---

In January 2025, President Trump issued a series of executive orders aimed at dismantling Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) programs within the federal government and among federal contractors. These actions have sparked significant legal challenges, raising questions about executive authority, constitutional protections, and the future of DEI initiatives in the United States.

1. Executive Orders Issued

a. Executive Order 14151: Titled "Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing," this order mandates the termination of all DEI and DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) programs within federal agencies. It also prohibits federal contractors from implementing DEI initiatives, asserting that such programs violate federal civil rights laws.

b. Executive Order 14173: Known as "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity," this order revokes previous directives that required federal contractors to adopt affirmative action plans promoting diversity.

2. District Of Maryland Issues Nationwide Injunction

On February 21, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction halting the enforcement of certain provisions of the executive orders. This injunction came in response to a lawsuit filed by federal employees who contend that the orders improperly targeted DEI-related training and programs, which they argued were essential for creating inclusive, non-discriminatory work environments. They also asserted that the orders violated their free speech rights, as these programs often involved the free exchange of ideas on race, sex, and other social justice issues.

The District Court judge found that the plaintiffs had raised serious legal questions, particularly regarding the vagueness of the executive orders' language on "divisive concepts." The judge ruled that the broad scope of the orders could result in the suppression of protected speech and disproportionately affect minority employees, particularly those in historically marginalized groups. As a result, the judge granted the injunction, temporarily blocking the orders' enforcement while the case moved forward in court.

3. Fourth Circuit Court Of Appeals Ruling

On March 14, 2025, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the nationwide injunction that had been previously granted by the Maryland District Court. This ruling effectively allowed the Trump Administration's anti-DEI executive orders to be enforced while legal challenges continued.

The Fourth Circuit determined that the Trump Administration had likely acted within its authority to issue the executive orders, citing the president’s broad powers over federal agencies and contractors. The court concluded that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated sufficient harm to justify a nationwide block on the orders, which had been issued as part of the president's effort to curb federal spending on DEI programs.

While the ruling allowed the executive orders to proceed, it did not definitively resolve the underlying constitutional issues. The case is expected to continue its way through the legal system, with further challenges likely to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming months.

4. EEOC Issues Guidance

Most recently, on March 19, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued new guidance regarding the DEI executive orders. The guidance emphasized that while the executive orders aimed to restrict certain DEI programs, they did not outright ban all diversity-related activities. Specifically, the EEOC noted that programs focused on preventing discrimination and promoting equal opportunity—core principles under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964—would still be permissible, even under the new restrictions.

The EEOC set forth the steps for employees who wish to file a lawsuit arguing they were discriminated against through an employer’s use of DEI programs. The EEOC made clear that employers cannot use a protected characteristic, e.g., race, gender, etc. in making employment determinations, even if the protected characteristic is not the sole determinative factor.

The EEOC clarified that federal employers could still conduct training aimed at preventing workplace discrimination, as long as the content did not promote “divisive” concepts, as outlined in the executive orders. However, the EEOC did note that DEI training can create a hostile work environment if an employee can prove the training was discriminatory in some way.

The legal and practical landscape of the anti-DEI executive orders is rapidly and frequently changing. There are likely to be myriad challenges to the orders and there may be conflict between the judiciary and the executive branch.

To read more articles like this one, subscribe to the ALERT Newsletter today!

---

About The Author

Tyler J. Johnson is a Partner in Sheppard Mullin’s Labor and Employment Practice Group in the firm’s Los Angeles office. Mr. Johnson represents employers in every stage of the litigation process, from prelitigation disputes to class certification hearings and trials. He represents businesses of every size, and has extensive experience in the healthcare, agricultural, fashion, and temporary staffing industries. Tyler defends employers against claims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, and has prevailed at trial in a pregnancy discrimination case. Tyler also routinely represents businesses in complex litigation, including proposed class actions and representative actions under the Private Attorneys General Act. Tyler has defeated class certification in a number of cases and frequently obtains summary judgment for employers.

Tyler is a co-author of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Litigation and Compliance Manual as well as a contributing author of the ALERT Newsletter.

Mr. Johnson received his law degree from the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law and his undergraduate degree from University of Maryland.