A federal appeals court will allow the Trump administration to carry out the president’s directives to crack down on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs while an appeal of a ruling that halted those orders is pending.
Two of the three judges on the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel wrote concurring opinions, raising concerns about the anti-DEI directives while concluding that the administration had met the standard for putting the trial judge’s decision on hold.
The circuit order is a significant victory for President Donald Trump, who has made the elimination of DEI programs a central focus of his administration.
The directives, outlined in two executive orders, directed agencies to take action against DEI programs, including those run by government contractors.
In February, US District Judge Adam Abelson ruled that the government could not freeze or cancel “equity-related” contracts, nor could it require grant recipients to certify that their programs do not promote DEI. He also prohibited the administration from pursuing False Claims Act enforcement action regarding the anti-DEI certification requirement.
The 4th Circuit stated that it would consider the merits of Abelson’s decision on an expedited timeline.
Chief Judge Albert Diaz, an Obama appointee, wrote a concurring opinion praising efforts to promote diversity, stating that “there should be room for open discussion and principled debate about DEI programs.”
However, he agreed with a fellow member of the appellate panel, Judge Pamela Harris, in raising the possibility of constitutional violations depending on how agencies carry out Trump’s orders.
In a concurring opinion, Harris, an Obama appointee, noted that some of Trump’s directives appeared to be limited in scope because their language specifically targeted “conduct that violates existing federal anti-discrimination law.”
The third member of the panel, Trump-appointed Judge Allison Rushing, emphasized the panel’s conclusion that the president’s orders did not likely violate the Constitution, and she criticized Diaz for praising diversity programs.
The city of Baltimore, two education associations, and a restaurant association filed the case, alleging that the orders violated several constitutional provisions.
