Judge Expands Ban on Trump’s Directives Limiting DEI Programs to All Federal Agencies
A federal judge asserted that President Trump’s directive to halt funding for grants and contracts related to ‘equity’ likely contravenes the First and Fifth Amendments.
The ruling marks an extension of a prior decision by a federal judge that obstructs Trump’s executive orders aimed at diminishing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Now, the restriction applies to all federal agencies, departments, and commissions.
This ruling is part of an active lawsuit entitled National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump, where higher education organizations, civil rights groups, and the City of Baltimore contest the constitutionality of Trump’s executive actions. The plaintiffs contend that these orders infringe upon free speech, overstep the president’s authority, and create ambiguities for grant recipients and contractors who depend on federal financing.
“Together, we will build a merit-based society that is colorblind,” Trump declared.
Trump’s anti-DEI initiatives have led to multiple lawsuits.
In the refined ruling released on March 10, Abelson reiterated that Trump’s Termination Provision, which enforces the cessation of funding for “equity-related” grants and contracts, likely violates both the First and Fifth Amendments. He previously indicated that the ambiguous language of the executive orders creates uncertainty for organizations regarding what constitutes a prohibited DEI practice, complicating adherence.
The White House did not provide a comment regarding the clarified ruling by the time of publication.
“The relief sought by the plaintiffs is neither in the interest of the public nor just,” stated attorneys for the Trump administration in their brief. “The public would face detriment if the Government is restrained from executing the President’s directive to enforce and implement anti-discrimination laws.”
With the broadened injunction now in effect, the Trump administration may seek to contest the ruling in appellate court.