Appeals Court Temporarily Reinstates Trump’s Directives Aiming at DEI Programs
The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s decision which suggested that President Donald Trump’s directives were likely unconstitutional.
On Friday, a federal appeals court granted temporary permission for the Trump administration to proceed with certain executive orders aimed at dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in federal agencies.
A three-judge panel from the appeals court unanimously decided to grant the administration’s request to stay the injunction regarding two specific executive orders, highlighting that the administration has a strong likelihood of success in its appeal.
U.S. Circuit Judge Pamela Harris, explaining her vote to grant the stay, indicated that the Trump administration has shown a sufficient likelihood that the challenged provisions do not inherently breach the Constitution.
Harris noted that the order for certifications from grantees pertains solely to actions that violate existing federal anti-discrimination laws and cannot terminate grants “based on a grantee’s speech or activities outside the scope of the funded activities.”
Nonetheless, she cautioned that her support for the stay included a stipulation that the orders would be unconstitutional if enforced beyond their intended parameters.
“What the Orders say on their face and how they are enforced are two different things,” Harris wrote in her opinion. “Agency enforcement actions that exceed the Orders’ limited scope may raise significant First Amendment and Due Process issues, as pointed out by the district court.”
Circuit Judge Albert Diaz echoed Harris’s reserve regarding the enforcement of the orders, underscoring that agency actions outside their scope may raise concerns under the Fifth Amendment for vagueness.
Diaz also defended DEI initiatives, asserting that “individuals sincerely working to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion deserve recognition, not condemnation.”
Circuit Judge Allison Rushing concurred with the need to suspend the preliminary injunction but stressed that a judge’s personal opinions on DEI initiatives “should play no role in the determination of this case.”
“The subjective views of individual judges regarding the prudence of specific Executive action are irrelevant to our duty to adjudicate legal matters according to the law, and should not be factored in,” Rushing conveyed in her opinion.
This ruling responds to a lawsuit initiated by the city of Baltimore and higher education groups, and will remain effective while the Trump administration’s appeal is in progress.
The White House has not provided a comment by the time of publication.
A representative for Democracy Forward, representing the plaintiffs, stated that the group was in the process of reviewing the ruling.
Contribution from Tom Ozimek and Reuters is acknowledged.
