Fourth Circuit backs Trump crackdown on diversity programs at federally funded organizations

The case began after President Trump signed two executive orders within days of taking office in January 2025. The orders instructed federal agencies to shut down DEI offices and positions, terminate equity-related grants and contracts, and end diversity performance requirements for employees, contractors and grant recipients. Agencies were told to act “to the maximum extent allowed by law.” 

A second provision required every federal contract and grant to include language demanding recipients certify they operate no DEI programs that violate federal antidiscrimination laws. That certification comes with teeth: recipients who make false statements face potential liability under the False Claims Act. 

Federal agencies wasted little time implementing the orders. The Department of Health and Human Services told Baltimore officials to immediately stop all activities promoting diversity and inclusion that were supported by federal grants. The National Science Foundation declined to approve travel for research projects examining gender disparities in science, citing concerns about whether the work aligned with the new executive orders. The Labor Department pulled funding for conferences, forcing organizers to cancel events and issue refunds to attendees. 

Three plaintiffs sued to stop the orders: the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, the American Association of University Professors, and the city of Baltimore. They argued the provisions were unconstitutionally vague and targeted specific viewpoints in violation of the First Amendment. A federal district court in Maryland agreed and blocked enforcement with a nationwide injunction. 

But the appeals court saw things differently. Chief Judge Diaz, writing for the majority, found the provisions did not cross constitutional lines. The court noted that the termination directive does not directly regulate private organizations but instead tells federal agencies how to allocate funding based on presidential priorities. The certification requirement, meanwhile, only asks organizations to confirm they follow existing antidiscrimination laws, something the court said does not burden protected speech.