Trump’s Bold Move Against DEI Marks the End of 60 Years of Discrimination

Just days into his presidency, one of Trump’s significant achievements has already surfaced.

With a strategic executive order, the president initiated the dismantling of DEI in the federal government, and potentially in the private sector and educational institutions as well.

This bold and fundamentally just action could herald a profound generational shift. The executive order titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” is likely to be a topic of discussion for years to come.

Trump’s decree revokes a series of executive orders that previously promoted affirmative action within the government, including the landmark 1965 Executive Order 11246 by President Lyndon Johnson.

The regulations stemming from 11246 have resulted in a complex system of racial preferences in federal contracting. The repeal of LBJ’s order is, in itself, a significant milestone.

The order mandates executive departments and agencies to “terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements.”

This is not just rhetoric. The Trump administration promptly directed the closure of diversity offices within the federal government, placing DEI staff on administrative leave and halting contracting programs that conflict with the race- and gender-neutral standards established by Trump’s order.

While all of this would be historically significant, the order extends beyond these measures.

It specifically targets other aspects of American life affected by DEI, which have either voluntarily or due to government pressure, adopted such practices.

Trump’s directive asserts, correctly, that DEI’s race-focused approaches violate federal civil rights laws.

Furthermore, it leverages the potential enforcement of civil rights laws to motivate private entities towards equitable, color-blind policies.

The federal contracting system will serve as a significant source of influence.

The order stipulates that federal contractors and subcontractors cannot “consider race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin in ways that violate the Nation’s civil rights laws” in their “employment, procurement, and contracting practices.”

With the federal government awarding approximately $1.7 trillion in contracts and grants each year, this stipulation will have extensive implications.

Moreover, federal contractors must assure the government that they do not support DEI in breach of anti-discrimination laws. False declarations could expose them to liability under the expansive False Claims Act.

Additionally, each federal agency is tasked with identifying nine potential civil compliance investigations involving “publicly traded corporations, large non-profit entities, foundations with assets exceeding $500 million, state and local bar and medical associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments exceeding $1 billion.”

This initiative is sure to attract the attention of the legal counsels of every entity that falls within these categories.

Finally, the order advises public and higher education systems that failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s recent anti-affirmative action ruling could jeopardize their federal funding.

In sum, these changes are groundbreaking.

While the administration may face resistance in inevitable legal battles, and some institutions might attempt to disguise their DEI programs, this moment could signify a pivotal shift.

Will a future Democratic president attempt to reinstate decades of government quotas?

That is feasible, yet it would require a strong electoral mandate, as the appeal of color-blindness is generally greater than that of racial preferences.

Even if a new Democratic administration supports DEI, would private organizations be willing to undergo cyclical policy changes that compel them to embrace discriminatory practices anew?

Taking the safer, more rational approach would involve distancing themselves from DEI entirely and concentrating on their primary operations.

This outcome would be incredibly beneficial for our society, initiated by what could eventually be recognized as a decisive act by Trump.

Twitter: @RichLowry