A week after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, he signed two executive orders targeting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs. Many DEI programs support marginalized groups of people by cultivating a workplace culture that supports employees with various backgrounds and identities. These goals to create a more inclusive workplace are often achieved through recruitment practices that push for a variety of backgrounds in the workforce, as well as additional DEI training for employees that addresses unconscious biases.
Many government organizations expanded their DEI programs after former President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 13985 into law on Jan. 20, 2021. The official title is “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” The order directed government agencies to revise their policies in an attempt to eliminate systemic racial inequities. It wrote, “Executive departments and agencies … must recognize and work to redress inequities in their policies and programs that serve as barriers to equal opportunity.”
Trump signed his first executive order in his second term as president on Jan. 20. In the order, titled “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Spending,” Trump asserted that DEI programs were a waste of resources and promoted discrimination. “The public release of [government organizations’ DEI] plans demonstrated immense public waste and shameful discrimination,” he wrote.
Trump signed a second executive order, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” on Jan. 21. Trump continued to argue that DEI programs discriminate against American citizens by undermining individual efforts and achievements. He wrote, “Hardworking Americans who deserve a shot at the American Dream should not be stigmatized, demeaned or shut out of opportunities because of their race or sex.”
Trump’s claim that DEI programs are discriminatory contradicts the stated purpose of these programs. “DEI was created because marginalized communities have not always had equal opportunities for jobs or felt a sense of belonging in majority-white corporate settings,” Niquel Terry Ellis wrote in a CNN article titled “What is DEI? Why is it Dividing America?”
The article also mentioned the intended impact of DEI programs in the workplace. “It was an attempt to try to create workplaces where more or all people can thrive,” Daniel Oppong said in an interview for Ellis’s CNN article. Oppong is the founder of The Courage Collective, a company that advises other businesses and organizations on DEI programs.
Many of the ideas instilled in DEI programs stem from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits race-based discrimination in hiring and promotion processes. The Civil Rights Act opened the door for future developments by protesting inequality within workplaces. In the 1970s and ’80s, for example, the feminist movement began confronting gender inequality in workplaces. In 2020, DEI-related job openings increased by 55% in response to George Floyd’s murder and increased calls for racial justice, according to NBC News.
As efforts to challenge inequalities continue to evolve, Trump’s executive orders have received backlash from civil rights organizations. On Jan. 22, 19 civil rights leaders from across the country met for a 90-minute roundtable discussion in Washington D.C. to defend DEI programs.
On Feb. 23, the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland, challenged Trump’s executive orders in a lawsuit along with national organizations. According to an article by Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo Law Firm, the plaintiffs argued that Trump’s orders exceed the President’s legal powers. The attorneys for the case wrote, “[The plaintiffs] argue that President Trump lacked authority to issue [the Jan. 20 executive order] to the extent that it unilaterally mandates the termination of certain grants and contracts, impacting Congress’s control over federal government spending.”
Urban students have reacted differently to what Trump’s executive orders could mean for the next few years. “It makes me feel scared. [I am] worried about what our future looks like and what our country’s future looks like,” said Laurel Socolow ’25, GSA co-leader.
Trump’s executive orders prohibit government agencies from using DEI in their employment processes and target public and private employers receiving federal funding or contracts. Microsoft, for example, has a $10 billion contract with the government to provide the United States military with technology services. Because the contract gives Microsoft government funding for these services, Trump’s executive order could mean that Microsoft has to eliminate its Global Diversity and Inclusion initiatives because DEI programs are now banned.
As part of his attack on DEI, Trump has specifically stripped away transgender-identifying people’s ability to join the U.S. military. Furthermore, those who are already members of the military will no longer have access to gender-affirming care.
According to ABC News, in a Feb. 7 memo, United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote, “Effective immediately, all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are paused, and all unscheduled, scheduled, or planned medical procedures associated with affirming or facilitating a gender transition for Service members are paused.”
The transgender military ban raises concern among individuals at Urban. “I think [the ban] sends the message that it is acceptable in a democracy to completely exempt some people from dignity and rights,” said Lindsey Collins, GSA faculty adviser.
Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness” states, “A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”
Some feel the orders send a broader message about Trump’s feelings toward the transgender community. “It’s kind of breathtaking to feel that energy from the federal government, [where] they are like, ‘I want you to know how deeply unwanted you are,’” Collins said.
Rohan Notaney ’27 reacted similarly to the government’s marginalization of transgender people. “The government doesn’t want to support trans people in our country, [which is] very discouraging,” he said.
The U.S.’s global power has caused some to consider the message Trump’s executive orders might send to foreign governments. Socolow said, “[These messages are] inevitably going to be outsourced beyond our country and given as an example to other countries, which I think is horrifying.”