The federalistThe Western Journal

4th Circuit Vacates Blockade On Trump’s Elimination Of DEI Grants

The 4th Circuit court of Appeals vacated a Maryland district court’s injunction blocking President Trump’s efforts to end DEI-related programs in federal contracting.In a unanimous decision, the panel remanded the case for further proceedings after ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge one provision and, while they had standing to challenge others, were unlikely to succeed on the merits.

Key points from the ruling:

– Standing and merits: The court found the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the Enforcement Threat Provision in one of Trump’s orders, though they had standing to challenge the other provisions. The court said the plaintiffs overstated the provision’s text and failed to show an injury-in-fact. They were unlikely to prevail on the merits of the challenges to the other provisions as well.

– Termination Provision: The court acknowledged that as president, Trump may set policy priorities and direct agencies to terminate funding accordingly. The question for the court was whether the provision is unconstitutionally vague for funding recipients, not whether the policy itself is sound.

– Certification Provision: The court considered that challengers were essentially asking the court to read subtext into the provision and to interpret antidiscrimination law in a particular way,which was not a fertile ground for a facial attack.

– Outcome: Abelson’s injunction was vacated, and the case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

Context provided in the article:

– The decision centers on Trump’s executive orders directing the termination of DEI-related contracts and grants in federal programs.

– The panel’s ruling was written by Chief Circuit Judge Albert Diaz and joined by other judges, highlighting that policy disputes are not the court’s role if they are not clearly unconstitutional on standing grounds.

– The piece is authored by Shawn Fleetwood of The Federalist, noting his background and other reporting.

In short,the 4th Circuit cleared the path for further litigation on the legality and scope of Trump’s DEI-related funding directives,vacating the lower court’s injunction and returning the case for additional proceedings.


Share

A federal appellate court handed President Trump a major victory on Friday by shutting down a lower court blockade on his efforts to eliminate racist DEI programs in federal contracting.

In its unanimous decision, a three-judge panel for the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a preliminary injunction issued by Maryland District Judge Adam Abelson last year. As The Federalist has reported, Abelson is a Biden appointee and Democrat donor who previously worked at a law firm stacked with Democrat partisans and lawyers involved in anti-Trump lawfare.

Abelson’s injunction attempted to prohibit enforcement of provisions included in two executive orders that Trump signed shortly after taking office. Those directives instructed executive agencies to terminate federal contracts and grants for DEI-related programs.

Writing for the three-judge panel, Chief Circuit Judge Albert Diaz, an Obama appointee, ruled that plaintiffs specifically “lack standing to challenge” the “Enforcement Threat Provision” in one of Trump’s contested orders. He and his colleagues furthermore determined that challengers “haven’t sufficiently alleged an injury-in-fact.”

“They claim that they fear retribution by defendants and that they’ll be forced to restrict ‘their speech and conduct in support of diversity, equity, and inclusion’ or face penalties. … But these allegations overstate the Enforcement Threat Provision’s text,” Diaz wrote.

The court ruled that, while plaintiffs had standing to challenge the other provisions in question, they were “unlikely to succeed” on the merits. When addressing plaintiffs’ challenges to the “Termination Provision,” which “requires that all executive agencies terminate equity-related grants or contracts,” Diaz went on to acknowledge that, as president, Trump “may determine his policy priorities and instruct his agents to make funding decisions based on them.” In this instance, he noted, the president “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.”

“Whether that’s sound policy or not isn’t our call. We ask only whether the policy is unconstitutionally vague for funding recipients,” Diaz wrote.

Finally, in terms of their challenge against the “certification provision,” which requires agencies to certify they do not operate unlawful DEI programs, Diaz made clear that “plaintiffs are really asking us to … read subtext into the Provision’s text.” They are “challenging … how the Administration and its agency actors interpret antidiscrimination law.”

“Neither is fertile ground for a facial attack against the Certification Provision,” Diaz wrote.

The chief circuit judge was joined in his decision by Judges Pamela Harris and, in part, by Allison Jones Rushing, who were appointed by Obama and Trump, respectively.

The 4th Circuit’s ruling vacates Abelson’s injunction and remands the case back to his court for further proceedings.




" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Back to top button
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker