BALTIMORE — A federal appeals court is giving an early green light to President Donald Trump's executive orders, ending grant funding to non-government-organizations (NGOs) involved in promoting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI).
In February, Baltimore City and a host of other organizations sued Trump over a pair of executive orders they claim violate federal anti-discrimination laws.
The White House contends DEI itself violates such laws, hence why the executive orders were signed in the first place.
RELATED: Baltimore City sues Trump Administration over executive orders targeting DEI
Specifically, Trump ordered federal agency heads to compile and terminate all equity based action plans, initiatives, programs, grants, and contracts "to the maximum extent allowed by law."
The Trump White House is aiming to revoke a Biden era order that forced Federal agencies and entities to submit “Equity Action Plans,” which the new administration says "demonstrated immense public waste and shameful discrimination."
A Biden appointed federal district court judge in Baltimore ruled in favor of Baltimore City, opining Trump's orders were too vague and therefore "chill[ed] speech."
The ruling led to swift criticism from Trump officials, and an immediate appeal to the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, who preliminarily overturned the lower judge's decision.
MORE: Congressman, Musk float impeachment for judge who sided with Baltimore against Trump DEI policies
A three judge panel, made up of two appointees of former Democratic President Barack Obama, and one Trump nominee, voted unanimously to let the executive orders go into effect.
While both Democrat appointed judges showed support for DEI efforts overall, they concluded this:
"As the government explains, the challenged Executive Orders, on their face, are of distinctly limited scope. The Executive Orders do not purport to establish the illegality of all efforts to advance diversity, equity or inclusion, and they should not be so understood. Instead, the so-called “Certification” and “Enforcement Threat” provisions apply only to conduct that violates existing federal anti-discrimination law. Nor do the Orders authorize the termination of grants based on a grantee’s speech or activities outside the scope of the funded activities. Rather, the “Termination” provision directs the termination of grants, subject to applicable legal limits, based only on the nature of the grant-funded activity itself. On this understanding, the government has shown the requisite likelihood that the challenged provisions do not on their face violate the First or Fifth Amendment."
When mentioning the "Certification and Enforcement Threat,” the panel was referencing the district judge's orders prohibiting the government from enforcing any of the following:
- Blocking, pausing, freezing, canceling, or terminating an organization's federal awards, contracts, or obligations based on DEI policies.
- Requiring grant recipients to certify non-involvement in organizational DEI.
- Risking civil action against grant recipients found to be non-compliant.
For now, the appellate court is permitting Trump and company to discard the district judge's ruling and implement the executive orders, while litigation plays out.
That's just one Maryland based court battle being fought by the Administration. Over the weekend another district level judge in Maryland ordered the federal government to reinstate thousands of fired probationary workers. That too is being appealed. Meanwhile, another lawsuit was recently filed in Baltimore seeking to halt Trump's dismantling of the Education Department. Plus the DOJ is now before the U.S. Supreme Court looking to have put on hold a Maryland judge's ruling on birthright citizenship.
