Appeals Court Upholds Trump’s Ban on DEI Programs in Federal Agencies and Contracts

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s executive orders eliminating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) mandates in government agencies and among federal contractors may proceed, delivering a major legal victory for the administration’s war on so-called “woke” policies.

In a unanimous decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a preliminary injunction issued by Judge Adam B. Abelson in Maryland, who had previously halted enforcement of Trump’s orders. The three-judge panel—Chief Judge Albert Diaz, Judge Pamela Harris, and Judge Allison Jones Rushing—agreed that the president has the authority to set executive policy and direct federal funding accordingly.

“President Trump has decided that equity isn’t a priority in his administration,” Diaz wrote in the opinion, “and so has directed his subordinates to terminate funding that supports equity-related projects to the maximum extent allowed by law.”

The court determined that the legal challenge brought by left-leaning groups lacked constitutional merit, emphasizing that the question before them was not whether the policy was “sound,” but whether it was unlawfully vague. They found it was not.

The plaintiffs—including the Baltimore mayor and city council, the American Association of University Professors, and the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education—had claimed that the orders violated the First and Fifth Amendments. But the court rejected those claims and vacated the injunction, marking the second time this year that Judge Abelson’s attempts to block Trump’s DEI crackdown were overturned.

President Trump’s DEI orders, signed on his first day back in office, called for federal agencies to immediately halt grants, contracts, and funding tied to equity-driven initiatives. A follow-up order required all federal contractors to certify that they do not engage in DEI promotion or training as a condition for government business.

Justice Department attorneys defending the orders said the DEI initiatives often violated federal civil rights laws by encouraging race- and gender-based preferences in hiring and training.

Judge Diaz, an Obama appointee, wrote a separate concurring opinion in which he acknowledged the policy’s opponents might be disheartened but urged them to “keep the faith” in the Constitution. He also took the unusual step of criticizing Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a footnote, referencing Rubio’s recent directive to replace Calibri with Times New Roman in State Department documents.

“The Administration’s obsession over so-called ‘woke’ DEI programs appears to know no bounds,” Diaz commented, though he admitted the font change was defensible on professional grounds.

Rubio had framed the font switch as part of the broader crackdown on “illegal, immoral, radical, wasteful” DEI initiatives, calling Calibri a symbol of the previous administration’s agenda.

Despite Diaz’s criticism, the court made clear it found no legal basis to prevent President Trump from enforcing his executive orders against DEI-related spending, training, and policies across the federal government.