A federal appeals court gave President Trump’s administration a green light to enforce two of the president’s executive orders looking to end diversity, equity and inclusion.
The three-judge panel from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, composed of two Democratic appointees and one Republican, lifted an injunction Friday issued by a lower court blocking Mr. Trump’s orders that instruct federal agencies to terminate DEI programs that violate civil rights laws or else lose federal funding.
The orders instruct the agencies to terminate former President Joe Biden’s orders to promote DEI, which Mr. Trump’s directive says ran afoul of civil rights protection by discriminating against people based on race and other factors.
The panel’s move lets the government implement the executive orders while the litigation continues.
Judge Albert Diaz, the chief judge for the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, gave the federal government the approval to start implementing the orders — but cautioned that diversity is a bedrock of the country.
“Despite the vitriol now being heaped on DEI, people of good faith who work to promote diversity, equity and inclusion deserve praise, not opprobrium. For when this country embraces true diversity, it acknowledges and respects the social identity of its people. When it fosters true equity, it opens opportunities and ensures a level playing field for all,” the Obama appointee wrote.
“And when its policies are truly inclusive, it creates an environment and culture where everyone is respected and valued. What could be more American than that? Under the most basic tenets of the First Amendment, there should be room for open discussion and principled debate about DEI programs,” he said.
Judge Pamela Harris, also an Obama appointee, said the executive orders are limited and seek to promote federal law prohibiting discrimination.
“The Executive Orders do not purport to establish the illegality of all efforts to advance diversity, equity or inclusion, and they should not be so understood,” she wrote.
Judge Allison Jones Rushing, a Trump appointee, meanwhile, warned that the district court went too far and cautioned — even to her colleagues — that a judge’s personal opinion doesn’t matter in a constitutional analysis. She didn’t reference Judge Diaz by name but did use some of his language to push back on a magistrate’s role.
“A judge’s opinion that DEI programs ’deserve praise, not opprobrium’ should play absolutely no part in deciding this case,” she wrote.
The challenge was brought by the mayor and city council of Baltimore along with three advocacy groups. They claimed Mr. Trump’s orders ran afoul of the U.S. Constitution, specifically the First and Fifth amendments.
The district court judge issued a nationwide injunction, which is now reversed with the panel’s Friday order.
The lower court judge, a Biden appointee, had suggested the DEI orders were vague and ran afoul of the First Amendment.
The two executive orders at issue were signed by Mr. Trump during his first and second days in office.
