Two Judges Defend DEI—But Still Rule in Favor of Trump’s Anti-DEI Executive Orders

Despite two deciding judges expressing support for DEI, the Fourth Circuit unanimously ruled on Friday that two Executive Orders issued by President Trump, which seek to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives from federal grant and contract processes, will remain in effect while legal challenges proceed. The Executive Orders claim that DEI programs promote race- and sex-based preferences that contradict American values of merit and hard work.

What Is This Case About?

Earlier this year, a group of plaintiffs challenged these Executive Orders. The District Court issued a nationwide injunction preventing federal agencies from enforcing key provisions. This included blocking the termination of ‘equity-related’ grants and contracts, halting requirements for federal contractors and grantees to certify they do not operate DEI programs that violate federal anti-discrimination laws, and stopping directives for the Attorney General to investigate and deter DEI initiatives in the private sector.

The government appealed, arguing that the injunction was too broad. The Fourth Circuit agreed, granting a stay that allows the Orders to remain in effect during the appeal.

Why Did the Court Grant the Stay?

Applying a four-part legal test, the Fourth Circuit found the stay appropriate because:

• The Orders Are Limited in Scope – They do not prohibit all DEI programs but target specific actions that may violate federal anti-discrimination laws.
• No Immediate Harm Justified an Injunction – The Orders primarily instruct federal agencies on grant and contract procedures.
• Further Legal Review is Needed – The case raises significant constitutional questions requiring thorough judicial review.
• The Government Has a Strong Chance of Success – The lower court may have overstepped in issuing a broad injunction.

Where Do the Judges Stand on DEI?

Interestingly, two of the three Fourth Circuit judges who lifted the injunction, Chief Judge Roger Gregory Diaz and Judge Pamela Harris, expressed support for DEI. Diaz strongly advocated for DEI, arguing it promotes fairness and inclusivity, while Harris took a more measured approach, acknowledging DEI’s value but cautioning against potential constitutional concerns in enforcement. Judge Allison Rushing maintained a neutral stance, emphasizing judicial restraint and criticizing the lower court’s broad injunction.

Key Takeaways for Employers

1. The Orders Remain in Effect—for Now – Federal grantees and employers with federal contracts should ensure compliance with the Executive Orders.
2. Review DEI Programs for Compliance – Audit workplace DEI initiatives to confirm they do not impose race- or sex-based preferences that could be deemed discriminatory under federal law. Ensure all diversity policies align with existing equal opportunity requirements to minimize legal risks
3. DEI Initiatives Remain Permissible, But with Limitations – The ruling does not ban all DEI initiatives; it is limited to federal contractors and grantees. The Executive Orders require federal agencies to terminate ‘equity-related’ grants and contracts, mandate certifications about DEI compliance, and authorize investigations into private-sector DEI practices.

Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit’s ruling permits the Orders to remain in effect while legal challenges continue, but the broader debate over DEI policies remains unresolved. Employers should closely monitor developments, assess the impact on workplace diversity initiatives, and ensure compliance while fostering inclusive environments.