20 attorneys general sue Trump administration over federal contractor DEI order – Higher Ed Dive
Let Higher Ed Dive’s free newsletter keep you informed, straight from your inbox.
The plaintiffs argue the president’s March executive order impedes each state’s efforts and is unclear in what it prohibits.
First published on
Trump’s executive order calls DEI-related initiatives “unethical and often illegal” and homes in on “disparate treatment” based on race or ethnicity in recruiting, employment and contracting.
In response, acknowledging that each state complies with all relevant antidiscrimination laws, the attorneys general stated that they “also have a strong interest in preventing, detecting and remedying racial discrimination within their own operations and more broadly.”
Plaintiffs also called the executive order “especially confusing” given President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1965 executive order prohibiting racial discrimination among federal contractors.
The plaintiffs are the states of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin, Virginia and Vermont. Along with Pete Hegseth, the defendants include Acting Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling, as well as a wide range of administration officials.
Notably, the March 26 executive order demanded that all federal contractors provide certain reports to agencies for review, including “books, records and accounts,” adding that should a contractor or subcontractor be noncompliant with the order, their contract “may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor or subcontractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts.”
Regarding this week’s lawsuit, a White House spokesperson told HR Dive that Trump “has made his position clear” regarding his administration’s approach to merit.
“Individual dignity, hard work, and excellence made America the greatest country in the world, and DEI discrimination has no place in it. These practices are wrong, often illegal, and impose real costs on the American people,” the spokesperson said. “When the federal government contracts with companies that engage in them, taxpayers foot the bill.”
Get the free daily newsletter read by industry experts
The Ohio private nonprofit’s president said he wants to invest the savings in areas with high student and workforce demand.
Recent laws and proposals could make it easier for public colleges to leave their accreditors for the nascent Commission for Public Higher Education.
Subscribe to Higher Ed Dive for top news, trends & analysis
Sign up for the free newsletter.
Interested? Explore more of what has to offer.
Thanks for signing up! Please keep an eye out for a confirmation email from [email protected] To ensure we make it into your inbox regularly, add us to your allow list, mark us as a safe sender, or add us to your address book. Check out more from
Get the free daily newsletter read by industry experts
The agency kept a contested definition of “professional” student that excludes fields like graduate nursing and physical therapy from higher loan caps.
Recent laws and proposals could make it easier for public colleges to leave their accreditors for the nascent Commission for Public Higher Education.
The free newsletter covering the top industry headlines
