CNN
—
A federal appeals court will allow the Trump administration to implement directives from the president cracking down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, as an appeal of a ruling pausing those orders plays out.
Two of the three judges on the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel wrote concurring opinions raising concerns about the anti-DEI directives, even as they concluded that the administration had met the bar for putting the trial judge’s ruling on hold.
The circuit order is a major win for President Donald Trump, who has made the elimination of DEI programs a centerpiece of his administration.
The directives, laid out in two executive orders, instructed agencies to take steps targeting DEI programs, including those operated by government contractors. US District Judge Adam Abelson’s February ruling said that the government could not freeze or cancel “equity-related” contracts, nor could it require recipients of grants to certify that their programs do not promote DEI. He also barred the administration from bringing False Claims Act enforcement action related to the anti-DEI certification requirement.
The 4th Circuit said it would be considering the merits of Abelson’s ruling on an expedited timeline.
Chief Judge Albert Diaz, an Obama appointee, wrote a concurring opinion praising efforts to promote diversity, and he said “there should be room for open discussion and principled debate about DEI programs.” However, he echoed a concurrence by a fellow member of the appellate panel, Judge Pamela Harris, by raising the possibility of constitutional violations depending on how agencies carry out Trump’s orders. The concurring opinion from Harris, an Obama appointee as well, pointed out that some of Trump’s directives appeared to be limited in scope as their language took aim specifically at “conduct that violates existing federal anti-discrimination law.”
The third member of the panel, Trump-appointed Judge Allison Rushing, stressed the panel’s conclusions that the president’s orders likely did not violate the Constitution, and she took a swipe at Diaz for praising diversity programs.
The case was brought by the city of Baltimore, two education associations and a restaurant association, who alleged various constitutional violations with the orders.
This story has been updated with additional details.
