The new analysis will also consider the rule's impact on industry "disruptions and dislocations," whether the rule is likely to increase litigation, and if those potential consequences will increase the cost of investment advice and reduce access to retirement services.

If the new the economic and legal analysis shows the rule has or will reduce access to retirement savings services and raise the cost of advice, the Labor department is instructed to propose a new rule for public comment.

Even though the final order does not explicitly delay the April 10 implementation date, opponents of the rule reacted as if the ultimate outcome will be a delay and a rewritten rule more favorable to industry.

"The so-called fiduciary rule would have made it more difficult and more costly for many families to save for retirement," said Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-NC, the new chair of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, in a statement.

"For years, we expressed our willingness to work with the Department of Labor on a responsible approach that would protect access to affordable retirement advice and require advisors to serve the best interests of their clients," said Foxx "Our repeated offers were rejected by the previous administration, but the offer still stands."

The Chamber of Commerce, Financial Services Roundtable, and the Insured Retirement Institute were among the trade organizations that issued statements in support of the executive order.

Related: Read our many years' worth of coverage on the fiduciary rule

A draft of the order referred to the rule's Best Interest Contract Exemption, the rule's primary enforcement mechanism, by name, but that language was stripped from the final order.

As written, the BIC Exemption requires financial institutions to disclose they are acting as fiduciaries when advising on IRA investments and defined contribution plans.

The contract creates a private right of action, which gives investors the right to bring class action claims in the event of a breach of contract. The new economic and legal analysis will no doubt address the potential consequences of litigation under the rule.

Not everyone pleased

The executive order gives the Labor Department the option to write a new rule "rescinding or revising" the regulation upon completion of the new economic and legal impact analysis.

Proponents of the rule, which would have required all advisors on qualified retirement assets to serve as fiduciaries, questioned whether the executive order is aligned with the Trump Administration's pledge to put the interests of middle-class Americans before Wall Street and corporations.

"We think the DOL got it right," said Micah Hauptman, financial services counsel for the Consumer Federation of America. "The rule stands for one basic proposition—that retirement advice should be given in the clients' best interest. It's just that simple."

The CFA was a leading advocate for the rule throughout the six-year rulemaking process. Hauptman said the Trump administration made no effort to reach out to the CFA, while it welcomed input for industry organizations opposed to the rule.

"The Trump administration made a decision behind closed doors without consulting stakeholders outside of Wall Street," said Hauptman. "It's unfortunate the President has put Wall Street interests before middle class Americans."

For years, opponents of the rule have argued it will price lower-income Americans out of the advisory market, and that it would limit investment options by favoring lower-cost passively managed investments, claims Trump's order specifically references.

"There is no merit to the claim that the rule would limit investors' choices by forcing all advisors to recommend the same low-cost index funds," said Seth Rosenbloom, associate general counsel for Betterment for Business, the record-keeping arm of the robo advisory Betterment, which many analysts said would benefit from the rule.

"The text of the rule itself is clear on this point. The rule simply requires advisors to make an investment recommendation that they can demonstrate is in an investor's best interest. That may be the lowest cost option, but not necessarily. If advisors are not able to defend the investments they are recommending, including their cost, investors will not suffer from their absence," said Rosenbloom in a statement.

Labor, DOJ to drop legal defense of rule

Because the fiduciary rule was made effective in June of 2016, the Labor Department will have to initiate a new rulemaking process, and open a new proposed rule for public comment, in order to change the existing rule.

A draft of President Trump's order included instructions for the Labor Department to consult with the Justice Department as to potentially dropping the defense of lawsuits against the rule in four federal courts, but that clause was also stripped from the final order.

Courts in District of Columbia and Kansas have already upheld the rule. The most wide-ranging claims challenging the rule's legality are still being considered in a Texas Federal court, which this week issued a statement saying a ruling will come no later than February 10.

Erin Sweeney, an attorney with Miller & Chevalier, said she expects the Labor and Justice Departments to "move quickly" to stay all pending litigation against the rule, given the Texas court's announcement of a decision next week.

Hauptman of the CFA says instructing the agencies to stop litigating the rule may not have stood up to legal scrutiny.