US Appeals Court Clears Trump Administration to Enforce Federal DEI Ban

A US federal appeals court has rejected a legal challenge to efforts by President Donald Trump’s administration to ban diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes within federal agencies and among businesses holding government contracts.

 

A three-judge panel of the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an injunction that would have prevented the administration from enforcing executive orders signed shortly after Trump returned to office last year, aimed at dismantling DEI initiatives across the public and private sectors.

 

In March 2025, at the administration’s request, the court had already placed the injunction on hold while it considered the government’s appeal. The injunction had been issued by Baltimore-based US District Judge Adam Abelson.

 

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson welcomed the ruling, calling it a “big win” and stating that the administration “has proudly put an end to unlawful DEI discrimination in the federal government”.

 

Further challenges possible

 

Despite the ruling, legal advocates indicated that further challenges remain possible. Skye Perryman, whose liberal legal group Democracy Forward represents the plaintiffs, said the decision leaves open the possibility of contesting how the executive orders are implemented.

 

“We look forward to continuing to litigate this case in the district court,” she said.

 

Abelson’s original ruling arose from a lawsuit filed by the city of Baltimore, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and the American Association of University Professors.

 

The plaintiffs challenged provisions of Trump’s executive orders directing federal agencies to eliminate DEI programmes, requiring contractors and grant recipients to certify that they do not operate such initiatives, and authorising cooperation with the Justice Department to deter and investigate DEI-related policies.

 

Abelson had found that the directives were likely to violate First Amendment free speech protections and failed to meet Fifth Amendment due process requirements because of vague enforcement standards.

 

However, US Circuit Judge Albert Diaz, writing for the appeals panel, said the executive orders could not be challenged directly and must instead be contested based on how individual agencies apply them to specific grant recipients.

 

“President Trump has decided that equity is not a priority in his administration and has directed his subordinates to terminate funding for equity-related projects to the maximum extent allowed by law,” Diaz wrote. “Whether that is sound policy is not for this court to decide.”

 

Diaz, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama, said in a concurring opinion that he reached his decision “reluctantly”, adding that the evidence suggested a “sinister story” in which important programmes were terminated based on keyword screening.

 

“For those disappointed by the outcome, I say this: follow the law,” he wrote. “Continue your critical work. Keep the faith. And depend on the Constitution, which remains a beacon amid the tumult.”

 

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.