favor of county road commissions, eliminate annual auto registration, eliminate no-fault auto insurance in favor of at-fault, eliminate large solar and wind installations on state land, eliminate renewable energy mandates, eliminate state participation in the Flock camera surveillance program, eliminate a 2023 statute that limits local control over data centers and energy projects. Around the eliminations sit commitments to medical transparency and informed consent, Second Amendment protection through repeal of red flag laws, immigration enforcement, parents' rights, and local control of decisions from school curriculum to energy siting.

Two structural facts frame any presidential translation of this record. First, nearly every plank is addressed to Lansing and Michigan law — the office a president holds has different powers than the one Hudson is actually seeking. Second, the Libertarian Party's national platform is not evidence of Hudson's personal positions and is not used as such anywhere in this analysis; only his own campaign materials and his own public statements are. Where his record says nothing about a federal question, this article says so rather than filling the gap.

This article does not predict that Anthony Hudson will become president. It examines how the individual's documented positions and record could translate into executive priorities if placed in presidential office.

Analysis — not prediction. N43 and Hermes AI grounds every scenario in the documented record as of September 21, 2026; where evidence is incomplete we say so.

02 Day One: what a president could do alone

Hudson has already told voters what he would do with executive power on Day One of a governorship, and the pattern — reach for the executive order, withdraw from a program, freeze a practice — translates more directly to the presidency than most state platforms do, because the federal executive already runs the kinds of programs he wants withdrawn from. Several plausible Day One actions follow from his own published commitments.

Likely Day-One Actions

• An executive order withdrawing federal law-enforcement cooperation with the Flock camera surveillance program and directing agencies to end warrantless access to its license-plate and camera data. Hudson's platform is explicit at the state level — he promises to "write an executive order to remove Michigan from the Flock Camera Surveillance Program" — and the federal analog, ending federal purchases and taps of commercially collected location data, sits squarely within presidential authority.
• A directive to federal agencies to stop purchasing or accessing privately collected location, camera and device data outside the warrant process — the same surveillance-loophole economy a governor cannot reach but a president can, since the buying is done by federal agencies.
• A freeze on new federal leasing, permitting and incentive support for large-scale solar and wind projects on federal land, mirroring his state plank to "eliminate solar and wind farms on state land" and restrict large-scale installations while rooftop generation remains allowed.
• An executive order directing federal agencies to treat parents as the ultimate authority over their children's upbringing, education and healthcare decisions — his 14th Amendment parents' rights plank — to the extent existing federal rules allow, with the caveat that the binding federal version is legislation, not a memo.

Actions the Candidate Could Not Do Alone

• Eliminating property taxes or the federal income tax — his signature fiscal planks, aimed at state levies and state structure — requires Congress to rewrite the tax code. (Property taxes themselves are not even a federal tax; see section 05.)
• Repealing red flag laws — his gun-rights plank is the repeal of Michigan's red flag statute; federally, any national extreme-risk protection-order framework or ATF rule changes would need Congress or the formal rulemaking process.
• Mandating medical transparency and informed consent as binding national law — his healthcare plank (no mandates, all decisions by informed consent, transparency on vaccines, reproductive surgeries and drugs) would need statute law to bind providers, insurers and agencies nationally.
• Auto insurance reform — no-fault to at-fault — is state insurance law, beyond a president entirely.
• Eliminating annual auto registration, part-time legislatures, county-controlled taxation and the state transportation department — all Michigan constitutional and statutory matters unreachable from Washington.

03 Days 2-30: reorienting the executive branch

The Department of Justice is the agency where a hypothetical Hudson administration would have the most documented work to do, in both directions. His platform pairs aggressive anti-surveillance action — pull out of the Flock program, end data-center partnerships — with aggressive pro-enforcement commitments: remove sanctuary cities, deport undocumented immigrants in cooperation with the federal government, eliminate taxpayer-funded benefits for undocumented residents, create child-trafficking task forces. DOJ houses the FBI and the federal grant-making levers over local law enforcement, so both halves of that agenda — the surveillance withdrawal and the enforcement escalation — run through the same building.

The Department of Homeland Security is the second evidenced agency. Hudson's immigration plank — enforce immigration laws with the federal government, end sanctuary jurisdictions — is a state-candidate's endorsement of federal enforcement, but as president the direction reverses: DHS would be his to run, and the documented position supports prioritizing interior enforcement and cooperation with state and local police rather than any documented change to legal immigration itself. The record contains no position on asylum law, visa policy or border infrastructure beyond this enforcement plank.

The Interior Department and the energy agencies are evidenced narrowly, by the eliminate-solar-and-wind-on-state-land and return-local-control planks. A president holding those views could redirect federal land leasing away from utility-scale renewables and slow agency support for large projects, within existing statutes; he could not abolish the federal renewable incentives, which Congress wrote. The Department of Education and HHS are touched by his parents' rights and medical-freedom planks — a president can direct enforcement posture and guidance — but the binding versions are legislative. There is no public evidence of Hudson positions on the Defense Department, the State Department, the intelligence community, the EPA's core missions, or federal labor policy.

On personnel philosophy the record is thin but not empty. His campaign biography emphasizes that he "turned down $6.3 million" in campaign funding as proof his "integrity can NOT be bought," and his party switch was framed as a revolt against party insiders hand-selecting candidates. That is a stated preference for appointments and nominees free of establishment networks, but it is not a documented plan for the civil service, and this analysis does not invent one.

04 Days 30-60: the first legislative package

A Hudson legislative package would be built almost entirely of repeals and eliminations — his platform's signature word — and the record supports the following items, each labeled by evidence strength. The labels describe the candidate's documented positions, not the bills' prospects.

• High evidence — a federal anti-surveillance-data bill. Hudson's plank is the most concrete promise in his platform: repeal the state law opening communities to data centers, impose a two-year moratorium on new data centers and solar farms, and issue an executive order removing Michigan from the Flock camera program. The federal translation — barring warrantless federal purchase of location and camera data, and restricting federal integration with private surveillance networks — is a direct carry-over of the same commitments.
• High evidence — tax elimination legislation. Eliminating property taxes and the income tax are the first two planks of his published platform, elaborated with a county-controlled replacement model on his campaign site. At the federal level the income-tax plank has an obvious (and radical) analog; the property-tax plank has none, because there is no federal property tax to eliminate — a distinction the package would have to resolve.
• High evidence — medical freedom and informed-consent law. His healthcare plank is specific: healthcare is between a person and their doctor; full transparency on all health decisions including vaccines, reproductive surgeries and drugs; no mandates; all decisions by informed consent. Binding national rules on mandates and disclosure would require Congress.
• High evidence — gun-rights legislation. Repealing red flag laws and protecting the right to bear arms is an explicit plank with a specific target (the state statute). A federal bill restricting national extreme-risk frameworks or clarifying due process in firearms deprivation would be the translation.
• Moderate evidence — immigration enforcement law. The platform states remove sanctuary cities, deport undocumented immigrants in cooperation with federal enforcement, and stop taxpayer-funded benefits; the record does not document a position on the underlying legal immigration system, so the shape of any broader bill is uncertain beyond enforcement and benefits.
• Moderate evidence — energy and land-use law. Eliminating utility-scale solar and wind on public land, returning siting control to local governments, ending renewable energy mandates (including EV mandates) and bringing natural gas back as a key energy source are all explicit planks; the federal versions (national mandate repeals, gas-favorable policy) would be legislation, and their content beyond the stated direction is undocumented.

Deliberately excluded: infrastructure investment and mental-health reform appear as planks but with no federal mechanism documented, and veterans, school curriculum and homeless-housing commitments are similarly directional. The package above is what the record actually supports.

05 Days 60-100: where governing meets reality

The structural problem of a hypothetical Hudson presidency is that his agenda is mostly a list of things state governments do. Eliminate property taxes, eliminate auto registration, convert no-fault auto insurance, make the legislature part-time, abolish the state transportation department and send its money to county road commissions — every one of these is a matter of Michigan constitutional and statutory law that Congress cannot pass and a president cannot order. The honest 100-day federal agenda is the small subset of his platform that touches federal power: surveillance data, federal land, enforcement cooperation and tax law.

That subset hits Congress-shaped walls immediately. Eliminating the federal income tax means rewriting the revenue base of the entire government — the largest, slowest, most contested bill imaginable, and the record offers no replacement model for the federal level, only the county-tax model he proposes for Michigan. Repealing federal renewable-energy incentives collides with a bipartisan coalition that passed them. Any national red-flag-law restriction meets a Senate filibuster and the states' own police powers. The filibuster alone — sixty votes for most of this list — is the practical ceiling on how much of the platform could become law in any Congress a Libertarian president would plausibly face.

The rulemaking path is faster but weaker. Executive withdrawal from surveillance-data partnerships, guidance changing enforcement posture on medical matters, and redirected federal-land leasing can be done by agencies — but each must survive the Administrative Procedure Act's notice-and-comment process, litigation from affected industries, and the standing reality that guidance can be reversed by the next administration's pen. The Flock withdrawal, the most concrete promise in his record, would be durable only as statute.

Federalism cuts against the platform more than for it. Hudson's local-control plank — counties deciding taxes, towns deciding energy projects — is philosophically sympathetic to state power, but as president he would need states to do most of what his platform promises, and many states would decline. His sanctuary-city removal plank would run straight into the constitutional limits on commandeering state and local police. The 100-day picture, judged only from the record: a president with a governor's agenda, able to act where federal agencies buy data and lease land, dependent on Congress for nearly everything else, and constitutionally unable to reach the Michigan planks at all.

06 The policy record in detail

Economic Policy and Taxes

The heart of the Hudson platform is tax elimination. His campaign site promises to eliminate property taxes and the state income tax, replacing them with a county-controlled tax set locally — "no more property taxes — you own your home and land outright" — with state support mechanisms preserved for counties that underperform, and with county-by-county charts illustrating the impact. The complementary planks: reduce the gas tax, prioritize small business, make paid time off and sick time tax exempt, lower energy costs. The philosophy is consistent — leave money where it is earned, decide locally — and the property-tax page shows real analytic effort rather than a slogan.

Energy and Environment

Hudson's environmental position is unusual for the stereotype of his party's voters: eliminate utility-scale solar and wind farms on state land because "large-scale solar and wind farms damage Michigan's forests, lakes, farms, and wildlife," restrict installations to rooftops, return siting control to local communities, eliminate renewable energy mandates including EV mandates, and bring natural gas back as a key energy source. This is a conservation argument against industrial renewables, paired with a pro-fossil fuel stance — not a climate-mitiation agenda in either direction.

Surveillance, Technology and Data Privacy

The plank is unusually specific for a gubernatorial candidate: repeal PA233 — the 2023 Michigan statute limiting local control over data centers and energy facility siting — impose a two-year statewide moratorium on data centers and solar farms, and write an executive order removing Michigan from the Flock Camera Surveillance Program. The connective tissue is data sovereignty: communities decide what gets built, and the state does not feed a networked license-plate camera system. A federal translation of the data half is straightforward; the siting half is state law.

Healthcare

The platform's medical plank is medical freedom: healthcare is between a person and their doctor, with full transparency on all health decisions including vaccines, reproductive surgeries and drugs; no mandates; all decisions by informed consent. Around it sit commitments to affordable healthcare through transparency and proactive wellness, and a mental-health overhaul addressing suicide, depression, addiction and gender dysphoria. The record contains no position on federal programs like Medicare or Medicaid funding structure — those are undetermined.

Gun Rights and Criminal Justice

On guns the plank is explicit: protect the right to bear arms, and repeal red flag laws, which he frames as safeguarding due process. On criminal justice the record is thinner: child-trafficking task forces, school security (curriculum "not indoctrination," protecting girls' sports and private spaces), and the immigration enforcement planks are the evidenced items. There is no documented position on sentencing, policing reform beyond surveillance, or federal prisons.

Immigration

The platform states: remove sanctuary cities, deport undocumented immigrants in cooperation with the federal government, enforce immigration laws, and stop taxpayer-funded benefits for undocumented residents. The position is enforcement-forward; the record says nothing about legal immigration levels, asylum process or visa policy, so a fuller federal immigration position cannot be characterized from the evidence.

Education and Parents' Rights

The planks frame parents as the ultimate authority over upbringing, education and healthcare decisions — "no government in private homes" — with school curriculum transparency alongside. There is no documented position on federal education funding or programs, so the federal education policy is undetermined beyond the parents' rights frame.

There is not enough public evidence to determine Anthony Hudson's position on foreign policy, defense, or trade. There is likewise not enough evidence on technology policy beyond the surveillance and data-center planks — no position on AI regulation, semiconductor policy or telecommunications is documented.

07 What could not happen alone — and what could

What President Hudson Could Not Do Alone

• Eliminate the federal income tax — a total rewrite of the revenue code that would consume an entire Congress, with no documented federal replacement model.
• Repeal national red flag frameworks or bind the states' own red flag laws — the federal version of his gun plank requires Congress, and the state statutes are beyond federal command.
• Remove sanctuary cities as a matter of law — Congress cannot command state and local police to enforce federal immigration law, and the funding levers a president holds are conditional, not plenary.
• Repeal federal renewable-energy mandates and incentives — statute law written with bipartisan votes, unwritable without the same.
• Bind medical informed-consent and no-mandate rules nationally — binding provider and insurer conduct is legislation.
• Fund the infrastructure and veterans-housing planks — appropriations are Congress's power, and his own transportation funding plank (eliminate the state DOT) is a state matter anyway.
• Eliminate no-fault auto insurance, annual auto registration, or county-controlled property tax structure — all Michigan law, unreachable from the Oval Office.

What Could Change Within 100 Days

• Executive withdrawal from Flock camera program cooperation and an end to federal warrantless purchases of location and camera data.
• A freeze on new utility-scale solar and wind leasing and permitting support on federal land.
• Enforcement-posture directives on medical freedom and parents' rights, within existing statutes.
• Immigration-enforcement priority directives emphasizing interior enforcement and state cooperation.

Potential Coalition Partners

The documented positions scramble the usual map. The anti-Flock, anti-data-center plank aligns with civil-liberties progressives who oppose police location tracking; the parents' rights and anti-mandate planks align with the parental-rights right; the tax-elimination and gas-tax planks align with anti-tax Republicans; the local-control planks could appeal to progressive municipalities that want to reject state-imposed projects as much as conservative ones do. The natural-gas and anti-renewables planks align with fossil-fuel-state Republicans and conflict with the same progressive coalition on the other items.

Areas of Likely Conflict

The income-tax elimination collides with both parties' fiscal leadership; the renewable-incentive repeal collides with its bipartisan authors; the sanctuary-city removal collides with constitutional limits and with the states and cities that adopted sanctuary policies deliberately; the medical-freedom planks collide with public-health establishments in both parties. And within his own coalition, the enforcement-forward immigration plank sits uneasily beside the no-government-in-private-lives plank — a tension the record does not resolve.

08 The 100-day scorecard and what the record tells us

Read as a whole, the Hudson record is the platform of an eliminator: nearly every plank is a repeal, a withdrawal, a moratorium or a devolution to counties and towns. The five strongest-evidence areas — taxes, surveillance, energy and land, medical freedom, guns — are exactly the areas where the platform is specific enough to be checked, which is also what makes a 100-days translation possible at all.

What moves fast in this scenario is the withdrawal agenda: ending federal taps of private surveillance data, freezing federal-land renewable leasing, redirecting enforcement posture. Each is an agency directive within existing authority. What moves slowly or never is everything Congress owns — tax law, mandate repeal, binding medical-freedom rules — and everything Michigan owns, which is roughly half the platform by item count. The record is candid about being a state agenda; the honest federal translation is a subset.

Where the record is thin is everywhere beyond elimination: foreign policy, defense, trade and education funding have no documented position, and the infrastructure, mental-health and veterans planks are directional commitments without mechanisms. A fair reading is that Hudson has documented what he is against in unusual detail and documented what he is for mostly in the form of devolution — let counties tax, let towns decide, let parents choose.

Philosophically, the difference from both major parties is the default direction of change. Where both major parties' platforms are predominantly additive — new programs, new rules, new funding — the Hudson platform's default is subtractive, with government receding to whatever level is closest to the people affected. That is a coherent governing philosophy, and it is precisely why it yields a short unilateral list: a president can stop federal actions quickly, but subtraction at the state level is not his to perform.

Whether a Congress of either party would move any of it is a question about politics this article does not predict. What the evidence supports is narrower: if the office ever reached him, the first 100 days would be about data, land and enforcement posture — with the eliminations queued behind a Congress that has never shown an appetite for them.