Navigating the Movement Against Diversity, Equity and Inclusion 

The 2020 racial justice protests spurred a wave of corporate, educational, and governmental commitments to racial equity, diversity, and inclusion. While national conversations on racial injustice gained unprecedented traction, organizations pledged resources to address systemic inequities in employment, health, and economic opportunity. As with past civil rights advances, this momentum faced swift backlash: through book bans, restrictions on Black history education, and laws curbing discussions on systemic racism. A well-coordinated movement soon reframed racial equity as a threat to fairness, merit, and American values—echoing historical resistance to racial progress.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) became the center of this movement, with conservative activists arguing that CRT had infiltrated institutions, leading President Donald Trump to issue the Executive Order on Combatting Race and Sex Stereotyping (2020) in his first term (Wallace-Wells 2021). This executive order sought to restrict federal agencies, contractors, and grant recipients from conducting training that included concepts related to systemic racism and sexism. The anti-CRT movement has now evolved into legislation and lawsuits against inclusion programs, repeal of established civil rights protections, and attacks on corporate diversity initiatives and nonprofit and government programs to address health, environmental and other social inequities.

This brief examines the surge of backlash against racial equity, diversity and inclusion programs and initiatives in recent years. It provides actionable strategies for organizations seeking to sustain their equity commitments amid evolving political and legal landscapes. The information provided in this brief should not be considered legal advice. Organizations are encouraged to conduct risk assessments and consult legal counsel for further guidance.

Framing the Anti-DEI Movement as an Anti-Civil Rights Agenda

The anti-DEI movement is a continuation of historical efforts to obstruct racial progress while using race-neutral rhetoric to appear fair (Watson 2023; Shelton 2023; Hernandez 2024).

• Historical Backlash: Figures like Robert Patterson, Bull Connor, Barry Goldwater, and Strom Thurmond resisted civil rights under the guise of “states’ rights” (Brown 2011).

• Evolving Strategies: As explicit racism lost public support during the civil rights movement, strategists like Lee Atwater refined coded language, promoting “colorblindness” and “fairness” while maintaining practices and processes that promoted systemic inequality (Hasbrouck 2022).

• Modern Repackaging: Today, the opposition to racial equity and inclusion efforts is framed as a return to “meritocracy” and an effort to protect American values against “reverse discrimination” while effectively working to dismantle the pillars of civil rights (White House 2025; Kmec 2024; Pratts 2021; Martinez 2023).

The Anti-DEI movement is fueled by a network of think tanks, politicians, and activists united against progress toward a genuinely multiracial democracy and a country where everyone has the freedom to be themselves. As the African American Policy Forum has documented, part of the strategy was to attack CRT, then “connect it to anything remotely tied to the values of racial justice, racial equality, and then to gender, LGBTQIA justice and equality.” Some of these key players include:

• Heritage Foundation & Manhattan Institute: The Heritage Foundation and Manhattan Institute actively critique DEI programs. Manhattan Institute senior fellow Christopher Rufo played a key role in branding CRT as extremist, fueling the introduction of restrictive legislation and book bans across the country. The New Yorker article, “How a Conservative Activist Invented the Conflict Over Critical Race Theory,” explores Rufo’s impact in depth. (Wallace-Wells 2021).

• Goldwater Institute & American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC): These entities draft and promote model legislation to end mandatory DEI training and courses, prohibit hiring practices designed to increase diversity, and end state funding for DEI offices and personnel at colleges and universities (Armiak 2024; Center for Media and Democracy 2024).

• Do No Harm: This organization advocates for “colorblind” policies in healthcare, arguing that DEI lowers professional standards(Ghlionn 2023). The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation blog post, “Race-Conscious Policymaking: A Key Way Forward for Health Equity,” counters these claims by emphasizing the importance of race-conscious policies in advancing health equity (Mallya 2024).

Legislative and Judicial Attacks on DEI

The push to dismantle equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility practices extends beyond banning institutional and organizational policies and programs; it targets foundational civil rights protections (Abrams 2024). These include affirmative action, voting rights protections, fair housing policies, and workplace anti-discrimination measures. Conservative-leaning think tanks, alongside politicians, have used implicit racial priming (coded language that activates racial images, often those associated with fear) to build political support to target civil rights law and racial equity at the state and federal levels (Tessler 2017). Words like “woke,” “illegal,” and “diversity” are being used to stir up fear, division, and resentment, pushing white voters to support policies and candidates that harm Black, Latino, LGBTQ, disabled, and other marginalized communities. While marginalized communities are hit hardest, rolling back progress weakens the foundation of opportunity for working- and middle-class families of all backgrounds, making our society less inclusive and less just.

The list below highlights just some of the over 30 bills (at least 13 of which have been ratified) that use subtle racial messaging to turn white voters against civil rights and REDI efforts (Bryant and Appleby 2025).

State-Level Restrictions on DEI

• Texas (SB 17, 2023): Bans DEI offices and programs in public universities.

• Oklahoma (HB 1775, 2021): Prohibits K-12 and university discussions of systemic racism.

• Tennessee (Higher Education Freedom of Expression Act, 2022): Discourages discussions on racial inequities in universities

• Idaho (HB 377, 2021): Bans race-conscious instruction.

• Mississippi (SB 2113, 2022): Passed through a vote where no Black legislators were present, having staged a “walkout” protest during the voting process. This bill bans race-based discussions that talk about white supremacy.

• Iowa & Arkansas (Anti-DEI Bills, 2023): Defund DEI programs in public universities, eliminating institutional support for racial equity.

Federal and Judicial Rollbacks

The effort to dismantle REDI programs is not limited to state-level policies; it extends to federal and judicial actions that systematically weaken civil rights protections and anti-discrimination laws (ACLU 2025). Conservative policymakers and legal strategists have leveraged litigation and legislative proposals to erode key civil rights precedents, curtailing affirmative action, voting rights, and workplace protections (Jenkins and Patel 2023). Through judicial decisions and executive actions, federal authorities have been instrumental in scaling back anti-discrimination mechanisms, creating pathways for state-level restrictions to gain more traction (Smith and Hansen 2008). The policies and court rulings listed below are a sampling of the legal and policy threats aimed at broadly unraveling and dismantling the principles, practices and protections needed to advance racial and social justice (Conyers and Fields 2025).

Judicial Rollbacks on Civil Rights and DEI

• Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023): Overturned race-conscious admissions policies. Although the ruling applied to higher education institutions, anti-DEI proponents have used it as a basis for legal challenges against race-specific programs.

• Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Weakened the Voting Rights Act by eliminating preclearance requirements, enabling state-level voter suppression laws.

Federal Legislative and Administrative Attacks on DEI

• EEOC & DEI Defunding: Ongoing efforts to dismantle the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)—including illegally firing two EEOC commissioners and a new focus on “rooting out unlawful DEI-motivated race and sex discrimination”—will weaken enforcement of workplace anti-discrimination protections.

• Proposed Elimination of the Department of Education: As outlined in Project 2025, conservative lawmakers have introduced proposals to dismantle the Department of Education, threatening its role in enforcing civil rights protections in public education.

Anti-DEI and Anti-Civil Rights Executive Orders (President Donald Trump, 2025)

• Executive Order (14151) Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing: Reinstates and expands the 2020 ban on diversity training, blocking discussions on systemic racism, white privilege, and implicit bias in government workplaces. Terminates all federal government DEI, DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility), and “environmental justice” offices and positions (including ‘Chief Diversity Officer’ positions) and all ‘equity action plans,’ ‘equity’ actions, initiatives, or programs, and ‘equity-related’ grants or contracts.

• Executive Order (14148) Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions: Revokes 78 actions and orders rolled out to promote racial equity, environmental justice, worker rights, accountability in law enforcement, and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation during the Biden Administration.

• Executive Order (14170) Reforming the Federal Hiring Process and Restoring Merit to Government Service: Prohibits federal agencies and contractors from considering race, sex, or religion in hiring and recruitment efforts. Identifies equity as “illegal racial discrimination” and gender identity as a concept that “puts critical government functions at risk.”

• Executive Order (14173) Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity: Revokes Equal Employment Opportunity (EO 11246), signed by President Lyndon Johnson on September 24, 1965; Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (EO 12898), signed by President Bill Clinton on February 11, 1994; Establishing a Coordinated Government-Wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce (EO 13583), Signed by President Barack Obama on August 18, 2011; EO 13672, signed by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2014; Presidential Memorandum Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in the National Security Workforce, signed by President Barack Obama on October 5, 2016.

The executive orders are being challenged in court and a temporary injunction on most provisions of the 2025 DEI orders has been issued on the grounds they violate free speech and are unconstitutionally vague. The National Council of Nonprofits has created an up-to-date tracker outlining the impacts of these and other executive orders on nonprofits with federal grants and contracts, especially those that provide diversity, equity, and inclusion training and programs or work in immigration, LGBTQ+ rights, or environmental protection.

Actionable Strategies for Organizations

Stay Grounded in Your Values

• In the current environment, some organizations fear terms such as “equity” and “diversity” pose a legal risk and are preemptively removing language that reflects their values and work. Going silent can create a vacuum where anti-DEI messages prevail in the absence of people and organizations advocating for equity.

• The DEI executive orders are being challenged in court, and a temporary injunction has been placed on most of their provisions. Part of the anti-DEI movement’s strategy is to create a chilling effect in which organizations preemptively comply and dismantle their programs out of fear. Sixteen state attorneys general have issued a statement declaring that “[D]iversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility best practices are not illegal” and have issued guidance for nonprofits, businesses, and other organizations operating in their states. The message here is that while there is real cause for concern, people are fighting back and seeing the attacks as a moment to lead with their values and an unwavering commitment to equity and justice.

Assess Risks to Your Organization’s Racial Equity Commitments

• Legislative and Legal Compliance Risks: Monitor the news and legislation to stay ahead of policy changes that impact DEI efforts. Create a quarterly or semi-annual review of federal, state, and local laws to assess their impact on DEI programs, hiring, and funding. Identify legal vulnerabilities, compliance gaps, and potential litigation costs. Track anti-DEI trends, key opposition figures, and legislative threats.

• Operational and Safety Risks: Physical violence and online intimidation by state and non-state actors are common tactics used to silence progressive movements (Building Movement Project 2025). Far-right groups have targeted organizations and leaders that promote racial justice and equity through websites that list personal information, digital attacks on organizational websites, and lawsuits that create financial burdens and operational risks. Several toolkits and trainings have been developed and feature action steps to promote digital security, protect staff, and enhance organizational preparedness in the event of a political attack on your organization.

• Financial Risk: Evaluate how anti-DEI backlash affects funding, stakeholder alignment, and risk of donor or government grant withdrawal. During these times, funders can protect and support organizations by funding rapid response efforts, supporting legal, technology, and research needs to aid response to emerging threats, and helping organizations build financial reserves to sustain their work. This is particularly crucial for under-resourced small, Black, Indigenous and People of color-led grassroots and community-based organizations.

• Stakeholder and Reputational Risks: Analyze how program participants, community members, employees, leadership, and investors perceive racial equity, diversity and inclusion efforts. Determine if branding or language shifts align with core values or signal a retreat from equity. Ensure language and approach adjustments will maintain or enhance program effectiveness and long-term goals.

Possible Outcomes of the Risk Assessment

• Refocus – A strategic refocus may be necessary if a risk assessment identifies significant legal exposure. This could involve:

  • Integrating race equity principles into broader organizational strategies, such as talent management, leadership development, or workplace culture initiatives.

  • Strengthening legal and compliance safeguards to ensure initiatives align with evolving laws while maintaining an inclusive environment.

• Reframe – If external scrutiny or legislative restrictions threaten racial equity initiatives, an organization may choose to reframe its work while preserving core objectives. This could involve:

  • Modifying language to reduce external pushback while maintaining program integrity. For example, instead of using explicit race-based eligibility criteria, some legal experts advise organizations to consider alternative ways to prioritize those most impacted by systemic inequities, e.g., focusing on lived experiences that reflect the barriers faced by underrepresented groups (Takagi 2025).

  • Ensuring that any rebranding effort reinforces the organization’s core values and commitment to equity, thus fostering clarity and confidence among internal and external stakeholders.

Strengthen Coalitions and Community Support

• Engage Stakeholders: Collaborate with partners and stakeholders (e.g., community members, employees, funders, partners) to reinforce commitments to racial equity, share resources, and advocate for equity, diversity and inclusion programs and practices.

• Engage Policymakers: Work with local leaders to push back against restrictive legislation.

Use Data-Informed Storytelling

• Leverage Data for Advocacy: Use community needs assessments, program data, and local statistics to highlight inequities and justify targeted, population-specific racial equity initiatives.

• Create a Compelling Narrative: To sustain and strengthen racial equity efforts, organizations must tell a compelling story grounded in data and lived experience. By triangulating insights—weaving together data that support the need for interventions, program outcomes, and qualitative narratives —we can illustrate the real impact of racial equity programs. Blending numbers with human-centered storytelling, can make the necessity for these programs undeniable, showing how equity strengthens workplaces, communities, and economies while pushing back against efforts to erase its value.

• Showcase Success Stories: Use real-world examples to illustrate how racial equity initiatives enhance community outcomes, workplace culture, and organizational impact.

Maintain Equity-Centered Practices and Cultures

• Root Equity Deeper Into Your Organization: Now is not the time to retreat. Our movements, communities, and future depend on us rooting equity deeper into hiring, leadership, organizational culture, community partnerships, and programs. For example, expanding representation within teams builds stronger, more effective organizations that reflect the communities they serve.  It also enhances productivity, employee engagement and problem-solving (McKinsey and Company 2023) while growing essential skills such as emotional intelligence, adaptability, cultural humility, and diverse professional experiences (Phillips 2017). Teams that are representative of the communities they serve can use their lived experience to create more equitable approaches and meaningful solutions. Organizations can use this moment to reflect on how to integrate and practice racial equity more deeply, not as a trend but as an enduring commitment to justice.

• Empower Affinity Groups and Employee Resource Groups (ERGs): The push to dismantle identity-based affinity or Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) is part of a larger strategy to erase race, gender, and other marginalized identities from workplace conversations. Despite the current move to eliminate identity-based ERGs, they remain a valuable resource. ERGs can be positioned as mentorship, career laddering, sourcing-recruitment, and leadership development platforms (Terekhin and Aurora 2024). They can also serve as safe spaces for employees to openly discuss their experiences with race, gender, sexual orientation, and other self-identified identity categories that exist in the workplace.

• Embed Critical Conversations into Organizational Culture: Protect and sustain the equity conversation by normalizing discussions on bias, power, and systemic inequities. Weaving these discussions into professional development, leadership trainings, team meetings, and program planning are some ways to ensure these conversations are part of how your organization operates and sustains its commitment to action. 

Conclusion

As attacks on racial equity programs and initiatives intensify, organizations will likely have to innovate to sustain equity efforts while complying with legal constraints. The fight for racial justice has always faced resistance, but history shows that creativity, adaptation, and persistence are key to ensuring long-term progress. While the road ahead may be challenging, in community we can build strength and sustain our movement for lasting change.