• On February 6, 2026, the Fourth Circuit held that the plaintiffs’ facial challenges in National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump to President Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders (EOs) were unlikely to succeed, but the court did not validate the administration’s enforcement practices, did not endorse its interpretation of anti-discrimination law, and did not define what constitutes “unlawful DEI.”
• The certification provision in EO 14173 applicable to federal contractors and grant recipients targets only programs that “violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws,” not DEI programming generally.
• The court expressly preserved the right of employers and other affected parties to challenge specific agency enforcement actions.

The plaintiffs, including the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, and the City of Baltimore, had argued that the executive orders were unconstitutionally vague and violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Fourth Circuit disagreed, finding that the plaintiffs’ facial challenges were unlikely to succeed. The court’s narrow ruling, however, did not validate the administration’s enforcement practices, does not clarify what the administration considers “unlawful DEI,” and expressly preserved the right of employers and other affected parties to bring as-applied challenges to specific federal agency actions taken to enforce...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMi4gFBVV95cUxQdXk5RU80LVQyZE16ek1jaXpE...