President Donald Trump talks to reporters from the Resolute Desk after signing an executive order on Jan. 30, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The plaintiffs claim they are not challenging the president’s ability to set policy priorities, rather the constitutional limits on the president’s power. Tey further claim the executive order violates the Constitution and that terminating programs which are statutorily mandated is unlawful. After Wednesday's hearing, Abelson took no action to pause the Trump DEI executive orders, at least for now.
Abelson questioned Justice Department lawyer Pardis Gheibi, who maintained it would be a "remarkable proposition" that the judicial branch would stop the president from asking the U.S. Attorney General to come up with a strategy regarding DEI programs, contracts, and grants over the next three months.
The judge asked Gheibi why he shouldn’t pause the termination of DEI contracts and grants until the government’s policy is made clear.
Earlier in the hearing, Aleshadye Getachew, arguing for the plaintiffs, told Abelson the Trump administration’s executive orders on DEI are having a "chilling" effect on the First Amendment rights of her clients.
"Speech was chilled almost immediately after these orders were issued," Getachew said.
Abelson seemed to agree with the plaintiffs at least on that point, stating: "What they're saying is, we are being precluded from engaging in all kinds of speech … inclusivity, or the history of our country ... being chilled from engaging in speech that we would otherwise be engaged in."
President Donald Trump holds up a memorandum he signed ordering an immediate assessment of aviation safety and ordering an elevation of what he called "competence" over "D.E.I." in the Oval Office on Jan. 30, 2025. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The plaintiffs reference the May 2020 in-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis that prompted mass demonstrations and riots across the country.
"As evidenced during his first term in office by his response to the mass demonstrations against systemic anti-Black racism after the police killing of George Floyd, President Trump has sought to quell any ensuing efforts to advance racial justice, including through DEIA initiatives," the lawsuit says. "That singular focus has continued to his current Administration: the recent Executive Orders also suggest that DEIA programs are inconsistent with merit, and do so through their text, the aggressive messaging around them, and the way the Administration has implemented them."
The plaintiffs argue that Trump's emphasis on merit "relies on longstanding stereotypes that Black people and other underrepresented groups are inherently unqualified and lack merit despite their accomplishments."
"Rather than acknowledging the need for DEIA programs to remove unfair barriers to opportunity for Black people and other excluded groups, the Executive Orders rely on these false stereotypes to support the baseless assertion that those programs provide racial preferences to unqualified Black people and other people of color. The Executive Orders simultaneously codify preferences for white people by suggesting that efforts to address racial inequity – for example, by ‘promoting diversity’ – are, by definition, reverse discrimination."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
White House spokesman Harrison Fields said both lawsuits represented "nothing more than an extension of the left’s resistance," adding in a statement to the New York Times that the administration was "ready to face them in court."
"Radical leftists can either choose to swim against the tide and reject the overwhelming will of the people, or they can get on board and work with President Trump to advance his wildly popular agenda," Fields said.
Danielle Wallace is a breaking news and politics reporter at Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to danielle.wallace@fox.com and on X: @danimwallace.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/group-dei-workers-sue-stop-trump-executive-orders