The president took swift action to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion programs across the federal government, issuing a series of executive orders that overturned decades of established policy.
In the first 48 hours of his second term, President Donald Trump took decisive steps to dismantle the remaining structures of affirmative action, swiftly overturning decades of established policy. His actions, observers say, will have far-reaching effects on nearly every aspect of American society.
Trump's newly signed executive orders, aimed at ending “illegal discrimination” and restoring “merit” to government service, were so bold and extensive that even long-time conservative activists—who have been pushing to eliminate diversity initiatives in both the private and public sectors—were taken aback by their intensity.
“I can’t believe he’s going this far,” said Dan Lennington, deputy counsel at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which has spearheaded legal efforts against diversity programs for years. “It’s still sinking in, because I’m thinking of all the ways this will affect the average American.”
The flurry of executive orders was designed to halt diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives throughout the federal government. The administration ordered U.S. diversity offices to shut down, with many of their workers placed on administrative leave by the following Wednesday. It also suspended numerous minority- and women-focused contracting programs, some of which had been in operation for decades. But Trump’s orders extended far beyond federal agencies. He instructed government bodies to compile lists of public companies with DEI policies, a move experts believe could have chilling effects on the private sector.
The Justice and Education Departments were also tasked with guiding educational institutions on how to comply with the Supreme Court's recent decision to ban race-conscious admissions. And in a historic move, Trump revoked an executive order issued by Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 that directed federal contractors to take “affirmative action” to end discrimination—a landmark policy designed to promote racial equality in the workforce. Although Ronald Reagan's administration tried to replace it in 1985, strong opposition from business leaders and Congress stopped that effort in its tracks.
"The equal employment principles embodied in EO 11246 have withstood the test of time across both Democratic and Republican administrations," said the three Democratic members of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in a joint statement. “Rescinding it removes a crucial protection against discrimination for millions of Americans employed by companies that receive federal funds.”
Trump’s actions come more than a year after the Supreme Court struck down race-based affirmative action at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This decision set off a legal battle to eliminate DEI in both private companies and government contracting. Since then, diversity programs have been scaled back at major corporations like Meta and Walmart, while federal initiatives supporting minority-owned businesses have been forced to alter key aspects of their mission. Now, the Trump administration is capitalizing on the Supreme Court’s ruling, pushing even further in some areas.
“The Trump administration is delivering a death blow to diversity in legal and political terms,” said Noah Feldman, a constitutional law professor at Harvard Law School. He pointed out that the executive orders directing the attorney general and federal agencies to target DEI initiatives in private companies test the boundaries of the high court’s affirmative action ruling. “If the Justice Department follows through, it would be a significant shift in how corporate America responds to evolving constitutional and statutory doctrines,” Feldman explained. However, he cautioned that these changes would take time to have a wide-reaching impact on culture and society. “People still believe in diversity as a fundamental good, but the writing is on the wall for its use in a variety of spaces,” he said.
By Wednesday afternoon, Trump’s actions were already making waves across the federal workforce. A memo from Secretary of State Marco Rubio instructed State Department officials that they would face "adverse consequences" if they failed to report colleagues who were hiding or obscuring DEI programs at the department. Similar communications were sent to employees at the Education and Homeland Security departments, according to emails reviewed by The Washington Post.
The executive orders are poised to significantly affect the private and government contracting sectors, said Jason Schwartz, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn. He explained that federal agencies are now tasked with identifying up to “nine big whales” for investigation, targeting large corporations, nonprofit organizations, state bar associations, medical groups, and universities with endowments over $1 billion. These moves are designed to send a strong message to corporate America and beyond.
Schwartz also highlighted new restrictions on federal contractors and grant recipients, prohibiting them from participating in many DEI initiatives, with violations subject to hefty financial penalties. He compared this approach to “handing out sheriff’s badges to private citizens” who could sue companies over their DEI programs.
Legal experts predict that parts of the executive orders will face intense court challenges. “It’s going to be a really crazy ride,” said Susan D. Carle, a law professor at American University. “We’re going to see whether our system of checks and balances holds.” The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has signaled it will consider challenging the orders, with Ricardo Mimbela, an ACLU spokesman, saying the group is evaluating the potential impacts and how it can protect people’s rights.
ReNika Moore, director of the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, argued that the administration’s stance was extreme, claiming it went "far beyond what we’ve seen from prior Republican administrations." While there remains uncertainty over how Trump’s orders will be enforced, Moore contended that they were designed to create a chilling effect, pressuring both the private and public sectors to reconsider their diversity efforts.
Trump’s actions represent a sharp reversal from the summer of 2020, when the killing of George Floyd sparked a nationwide push for racial equity, leading corporate America to increase investments in DEI policies. These efforts included recruiting, mentorship, anti-bias training, and resource groups aimed at fostering more inclusive work environments. Critics of these policies argue that they come at the expense of nonminority groups and that the focus should be on race neutrality.
One of the most striking aspects of Trump’s orders, Moore noted, was the argument that policies designed to eliminate historical barriers to opportunity for underrepresented groups are themselves discriminatory. “It flies in the face of history and the laws themselves,” she said.
Lennington, the legal activist, expressed confidence that the executive orders would be effective. "There’s no hiding from this,” he said. “You can gamble on a court ruling it unconstitutional someday, but that’s a big business risk.”
The orders also present a great deal of uncertainty for universities. Jonathan Fansmith, senior vice president of government relations for the American Council on Education, said the provisions related to race-conscious admissions and related programs may lead to further scrutiny of policies like race-based scholarships, leadership programs for women, and affinity housing.
Christopher Rufo, an anti-DEI activist, observed the broad reach of Trump’s initiatives and emphasized that institutions from Silicon Valley to Ivy League schools are already adjusting to the new landscape. "We won,” he said. “The next four years are going to be about making these changes permanent.”
0 Comments