A federal appeals court on Friday handed President Donald Trump's administration a legal victory, with an Obama-appointed judge writing a ruling that allows the government to move forward with executive orders banning diversity, equity and inclusion programs across federal agencies and among government contractors.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, overturned a lower court injunction that had blocked enforcement of the orders, which Trump signed shortly after returning to office.
Appeals Court Clears Path for DEI Ban
U.S. Circuit Judge Albert Diaz, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote for the panel that the executive orders could not be challenged broadly before being applied. Instead, he said, legal challenges must be brought based on how federal agencies enforce the directives in specific cases.
"President Trump has decided that equity isn't a priority in his administration and so has directed his subordinates to terminate funding that supports equity-related projects to the maximum extent allowed by law," Diaz wrote. "Whether that's sound policy or not isn't our call."
The panel had previously paused the injunction in March 2025 while it considered the administration's appeal.
Lower Court Had Blocked Trump Orders
The injunction was issued by U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson of Baltimore, who ruled that the directives likely violated the U.S. Constitution. Abelson said the orders risked infringing on First Amendment free speech protections and imposed vague standards that failed to meet Fifth Amendment due process requirements.
Abelson's ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by the city of Baltimore, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education and the American Association of University Professors.
Plaintiffs Challenged Scope of Directives
The plaintiffs argued that Trump's executive orders improperly directed federal agencies to eliminate DEI programs, required contractors and grant recipients to certify they did not operate such initiatives, and instructed agencies to work with the Justice Department to deter and investigate DEI-related policies in the private sector.
The appeals court rejected those arguments at this stage, saying the orders must first be applied before they can be challenged.
Reaction and Concurring Opinion
Democracy Forward, a liberal legal group representing the plaintiffs, said it is reviewing the ruling. The White House had no immediate comment.
In a separate concurring opinion, Diaz said he reached his conclusion "reluctantly," writing that the evidence suggested a "sinister story" in which programs were terminated based on keywords.
"For those disappointed by the outcome, I say this: Follow the law," Diaz wrote. "Continue your critical work. Keep the faith."
This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.