Divya Nimmagadda is a student at Harvard Law School.
In the post-transition flood of executive orders and actions, one effort in particular takes special aim at diversity and inclusion measures with the federal workforce.
As part of a larger executive action and order aimed at dismantling DEI programming, President Trump rolled back the Equal Employment Act of 1965. The Act, in the form of an executive order (Executive Order 11246), was originally put in place by President Johnson in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement and the year after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1974. It instituted affirmative action programming within the federal workplace and “prohibit[ed] federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin.” Within the same action, Trump revoked another 2011 executive order that “Establish[ed] a Coordinated Government-wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce” and, in a forward-looking measure, is requiring the head of each agency to include in any government contract or grant “[a] term requiring such counterparty or recipient to certify that it does not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.” Based on Trump’s directive, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo ordering all DEI employees to be placed on administrative leave by Wednesday of next week.
We are already beginning to see the effects of the administration’s effort to limit the federal DEI infrastructure. A CIA spokesperson stated that the agency had gotten rid of its office for diversity and inclusion. The Agriculture, Treasury and Labor Departments had each taken down some webpages on diversity measures by yesterday morning.
Relatedly, yesterday, the administration sent out a message to federal employees warning them that they may face “adverse consequences” if they attempted to hide efforts by fellow colleagues or supervisors to defy the above order to end all DEI programs. Employees were given ten days to report such efforts to “disguise these programs by using coded or imprecise language.”
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
April 24
NLRB seeks to compel Amazon to collectively bargain with San Francisco warehouse workers, DoorDash delivery workers and members of Los Deliveristas Unidos rally for pay transparency, and NLRB takes step to drop lawsuit against SpaceX over the firing of employees who criticized Elon Musk.
April 22
DOGE staffers eye NLRB for potential reorganization; attacks on federal workforce impact Trump-supporting areas; Utah governor acknowledges backlash to public-sector union ban
April 21
Bryan Johnson’s ULP saga before the NLRB continues; top law firms opt to appease the EEOC in its anti-DEI demands.
April 20
In today’s news and commentary, the Supreme Court rules for Cornell employees in an ERISA suit, the Sixth Circuit addresses whether the EFAA applies to a sexual harassment claim, and DOGE gains access to sensitive labor data on immigrants. On Thursday, the Supreme Court made it easier for employees to bring ERISA suits when their […]
April 18
Two major New York City unions endorse Cuomo for mayor; Committee on Education and the Workforce requests an investigation into a major healthcare union’s spending; Unions launch a national pro bono legal network for federal workers.
April 17
Utahns sign a petition supporting referendum to repeal law prohibiting public sector collective bargaining; the US District Court for the District of Columbia declines to dismiss claims filed by the AFL-CIO against several government agencies; and the DOGE faces reports that staffers of the agency accessed the NLRB’s sensitive case files.