Legal Challenge Brought Against Trump’s Executive Orders Targeting DEIA Programming

02.10.2025

On February 3, 2025, less than two weeks after the Trump Administration issued Executive Orders terminating Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility (“DEIA”) programs, a city and three organizations filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Orders.

The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, and the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore Maryland (“Plaintiffs”) sued the Trump Administration in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The lawsuit, titled National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, et al.^[1] v. Trump, seeks a court order declaring that two of the DEIA Executive Orders are unlawful and blocking their enforcement. As of the posting of this alert, the Trump Administration has not yet filed an official answer to the complaint, and no decisions or orders related to the lawsuit have been issued by the court.

In case you missed our previous Alert published on February 3, President Trump issued the two Executive Orders in question on January 20 and 21, 2025. Executive Order 14151, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing” (“Executive Order #1”), directs federal agencies, employees, grantees, and contractors to “terminate to the maximum extent allowed by law” any equity-related grants or contracts, and DEIA performance requirements. Executive Order #1 also requires federal agencies to submit a list of contractors who provide DEIA training or materials to federal employees to the Office of Management and Budget. Executive Order 14173, titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” (“Executive Order #2”), prohibits federal agencies from promoting diversity, practicing affirmative action, and encouraging workforce balancing when awarding government contracts. It directs federal agencies to terminate “discriminatory and illegal preferences” and combat private-sector DEI programs. Executive Order #2 also requires heads of federal agencies to generate reports identifying “the most egregious discriminatory DEI practitioners” in their respective sectors. Our alert predicted that legal challenges like this case would follow.

Plaintiffs argue these two Executive Orders exceed the President’s executive legal authority. Specifically, they argue that President Trump lacked authority to issue Executive Order #1 to the extent that it unilaterally mandates the termination of certain grants and contracts, impacting Congress’s control over federal government spending. Plaintiffs argue Executive Order #2 also violated the separation of powers regarding control over government spending by imposing a condition on receipt of federal funds. Additionally, Plaintiffs allege Executive Order #2 violates the First and Fifth amendments by chilling free speech and academic freedom. The complaint further argues that both Orders are overly vague, violating the Fifth Amendment right to due process due to lack of fair guidance on the prohibitions and definitions of key terms.

In a related development, on February 5, 2025, United States Attorney General Pam Bondi issued two memoranda ending DEIA programs consistent with President Trump’s two Executive Orders. The first memo, titled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences” directs the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to “investigate, eliminate, and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities in the private sector and in educational institutions that receive federal funds.” The memo requires developing a “plan including specific steps or measures to deter the use of DEI and DEIA programs or principles that constitute illegal discrimination or preferences, including proposals for criminal investigations and potential civil compliance investigations of entities that meet the criteria outlined in section 4(b)(iii) of Executive Order 14173.” It requires the Civil Rights Division and the Office of Legal Policy to submit a joint report on this effort by March 1, 2025. The second memo, titled “Eliminating Internal Discriminatory Practices”, eliminates DEI initiatives within the Department of Justice. It further directs DOJ “components” to “thoroughly evaluate consent decrees, settlement agreements, litigation positions (including those set forth in amicus briefs), grants or similar funding mechanisms, procurements, internal policies and guidance, and contracting arrangements.” The DOJ components must each submit a report to the Office of the Attorney General by March 15, documenting efforts to eliminate DEIA programs in the Justice Department.

Notably, both memos include a footnote stating that their prohibitions do not extend to “educational, cultural, or historical observances—such as Black History Month, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, or similar events—that celebrate diversity, recognize historical contributions, and promote awareness.”

We’ll be keeping a close eye on how National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, et al. v. Trump unfolds. If you have questions about compliance and the developing legal landscape of DEIA policy and directives, our experienced attorneys are here to help navigate these issues.

This AALRR publication is intended for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in reaching a conclusion in a particular area of law. Applicability of the legal principles discussed may differ substantially in individual situations. Receipt of this or any other AALRR publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Firm is not responsible for inadvertent errors that may occur in the publishing process.

^[1]The other plaintiffs are the City of Baltimore, the American Association of University Professors and the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United.