Loading Now

Trump’s executive orders do not erase anti-discrimination protections under federal law

Trump's executive orders do not erase anti-discrimination protections under federal law

Laws That Protect Against Discrimination

Key federal laws continue to provide strong anti-discrimination protections, including:

  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), or national origin.
  • Equal Pay Act of 1963: Requires equal pay for equal work regardless of gender.
  • Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA): Protects workers aged 40 and older.
  • Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): Prohibits discrimination based on disability.
  • Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Applies ADA protections to federal employers and contractors.

These laws remain in effect and enforceable, regardless of any executive orders. Individuals who experience discrimination can still file complaints with agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or pursue lawsuits.

What the Executive Orders Change

Trump’s executive orders do not remove the legal protections above but instead:

  1. Eliminate Affirmative Action Requirements: By revoking policies like Executive Order 11246, the orders remove proactive obligations for federal contractors to implement diversity programs or goals. While contractors are still prohibited from discriminating, they are no longer required to take steps to promote diversity or correct imbalances in hiring practices.
  2. Dismantle DEI Programs: Agencies and contractors are no longer required to fund or operate initiatives focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion, which were designed to prevent discrimination and improve representation.

These orders essentially remove preventative measures that aimed to address systemic biases, leaving the government and contractors more reactive rather than proactive in addressing discrimination.

Does This Increase the Government’s Risk of Liability?

Yes, it could. Here’s why:

  1. Lack of Preventative Frameworks:
    • Without policies like affirmative action or DEI programs, agencies and contractors are at greater risk of unintentionally perpetuating discriminatory practices.
    • A lack of training and oversight increases the likelihood of discrimination occurring, even inadvertently, which can lead to lawsuits or complaints.
  2. Heightened Scrutiny:
    • Courts and advocacy groups may scrutinize government agencies and contractors more closely if they are perceived as failing to take reasonable steps to prevent discrimination.
    • The government itself may face lawsuits if employees or contractors claim that systemic discrimination occurred without adequate safeguards in place.
  3. Potential Reputational Damage:
    • High-profile cases of discrimination could erode public trust in the government’s ability to ensure fairness, especially if protections are seen as being weakened.

In Summary

Trump’s executive orders do not erase anti-discrimination protections under federal law but remove proactive policies that helped prevent discrimination and promote diversity. By dismantling these measures, the government and its contractors may face increased legal and reputational risks if discrimination occurs. Essentially, the lack of a structured, proactive approach could leave the government more vulnerable to claims of negligence or systemic bias.

 

 

Share this content:

Post Comment