
Private sector DEI programs still legal despite Trump's executive order, Maryland AG says
In the letter, the AGs emphasize that DEI programs are still legal, despite an executive order issued by President Trump halting federal DEI programs nationwide.
Following the order, Maryland leaders shared their support for DEI programs, and the City of Baltimore responded with a lawsuit alleging that the order would stifle programs the city relies on for essential functions.
What is DEI and DEIA?
DEI and DEIA refer to principles of diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility.
While the push gained momentum after the 2020 murder of George Floyd, DEI has much earlier roots.
The concept dates back to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned employment discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, and other criteria. Since then, other policies seeking to eliminate hiring bias, promote fairness in the workplace, and provide equal opportunities to people of color, women, and individuals with disabilities have arisen. DEI has also expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
Are workplace DEI and DEIA programs legal?
Mr. Trump's executive order calls for an end to "discriminatory programs," including "'diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility' (DEIA) mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the Federal Government, under whatever name they appear."
It also instructs the U.S. attorney general to create a plan that would deter the private sector from continuing DEI programs.
According to the Bureau of Justice Assistance, "Executive Orders (EOs) are official documents … through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government."
But the memo from the 16 state attorneys general says Mr. Trump's executive action does not have the authority to mandate an end to DEI and DEIA programs within the private sector.
"Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility best practices are not illegal, and the federal government does not have the legal authority to issue an executive order that prohibits otherwise lawful activities in the private sector or mandates the wholesale removal of these policies and practices within private organizations, including those that receive federal contracts and grants," the memo reads.
AGs say DEI prevents workplace discrimination
The attorneys general argue that DEI employment practices are not only lawful but exist to prevent workplace discrimination — protecting companies from the risk of lawsuits.
"Employment policies incorporating diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility best practices are not only compliant with state and federal civil rights laws, but they also help to reduce litigation risk by affirmatively protecting against discriminatory conduct that violates the law."
According to the 16 attorneys general, more than 285,000 discrimination complaints have been filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by employees in their states alone.
In the letter, the attorneys general said Mr. Trump's executive order is misleading and suggests that DEI policies are discriminatory practices.
"The Executive Order states what is already the law—that discrimination is illegal—but then conflates unlawful preferences in hiring and promotion with sound and lawful best practices for promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the workforce," the coalition of attorneys general wrote. "This conflation is inaccurate and misleading. Policies and practices that promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are not the same as preferences in individual hiring and promotion decisions that have been found to be unlawful. The Executive Order cannot and does not prohibit these otherwise lawful practices and policies."
How should organizations implement DEI policies?
The attorneys general encouraged organizations to prioritize wide-scale recruitment efforts to attract diverse applicant pools, while using panel interviews to ensure multiple perspectives in hiring and promotion decisions.
The AGs said companies should also establish standardized evaluation criteria focused on skills and experience to maintain objective, merit-based hiring processes.
Companies are also encouraged to maintain accessible recruitment practices and provide reasonable accommodations throughout the hiring process.
In the letter, the attorneys general also told companies to ensure that employees have equal access to professional development, training, and mentorship programs to minimize turnover rates and strengthen organizational culture.
They also recommended employee resource groups, or ERGs, which are spaces where employees of common backgrounds can feel recognized and supported.
In addition, the AGs encouraged organizations to conduct training on unconscious bias, inclusive leadership, and disability awareness.
How do DEI programs impact the workplace?
DEI experts told CBS News that DEI is often misperceived as being solely focused on race. Policies giving working parents flexible work hours or establishing professional groups based on shared identities, such as sexual orientation, could also be classified as DEI programs.
Proponents of DEI argue that it improves the quality of the workforce and its employees, while opponents argue DEI programs work against the principle of merit-based hiring and promotions or even promote discrimination themselves.
According to Mr. Trump's executive order, DEI policies have led to "illegal, pernicious discrimination that has prioritized how people were born instead of what they were capable of doing."
In a statement Thursday, Attorney General Brown said companies in the top quartile for diversity are 35% more likely to have financial gains above their respective industry counterparts, citing a study by the consulting firm McKinsey & Company.
"Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives are not only legal, they are essential for creating fair, thriving workplaces. They help businesses comply with the law, prevent discrimination, and ensure equal opportunities for all employees," Brown said. "DEIA policies are critical for expanding talent pools, addressing bias, and fostering employee success. Far from being illegal, they are vital for business growth, retention, and engagement."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Can States Handle Disasters Without FEMA? The Legal Gaps Business Leaders Should Know
HUNT, TEXAS - JULY 6: Vehicles sit submerged as a search and rescue worker looks through debris for ... More any survivors or remains of people swept up in the flash flooding on July 6, 2025 in Hunt, Texas. Heavy rainfall caused flooding along the Guadalupe River in central Texas with multiple fatalities reported. (Photo by) A year already marked by record-smashing heatwaves, catastrophic storms, and deadly flash floods is forcing business leaders to reckon with an unsettling question: What happens if the federal government pulls back from disaster response? The idea of handling disasters without FEMA is not an abstract worry. In recent weeks, political debates have intensified over proposals to reduce federal spending on disaster relief or even eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after the 2025 hurricane season, as reported by NBC News. Former President Trump and some congressional leaders have floated plans to shift primary responsibility for disaster recovery to state governments—a move that could leave businesses navigating a patchwork of legal systems without the backstop they've come to rely on for decades. This uncertainty comes as disasters batter communities from coast to coast. In the first half of 2025 alone, the U.S. suffered at least 15 billion-dollar weather disasters, including historic flooding, tornado outbreaks, and prolonged heat waves, according to Yale Climate Connections. Just this past weekend, flash floods devastated Kerr County, Texas, forcing rescues and shutting down businesses in a region still recovering from earlier storms. For business owners, investors, and insurers, this brewing shift raises urgent questions: If FEMA disappears, can state laws and budgets fill the gap? Will private enterprises have to shoulder more responsibility for disaster planning and recovery? And which states are prepared—or dangerously unprepared—to protect their residents and economic lifelines in a post-FEMA landscape? A Federal Safety Net Under ThreatALTADENA, CALIFORNIA - JANUARY 30: People walk past a FEMA sign following a press conference at the ... More Altadena Disaster Recovery Center on January 30, 2025 in Altadena, California. House Democratic leaders and local officials held the press conference near the Eaton Fire burn zone to call for federal disaster assistance following the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles County. (Photo by) Since its founding in 1979, FEMA has been the cornerstone of America's disaster response. It funds emergency shelters, debris removal, rebuilding grants, and cash assistance for displaced families. Critically for businesses, FEMA programs like the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant fund projects that reduce future risks, a crucial buffer as extreme weather grows more frequent. Yet the agency has long faced political crossfire, with critics labeling it bloated or inefficient. Earlier this year, a lawsuit was filed against the Trump administration's previous halt to BRIC funding for certain states, highlighting how political swings can upend even well-established federal programs. If proposals to wind down FEMA proceed, business leaders would be left relying on a fragmented patchwork of state disaster laws—many of which, my research suggests, lack the resources or legal frameworks to handle large-scale crises. State Disaster Laws Are A Patchwork of Authority Every U.S. state has laws empowering governors and local officials to declare emergencies and coordinate response efforts. Yet those powers vary widely in scope, funding, and legal protections for vulnerable communities. Despite these structures, most states still rely heavily on FEMA for funding, specialized teams, and logistical support. Without FEMA, states would have to cover enormous costs themselves. For example, after Hurricane Harvey, Texas received over $13 billion in FEMA aid, money that state coffers alone could not match. The Business Risks Of A FEMA Void Businesses have more skin in this game than ever. Beyond humanitarian concerns, legal and financial risks loom if federal safety nets vanish. Federal aid often helps cover costs insurers won't, such as temporary housing, debris removal, and infrastructure repair. Without that aid, insurance companies may face larger payouts or withdraw entirely from high-risk markets. In Florida, for example, multiple insurers have already exited the market due to hurricane risks, leaving businesses scrambling for coverage. A weakened federal role could mean higher premiums, stricter underwriting, or outright denial of coverage in disaster-prone regions, especially for small and midsize enterprises without deep cash reserves. If state laws differ significantly on evacuation orders, business owners may be caught between conflicting mandates. For instance, if local officials order an evacuation, but state law vests that authority only in the governor, businesses face legal ambiguity about when to close operations, protect staff, or move inventory. Disaster response gaps also raise potential civil rights issues. Federal laws like the Stafford Act prohibit discrimination in disaster aid based on race, disability, or language. Many states lack comparable mandates, meaning vulnerable communities—and businesses serving them—could fall through the cracks if federal oversight disappears. Companies with operations across multiple states face a regulatory minefield if FEMA's uniform national standards vanish. Without coordinated federal logistics, restoring supply chains and reopening businesses could take longer, increasing downtime and losses. Which States Are Ready? Which Aren't? Few states are fully prepared to absorb FEMA's responsibilities. According to my analysis of disaster laws across the South and Mid-Atlantic, only a handful—like Virginia and Texas—have begun integrating equity planning, vulnerable population registries, and robust local emergency powers into state statutes. Other states, particularly smaller ones with limited budgets, may lack: That leaves gaps businesses can't ignore. A company operating in Virginia might navigate disaster recovery relatively smoothly, while the same company in Mississippi or Georgia could face a chaotic patchwork of legal obligations, prolonged closures, and community backlash. What Business Leaders Should Do Now While FEMA's fate remains uncertain, businesses should: FEMA's potential dismantling would represent the biggest shift in American disaster management in generations. Businesses that fail to prepare for handling disasters without FEMA amidst a state-led disaster regime risk higher costs, legal headaches, and reputational damage. Disasters don't respect state lines, but the laws governing them increasingly do. For business leaders, understanding those legal boundaries might be the key to survival in a future where the federal safety net is no longer guaranteed.


The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Coca-Cola confirms it will launch cane sugar version in US amid Trump ‘enthusiasm'
Coca-Cola Company confirmed on Tuesday that it will launch a cane sugar version of its iconic drink in the U.S. amid President Trump's ' enthusiasm,' coming less than a week after the president revealed the change on social media. 'As part of its ongoing innovation agenda, this fall in the United States, the company plans to launch an offering made with U.S. cane sugar to expand its Trademark Coca-Cola product range,' the company said in a news release. The Atlanta-based company said the addition is 'designed to complement the company's strong core portfolio and offer more choices across occasions and preferences.' Trump said in a post on Truth Social last week that Coca-Cola agreed to use cane sugar in its flagship drink instead of high-fructose corn syrup. 'I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so,' the president wrote on Wednesday. 'I'd like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You'll see. It's just better!' The soft drink giant did not confirm the change last week, but said it appreciated Trump's 'enthusiasm' for the brand and that more details on 'new innovative offerings within our Coca‑Cola product range will be shared soon.' The soda sold in the U.S. is usually sweetened with corn syrup, while other countries — like Mexico, already use cane sugar. The 'Mexican Coke' is also sold in the U.S. Trump has been a longtime aficionado of Diet Coke, with the president having a red button installed at the Resolute Desk during his first term. When pressed, a staffer would bring the drink to the president.


The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Court allows Trump administration to end deportation protections for Afghans, Cameroonians
An appeals court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to end protections from deportation for Afghans and Cameroonians, declining to bar removals amid a review of the move's legality. The decision will impact more than 10,000 citizens of both countries who remain in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which bars deportation of those who cannot safely return to their country due to civil unrest or a natural disaster. While a lower court had agreed to bar deportations for another week, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to continue to bar them while the legal battle continued. 'There is insufficient evidence to warrant the extraordinary remedy of a postponement of agency action pending appeal,' they court wrote. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ended TPS for both countries, with protections for Afghans designed to end last week and protection for Cameroonians set to expire August 4. In doing so, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reversed findings of the Biden administration that each country was too dangerous for its citizens to be returned. Some 9,600 Afghans and nearly 3,500 Cameroonians have TPS, according to The National Immigration Forum. Those impacted will have to apply for asylum or protections under the Convention Against Torture in order to remain in the country. Afghanistan remains under Taliban rule and deteriorating conditions in the country have accelerated since the U.S. withdrawal in 2021, including widespread food insecurity. Many of the roughly 80,000 Afghans who came to the U.S. after the fall of Kabul have adjusted their status, either securing asylum or a special immigrant visa given to those who assisted U.S. military efforts there. 'Thousands of Afghans who served alongside U.S. forces are now at risk of detention and deportation,' Shawn VanDiver, president of #AfghanEvac, said in a statement. 'These are our allies, neighbors, coworkers—people who believed in the promises this country made.' The Biden administration had also cited armed conflict in Cameroon as a rationale for keeping protections there. 'Since 2014, ongoing armed conflict between the Government of Cameroon and nonstate armed groups in the Far North Region, specifically Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), has resulted in killings, kidnappings, displacement, and destruction of civilian infrastructure,' the Biden administration wrote in the 2023 re-designation.