Lawsuit filed to Block trump DEIA Executive Orders "In the United States," says the legal complaint, "there is no king."

Posted on Updated on February 23, 2025

On This Page

This is an article about a lawsuit. The lawsuit challenges two orders by president trump. These orders attack diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in the United States national government. One order even says the government should target some private organizations who care about fairness and civil rights. The lawsuit asks the judge to stop these orders. In better news, top lawyers in 16 states did something to support fairness and equity. These lawyers are called Attorneys General. They wrote a memo criticizing the president’s order. They wrote about how companies can promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the workforce. This lawsuit and the memo from the state Attorneys General are welcomed acts of resistance against the president. Visit the Update Section of this article for news about the lawsuit and trump’s DEIA orders.

Article updated

This article has been updated since it was first published on February 14, 2025. The most recent update was added on February 23, 2025. Read the updates for this article.

the word "NO" in yellow letters painted on the ground. Toes of black shoes indicate person standing in front of the letters

I was glad to learn that a lawsuit was filed in federal court challenging two Executive Orders published shortly after trump became president. These sweeping (and unlawful) executive orders attack diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) from many angles.

I was also glad to see that the first line of the introduction to the legal complaint says “In the United States, there is no king.” (See below for links to the documents mentioned in this article.)

Jump to:

share on linkedinshare on bluesky

What is this lawsuit about?

The legal action challenging trump’s diversity, equity, and inclusion orders was filed by the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, Restaurant Opportunities Center United, and the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore Maryland. The lawyers representing these organizations are from the Democracy Forward Foundation and Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAAJ).

The lawsuit argues that the Orders violate the United States constitution for two reasons. First, they don’t even define so called “illegal DEI and DEIA policies.” This is a violation of the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution’s Due Process Clause, a core United States principle designed to prevent arbitrary government actions.

The lawsuit also explains how Executive Order 14173 violates the First Amendment because it calls for civil compliance investigations of private sector organizations for their diversity, equity, and inclusion activities.

The order specifically lists organizations that could be targeted, including “publicly traded corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with assets of 500 million dollars or more, State and local bar and medical associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments over 1 billion dollars.” (The trump-appointed Attorney General — the top public lawyer in the country — takes it a step further in a February 5th memo calling for criminal investigations titled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences.”)

For more on the DEIA Executive Order, read The Effect of Donald Trump’s DEI Executive Order on Accessibility. This is a gues article by civil rights and accessibility lawyer Eve Hill published on this website on January 27, 2025.

What happens next with this lawsuit

On February 13 the plaintiffs in the case (the ones filing the lawsuit) asked the court to prevent the harms that come from the executive orders and ensure that they are not implemented. The first paragraph of the lawyers’ arguments sums up some of the negative things that have happened since the executive orders were issued:

Millions of people, organizations, and communities have found themselves in turmoil since the President issued two Executive Orders that aim to rid the country of diversity, equity, and inclusion, principles that are fundamental to the country’s history and Plaintiffs’ existence. In the week since Plaintiffs filed this case, their worst fears have become reality.

The Orders and their implementation have wreaked havoc: agency Defendants have begun to freeze, or even terminate, grants and contracts; the livelihoods of Plaintiffs’ members, and countless others, are in imminent danger; and individuals and institutions are forced to censor themselves for fear of losing federal funding or being targeted by imminent federal investigations. These harms stem directly from the Orders, that seek to suppress views that the President disfavors.Plaintiffs’ legal memorandum in support of a temporary restraining order and injunction (link below)

I’m grateful for the plaintiffs and their lawyers for filing this case, one of many challenging the flood of actions that have destabilized the country over the past month. I will update this article when I learn the result of the plaintiffs’ efforts to stop these hurtful executive orders. There are several organizations tracking the lawsuits striving to protect US democracy in these difficult times. Here are two of them:

Another positive act of resistance to the DEIA Executive Orders

As I was writing this article a colleague sent me the Multi-State Guidance Concerning Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Employment Initiatives. It is a breath of fresh air in the face of the Executive Orders challenged in this lawsuit.

The Guidance was jointly published by Attorneys General from 16 states to:

help businesses, nonprofits, and other organizations operating in our respective states understand the continued viability and important role of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility efforts (sometimes referred to as “DEI” or “DEIA” initiatives) in creating and maintaining legally compliant and thriving workplaces.

The memo explains that DEIA initiatives help businesses prevent discrimination in the workplace. It also includes sections on why these efforts are consistent with federal and state law and offers best practices for diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.

Like the lawsuit, the Attorneys General action is an act of resistance in the face of a rogue government bent on destroying the values of a just American society.

Links to documents about the lawsuit challenging the illegal DEIA Orders

I feel like this resource list should come with a content warning. It is very painful to read the trump executive orders, which simmer under the surface with hatred and an unbridled anti-democratic power.

And it is frustrating to read how they twist words and phrases like civil rights and equity to mean something that robs people of civil rights and denies equity. Proceed with caution when opening the executive orders and attorney general memo links below.

photo credit: Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Updates to this article

February 23, 2025 Update

Good news! On February 21, 2025, the judge handling the case discussed in this article agreed that the Executive Orders about diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility cannot be enforced while the case continues.

Legally this is called a “preliminary injunction.” It means that the case isn’t over but the plaintiffs (organizations that filed the lawsuit) proved two things: (1) there was a “likelihood of success” — that they would eventually win the case; and (2) there would be “irreparable harm” if the president’s orders were enforced while the case proceeded.

The judge’s opinion is 63 pages! It discusses the DEIA executive orders in detail and explains why they likely violate both the First Amendment (Free speech) and the Fifth Amendment (fair processes) of the United States Constitution.

Here’s just one example. Under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution laws and rules need to be specific enough so they are fairly enforced and people and organizations know how to comply.The anti-diversity executive orders are too vague. As the judge wrote:

The vagueness of the term “‘equity-related’ grants or contracts” invites arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. February 21 Order stopping the DEIA executive orders, page 38

He gave several examples of problems caused by the language in the executive orders, including this one:

If a university grant helps fund the salary of a staff person who then helps teach college students about sexual harassment and the language of consent, would the funding for that person’s salary be stripped as “equity-related”? If a business with a grant from the Small Business Administration conducts a recruiting session at a historically Black college or university, could the business be stripped of the grant on that basis? February 21 Order stopping the DEIA executive orders, page 42

And it’s not just public organizations that are faced with overbroad, vague, and unconstitutional directives in the executive orders. The language of those orders, said the judge:

leaves the private sector at a loss for whether the administration will deem a particular policy, program, discussion, announcement, etc. to be among the “preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities” the administration now deems ‘illegal.’ February 21 Order stopping the DEIA executive orders, page 3

For these and many other reasons described in the order, the judge halted enforcement of the two anti-diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility executive orders described in this article.

This is just one example of lawsuits as an effective form of resistance in these early stages of the trump administration. (Links to pro-democracy lawsuit trackers in the main article above.) And a reminder “not to obey in advance.”

Back to the original article text

February 19, 2025 Update

On February 19, 2025, another lawsuit was filed challenging the anti-diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility executive orders discussed in this article. The lawsuit was brought by the National Urban League, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and the AIDS Foundation of Chicago, represented by lawyers from the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, LAMBDA Legal Defense & Education Fund, and the private law firm of Covington & Burling,LLP.

The core of the complaint can be found in paragraph 4:

The Executive Orders falsely assert that DEIA programs and activities are illegal and inconsistent with merit, hard work, and standards of excellence. They penalize Plaintiffs for expressing viewpoints in support of DEIA and transgender people. Because of these Orders, Plaintiffs are at significant risk of losing federal funds that they use to help people of color, women, LGBTQ people, and/or people with disabilities overcome systemic barriers to access housing, education, employment, and healthcare stemming from discrimination, biases, and inequalities.

The legal complaint that kicks off this lawsuit is 101 pages long! Read the February 19 legal challenge to the anti-DEIA orders here.

Back to the original article text