Maryland Federal Court takes aim at Trump’s DEI executive orders
Since taking office a mere month ago, President Donald Trump and his administration have taken significant steps towards eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in the federal government, higher education, and the business world. These efforts, including two executive orders, have faced significant opposition from various groups who have sought court intervention against the Trump administration.
The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE) brought one such case in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland challenging the Termination Provision, the Certification Provision, and part of the Enforcement Threat Provision of the executive orders. The Termination Provision “directed all executive agencies to ‘terminate . . . equity-related grants or contracts;’” the Certification Provision “directed all executive agencies to ‘include in every contract or grant award’ a certification, enforceable through the False Claims Act, that the contractor and grantee ‘does not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal antidiscrimination laws;’” and the Enforcement Threat Provision directed “the Attorney General to take ‘appropriate measures to encourage the private sector to end illegal discrimination and preferences, including DEI,’ to ‘deter’ such ‘programs or principles,’ and to ‘identify . . . potential civil compliance investigations’ to accomplish such ‘deter[rence].’”
On February 21, 2025, Judge Adam B. Abelson found in favor of the NADOHE and temporarily blocked the Termination Provision, the Certification Provision, and part of the Enforcement Threat Provision. As a result of Judge Abelson’s decision, the Trump administration is prevented from altering or ending DEI-related federal contracts or bringing "any False Claims Act enforcement action, or other enforcement action, pursuant to the Enforcement Threat Provision, including but not limited to any False Claims Act enforcement action premised on any certification made pursuant to the Certification Provision.” In his decision, Judge Abelson stated that the challenged portions of the executive orders “squarely, unconstitutionally, ‘abridge the freedom of speech.’”
The effect that this court ruling will have on the overall efforts of the Trump Administration to eliminate DEI initiatives in both the federal government and the private sector, remains unsettled. While the legality of the DEI executive orders plays out in court, employers should remember that they remain obligated to comply with applicable federal and state civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of protected status. Employers should review diversity programs and affirmative action initiatives for compliance with those standards. .
The Labor and Employment practice group at McDonald Hopkins will continue to monitor the status of the DEI executive orders and provide updates.
