Margot Cleveland of the Federalist critiques efforts to block the Trump administration’s DEI order in court.
A group of plaintiffs asked a federal judge on Saturday to vacate the injunction he had previously entered in their favor against the Trump Administration that halted the implementation of the president’s directives to end DEI initiatives. The plaintiffs’ move came after a federal appellate court stayed the injunction, signaling a likely reversal of the injunction on appeal and a win for Trump. This motion represents the second effort within as many weeks by litigants to game the judicial system to avoid losing to the president on appeal. The courts should refuse to play along, including in this case by denying the motion to vacate the injunction. …
… The stay of the lower court’s injunction means that the Trump Administration can continue to implement the president’s executive orders by terminating DEI grants, mandating contractors and grantees certify they will not violate federal anti-discrimination law with DEI programs, and enforcing those certifications. The stay, however, means much more: It means that the Trump Administration is very likely to win on appeal. …
… Thus, once the Fourth Circuit granted the stay, the National Association of Diversity Officers and its fellow plaintiffs knew that they were likely to lose on appeal.
A legal loss is never pleasant, but there is more at stake than these plaintiffs’ claims: An adverse decision by the federal appellate court would also establish binding precedent on the lower courts in the Fourth Circuit, which includes both the Maryland court that granted the stay in this case and other federal courts in Virginia, West Virginia, and North and South Carolina. Further, while federal lower courts in other circuits and the other federal appellate courts are not bound by decisions from the Fourth Circuit, judges often rely on out-of-circuit or sister-circuit precedent in deciding cases before them — especially in cases involving issues of first impression, as many of the cases waged against the Trump Administration are.
