Trump gets partial relief from appellate court on DEI order
One of Donald Trump’s first orders after taking office was to end DEI programs throughout the government.
Of course, that order was immediately challenged, and defeated, but Trump finally got some good news from the courts on this front.
Trump’s Order
Like Trump, I am a big believer that taxpayer money should not be used to support partisan programs, which is what DEI programs are.
As I have stated before, I would say the same thing if the government were using our taxpayer dollars to push conservative programs. We have plenty of fundraising arms to do that.
So, Trump signed an order on his first day in office that terminated all “equity-related” grants or contracts.
Democrats lost their minds, and some “experts” claimed that this was an overcorrection of policy, yet none of them spoke up about possibly having too many DEI programs in place when Biden was in office.
The Challenge
As noted above, the order was immediately challenged, with the Trump DOJ arguing, “The government doesn’t have the obligation to subsidize plaintiffs’ exercise of speech.”
The plaintiffs' attorneys argued, “Ordinary citizens bear the brunt. Plaintiffs and their members receive federal funds to support educators, academics, students, workers, and communities across the country. As federal agencies make arbitrary decisions about whether grants are ‘equity-related,’ Plaintiffs are left in limbo.”
The case came before Judge Abelson, a Biden-appointed judge, so we all knew the outcome of this case before a single argument had been made.
Not shockingly, Abelson agreed with the plaintiff in the case, writing, “The harm arises from the issuance of it as a public, vague, threatening executive order.”
Appeals Court Comes Through
On Friday, a federal appeals court gave the Trump administration some relief on this matter. What was truly shocking was that two of the judges had been appointed by Democrats, so I never would have guessed they would have given Trump relief. However, they both noted that challenges are likely to take place in the future.
Obama-appointed Judge Pamela Harris wrote, “But my vote to grant the stay comes with a caveat. What the Orders say on their face and how they are enforced are two different things. Agency enforcement actions that go beyond the Orders’ narrow scope may well raise serious First Amendment and Due Process concerns.” Another Obama appointee, Judge Albert Diaz, tried to praise DEI while saying that “some” people consider it a “monster in America’s closet.”
Trump-appointed Judge Allison Jones Rushing slammed their opinions, saying that praising DEI “should play absolutely no part in deciding this case. We must not lose sight of the boundaries of our constitutional role and the imperative of judicial impartiality. Any individual judge’s view on whether certain Executive action is good policy is not only irrelevant to fulfilling our duty to adjudicate cases and controversies according to the law, it is an impermissible consideration.”
This ruling will stay in place until the case is fully litigated before the 4th Circuit Court.
