Trump's DEI cuts

Should DEI initiatives be curbed in the US? Viewpoints from multiple sides.

Feb 01, 2025

Enjoying Framechange? Forward to a friend to help spread the word!

New to Framechange? Sign up for free to see multiple sides in your inbox.

Learn more about our mission to reduce polarization and how we represent different viewpoints here.

What’s happening

Since taking office on Jan 20, President Trump has taken a slew of actions aimed at ending Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the federal government and private sector. He issued two executive orders in what his administration described as an effort to halt "discriminatory" DEI programs and restore "merit-based opportunity."

Executive orders: The first executive order, “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing,” calls for an end to all DEI hiring and DEI-related programs within the federal government. Following the order, Trump placed all federal employees focused on DEI initiatives on administrative leave.

His second order, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” rolls back a previous requirement that federal contractors take affirmative action in their hiring practices. It also encourages private and nonprofit organizations to end DEI initiatives and instructs federal agencies to identify and report the “most egregious and discriminatory DEI practitioners” in sectors under their jurisdiction.

What are DEI and affirmative action: DEI broadly refers to programs and policies that promote representation and participation of diverse groups in workplaces and other institutions. These initiatives often focus on promoting inclusion of historically marginalized groups based on factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, and sexual orientation.

Affirmative action is a distinct but related concept – often implemented within broader DEI efforts – focused on actively improving educational and employment opportunities for minority groups. It was born out of the Civil Rights Act (1964) and President Lyndon B Johnson’s Executive Order 11246 in 1965, which required federal contractors to use affirmative action in hiring. Trump’s second executive order explicitly rolls back Johnson’s order and other DEI-focused orders of presidents since then.

Implications: Paired with a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that struck down the consideration of race in college admissions, Trump’s efforts to limit DEI and affirmative action could have broad-reaching implications on how institutions including the government, corporations, and universities operate with respect to diversity.

This week, we highlight a few of the viewpoints around the complex and hotly debated topic of DEI. What do you think about the future of DEI in the US? Let us know.

Notable viewpoints

More supportive of cutting back DEI programs:

DEI efforts erode standards and deprioritize merit.

Any explicit focus on hiring individuals based on characteristics aside from their performance potential is likely to contribute to a lower output quality than the alternative.
DEI in the military has driven an “erosion of standards” in an area where merit-based membership and lethality are paramount. The Army, for example, reduced the standards for its regular fitness test for women – reducing its push-up requirement from 13 to 10, among other changes – after a 2022 RAND report found women were failing at a higher rate than men and triggered political pressure to make a more inclusive test.
A series of McKinsey studies – often cited by DEI proponents – finding that diversity on corporate executive teams leads to higher profitability are flawed. A 2024 paper by Texas A&M and University of North Carolina professors found that McKinsey’s method does not prove causation and does not generate reproducible results.

DEI policies are discriminatory.

Some DEI initiatives – particularly on college campuses – have gone too far in the opposite direction, infringing upon basic civil liberties and free speech by unfairly penalizing those in non-minority groups. Efforts in several such instances have been historically struck down by courts including cases involving Temple University (2008) and San Francisco State (2007).
Existing anti-discrimination laws such as the Civil Rights Act (1964) and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause are sufficient to prevent discrimination and protect the civil rights of minority groups. DEI orders and affirmative action can “devolve into reverse discrimination against non-protected groups (such as white males, Christians, conservatives, Asians, etc.).” (Summarized and quoted from Dr. Carol M Swain, black woman and former professor, in Katie Couric Media.)

DEI programs contribute to higher levels of divisiveness.

DEI programs tend to promote division more than unity by highlighting racial differences and awarding certain roles based on those differences.
DEI programs can lead to suspicions of bigotry where it doesn’t exist (i.e., “hostile attribution bias”). A 2024 Network Contagion Research Institute study found that a group of participants assigned literature to read about racism were more likely to assume race was involved in a hypothetical college admissions rejection scenario – where race was not mentioned – compared to a control group.
Diversity training in organizations can awaken biases and reinforce stereotypes rather than reducing them. A 2018 study by Harvard sociologists, for example, found that diversity training can instill resentment in white men who feel they are being accused of bias. A 2011 University of Toronto study found that DEI campaigns focused on race often drove higher feelings of prejudice compared to no intervention at all.

More opposed to cutting back DEI programs:

DEI programs are needed to resolve inequities and prevent discrimination.

DEI and affirmative action are critical to ensuring historically marginalized groups have a fairer shot at jobs and other opportunities from which historic, institutional, and systemic barriers have disadvantaged them.
DEI initiatives are crucial to helping prevent individuals from being discriminated against and/or excluded from certain opportunities based purely on their race, gender, or other characteristics.
“It’s bad enough that Trump and his advisers believe the official discrimination against Black people that characterized US laws and politics from the founding of the Republic until the 1960s is not a problem worth addressing anymore. It’s even worse to claim that the only way to prevent discrimination is to get rid of any effort to address it. That way lies a return to white supremacy in the guise of color-blind “meritocracy.” (Ed Kilgore, Intelligencer.)
President Trump’s executive order to restrict government contractors from DEI practices is unlawful and falsely equates certain DEI efforts aimed at inclusion and workplace diversity as discriminatory. (Summarized from a statement by American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).)

DEI programs contribute to higher performance and better output.

A 2023 McKinsey study found that organizations in the top quartile of gender diversity in executive positions were 39% more likely to achieve above-median profitability than companies in the bottom quartile. Similarly, companies in the top quartile on ethnic diversity were 39% more likely to financially outperform.
Diverse teams within organizations are more innovative than homogeneous teams. A 2011 study analyzing research & development teams from 4,277 companies in Spain found that teams with more women launched a higher number of “radical innovations” to the market.
“[W]hen diversity is done right, it can be a crucial strategy for bolstering American power. The United States attracts the world’s best and brightest because they can rise here and eventually help run the place. Newcomers to China, Russia and Iran can’t expect the same thing. That makes diversity in the ranks of the federal government a big comparative advantage.” (Farah Stockman, New York Times.)
While some organizations have begun rolling back DEI initiatives, others like Costco and Delta Airlines are maintaining their programs based on the benefits of DEI to their businesses and the communities they serve.

From the source

Snippets

The Federal Reserve held interest rates steady in its latest meeting, leaving the federal funds rate at 4.25%-4.5%. The Fed cited an optimistic outlook on jobs but an uncertain outlook on inflation.
An American Airlines jet carrying 60 passengers and 4 crew members collided with a military helicopter carrying 3 soldiers during the jet’s final approach into Washington DC’s Reagan Airport. There are no expected survivors and search efforts have recovered at least 41 bodies.
President Trump signed a memo instructing the Pentagon to prepare the Guantanamo Bay military camp to house deported migrants from the US. The camp has a capacity of 30,000 beds which Trump said he would use to “detain the worst criminal illegal aliens threatening the American people.”
President Trump signed an executive order intended to block access to transgender treatments for anyone under the age of 19. It instructs federal agencies to restrict funding to providers that offer gender transition treatments to minors. Advocacy groups have said they intend to fight the order in court. (See our previous coverage on the arguments around gender transition treatments for minors.)
The White House rescinded a memo that had triggered a freeze on various federal assistance programs but said it would continue to review federal spending that it deems as wasteful. The order had driven confusion over the availability of funding for a number of programs including Medicaid.

Give us your feedback! Please let us know how we can improve.

Your feedback

Music on the bottom

In honor of a stunning cover of this song by Pink at this week’s FireAid benefit concert, enjoy Janis Joplin’s effortlessly cool version of “Me and Bobby McGee” that made it famous.

Listen on Spotify, Apple Music, or Amazon Music.