Court allows Trump to restrict DEI programs nationwide


Listen To Story Above

A federal appeals court delivered a significant ruling on Friday, determining that there is no constitutionally protected right to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, overturning a previous judge’s decision.

The Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals aligned with the Trump administration’s position, indicating that the White House’s ban on DEI programs likely meets constitutional requirements. While the court’s decision was nuanced, with two judges offering a separate opinion stating that DEI policies aren’t inherently unconstitutional, the ruling effectively allows the administration to proceed with initiatives aimed at eliminating such programs in federal agencies and federally funded organizations.

“This is a difficult case that will benefit from more sustained attention than we can give it in the present posture,” wrote Judge Pamela Harris, an Obama appointee. “But for now, I believe the government has shown a sufficient likelihood of success to warrant a stay until we can hear and decide its appeal.”

Judge Albert Diaz joined Harris in this assessment, suggesting that the final verdict might hinge on implementation rather than fundamental principles. In his opinion, Diaz wrote, “Despite the vitriol now being heaped on DEI, people of good faith who work to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion deserve praise, not opprobrium.”

Trump appointee Judge Allison Jones Rushing provided a separate opinion, expressing confidence in the government’s likelihood of success in establishing the constitutional basis for its DEI-related arguments.

The legal challenge originated from Baltimore’s city council and three other federal funding recipients with DEI initiatives. Their lawsuit argued that Trump “cannot usurp Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, nor can he silence those who disagree with him by threatening them with the loss of federal funds and other enforcement actions.”

Initially, Biden appointee Judge Adam Abelson of Maryland’s U.S. District Court supported this position in February, citing potential First Amendment violations. Abelson noted in his decision, “As Plaintiffs put it, ‘efforts to foster inclusion have been widespread and uncontroversially legal for decades.’ Plaintiffs’ irreparable harms include widespread chilling of unquestionably protected speech.”

Deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller countered that DEI programs violate the Civil Rights Act through discriminatory practices favoring women and minorities. Miller stated, “A judge cannot nullify the Civil Rights Act and order the government to award federal taxpayer dollars to organizations that discriminate based on race.”

The appeals court appeared unconvinced by the First Amendment defense. Judge Rushing emphasized that judicial policy preferences shouldn’t influence determinations about the executive orders’ lawfulness. “A judge’s opinion that DEI programs ‘deserve praise, not opprobrium’ should play absolutely no part in deciding this case,” she wrote.

While this ruling enables temporary implementation of the administration’s program ban, the lower court’s decision remains effective pending the final appeal outcome, which could extend several months. Nevertheless, the decision represents a significant victory for the Trump administration, with three judges, including two Obama appointees, acknowledging the legal basis for the DEI restrictions, even as opponents maintain that anti-discrimination measures constitute protected speech.

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR