By Rich Lowry
Friday, January 24, 2025
We’re only days into the Trump administration, and
we can already identify one of his top five achievements.
With one carefully crafted act, the president initiated
the end of DEI in the federal government and perhaps in the private sector and
educational system, as well. It is a breathtakingly bold and wholly righteous
move that could bring about a generational change. One way or the other, books
will be written about the executive order, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and
Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.”
Trump’s directive repeals a series of executive orders
promoting affirmative action in government, including the granddaddy of them
all, President Lyndon Johnson’s 1965 Executive Order 11246. The implementing
regulations for 11246 have created a vast archipelago of racial preferences in
federal contracting. The rollback of the LBJ order alone would be momentous.
Trump’s order goes further, though. It instructs
executive departments and agencies to “terminate all discriminatory and illegal
preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations,
enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements.”
This is not empty verbiage. The Trump administration
immediately ordered diversity offices in the federal government closed and DEI
workers put on administrative leave, while it suspended contracting programs
that run afoul of the race- and gender-neutral standard set by Trump’s order.
Again, all of this would be historic on its own, but the
order goes further still. It takes solid aim at other institutions of American
life that have, through government pressure or their own initiative, embraced
DEI.
A key, and correct, contention of the Trump order is that
DEI’s race-consciousness practices violate federal civil-rights laws.
It then uses the prospect of federal enforcement of the
civil-rights laws as a stick to move private actors toward fair, color-blind
policies. The federal contracting process itself will be a massive point of
leverage. The order says that in their “employment, procurement, and
contracting practices” federal contractors and subcontractors cannot “consider
race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin in ways that
violate the Nation’s civil rights laws.”
Given that the federal government doles out about $1.7
trillion in contracts and grants annually, this provision will have huge ripple
effects.
Moreover, federal contractors have to assure the
government that they aren’t promoting DEI in violation of anti-discrimination
laws. If a contractor provides false information, it is potentially liable
under the sweeping False Claims Act.
Then, more broadly, each federal agency is to identify
nine potential civil compliance investigations “of publicly traded
corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with
assets of 500 million dollars or more, State and local bar and medical
associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments over 1
billion dollars.”
That is intended to — and will — get the attention of the
general counsels to every institution in America that falls into one of those
buckets.
Finally, the order puts public education systems and
institutions of higher education on notice that if they don’t comply with the
Supreme Court’s recent anti-affirmative action decision, their federal funding
will be at risk.
Taken together, this is seismic. Maybe the administration
will get stymied in the inevitable legal fights. Maybe institutions will keep
their heads down, and rename their DEI programs and pursue the same noxious
ends using different means. But this looks like an inflection point.
Will a subsequent Democratic president come into office
and reinstitute decades’ worth of government quotas? It’s possible, but this
would require an electoral mandate to do so, and color-blindness has much more
political appeal than racial preferences do.
Even if a new Democratic administration is encouraging of
DEI, will private entities want to get whipsawed back and forth and break out
the Robin DiAngelo books again and begin discriminating on the basis of race
and gender anew? The safer and more rational course would be stay out of DEI
altogether and focus on their core business.
That outcome would be profoundly welcome for our society,
and the first step could have been a Trump stroke of a pen.
No comments:
Post a Comment