Big Win for Trump Admin. on DEIA Initiatives As 4th Circuit Puts Kibosh on Lower Court Injunction

The Trump administration has been racking up some solid wins before the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals of late. Another was added to the list on Friday as the appellate court vacated a District Court preliminary injunction regarding the administration's ban on DEIA initiatives. 

🚨🚨 Huge win for President Trump in hostile territory. President Trump's executive order can go into effect, injunction vacated. Unanimous opinion by ChiefJudge Diaz (Obama) joined by Judges Harris (Obama) and Rushing (Trump). Massive civil rights win for @TheJusticeDept! pic.twitter.com/RGTs2srg6d

— Eric W. (@EWess92) February 6, 2026

Here's the back story, from the 4th Circuit's opinion itself: 

In the first days of his second term, President Donald J. Trump issued two Executive Orders that directed executive agencies to end “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”) programs within federal grant and contract processes. See Exec. Order No. 14,151, 90 Fed.Reg. 8339 (Jan 20, 2025); Exec. Order No. 14,173, 90 Fed. Reg. 8633 (Jan. 21, 2025). Plaintiffs—the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore; the American Association of University Professors; and the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education—sued and sought to preliminarily enjoin three of the Orders’ provisions on First and Fifth Amendment grounds. 

The district court entered a preliminary injunction, but we stayed it pending appeal. We now vacate the district court’s injunction and remand.

The plaintiffs, as noted, challenged three key provisions of the orders (the Termination, Certification, and Enforcement Threat provisions) on First and Fifth Amendment grounds, and Judge Adam Abelson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted a nationwide preliminary injunction.

A three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit (consisting of two judges appointed by President Obama and one appointed by President Trump) vacated the injunction, first holding that the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the Enforcement Threat Provision. That provision merely required the Attorney General to prepare a report. But, the court found, plaintiffs failed to show a concrete injury tied to that reporting requirement, and any alleged injuries rested on a speculative chain of future events.

While the court found that the plaintiffs did show standing to challenge the Termination and Certification Provisions by alleging “classic pocketbook” injuries from lost federal funding and a credible chill on DEI-related activities, it held that they were unlikely to succeed on the merits as to those provisions. As to the Termination Provision, the court determined that it was not unconstitutionally vague. Further, the court found that the Certification Provision does not violate the First Amendment, because while it requires grantees to certify compliance with existing federal antidiscrimination laws, it doesn’t on its face prohibit protected speech.

RELATED: US Circuit Court Grudgingly Halts Judge's Order Blocking Trump EO Banning DEI

Trump Admin. Scores Another Legal Win - This One Involves Federal Grants

So, the matter is remanded back to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the 4th Circuit's opinion. As with so many of these rulings, this is not the end of the road. The plaintiffs may decide to seek rehearing en banc and/or appeal today's decision. And even if they do not, the case may still proceed on the merits in the District Court (at least as to the latter two provisions). Still, as they say, a win's a win. And this is a solid win for the administration. 

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy RedState’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join RedState VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!