In Washington, a federal judge issued a substantial block on Friday against comprehensive executive orders initiated by President Donald Trump. These orders aim to terminate government support for programs that endorse diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson, based in Baltimore, granted a preliminary injunction to prevent the administration from discontinuing or amending federal contracts they classify as equity-related.
Judge Abelson highlighted potential constitutional violations in these orders, specifically concerning free speech rights. On his first day in office, President Trump signed an order directing federal agencies to end all “equity-related” grants or contracts and followed up with another order demanding federal contractors to confirm they do not promote DEI.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the decision. The plaintiffs, including the city of Baltimore and several higher education organizations, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration earlier this month. They assert that the executive orders are unconstitutional and represent a significant overreach of presidential authority, also claiming that they suppress free speech.
During a nearly three-hour court hearing, attorney Aleshadye Getachew stated that the executive orders constitute an excessive rollback of DEI initiatives. The Trump administration, however, has maintained that it only targets DEI programs that breach federal civil rights laws, asserting that the administration should have the discretion to align federal spending with presidential priorities.
Justice Department attorney Pardis Gheibi argued that the government is not obligated to financially support the plaintiffs’ free speech activities. Judge Abelson, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, concurred with the plaintiffs that the executive orders discourage organizations and public entities from advocating for diversity, equity, and inclusion. He described the orders as public, vague, and threatening.
Judge Abelson’s ruling permits the attorney general to investigate and report on DEI practices according to one of the orders but prohibits enforcement. In his written opinion, he argued that the orders are unconstitutionally vague, leaving federal contractors and grant recipients uncertain about compliance requirements.
The efforts to promote diversity have long faced criticism from Republicans, who argue that such measures undermine merit-based opportunities. However, proponents argue that DEI programs are crucial for addressing the needs of diverse populations and countering systemic racism. These programs aim to create equitable environments within organizations and education systems.
The plaintiffs, including the city of Baltimore and organizations like the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, claim that the executive orders have already caused harm. Their attorneys argue that President Trump is overstepping his authority and seeks to restrict dissenting opinions, asserting that his powers are not unlimited.