Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs Baltimore-based U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson on Friday granted a preliminary injunction which largely blocked an executive order signed by President Donald Trump shortly after his inauguration that banned diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government.Newsweek contacted the White House press office for comment on Saturday via email outside of regular office hours.Why It MattersTrump has sought to radically restructure the federal government since his inauguration on January 20, purging what he views as discriminatory DEI programs and looking to cut overall spending via the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).However the new administration has already suffered a number of legal blows, with federal judges having blocked DOGE from having access to the Treasury’s payments system. Senior figures within the administration reacted with fury, potentially setting the stage for a major showdown between elements of the judiciary and the White House.What To KnowOn Friday Judge Abelson approved a preliminary injunction that prevents the Trump administration from terminating or altering contracts they believe are DEI related. It came after Trump signed an Executive Order on his first day in office instructing federal agencies to terminate any “equity-related” contracts or grants.The case against the Trump administration was brought by the city of Baltimore along with a number of higher education groups, who argued the president had exceeded his authority and was threatening freedom of speech.
President Donald Trump speaks during a ceremonial swearing-in for U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 21, 2025.
President Donald Trump speaks during a ceremonial swearing-in for U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 21, 2025.
JIM WATSON/AFP/GETTY
In his judgment Abelson concluded Trump’s executive orders were excessively vague, meaning federal agencies and contractors would have “no reasonable way to know what, if anything, they can do to bring their grants into compliance.”He cited hypothetical examples of a teacher using federal funding to teach about Jim Crow laws and a construction worker filling in potholes in a low-income area, and said it was unclear if these would be “equity related.”Friday’s ruling is likely to increase tensions between the Trump administration and the judiciary, with Vice President JD Vance having previously asserted judges shouldn’t be able “to control the executive’s legitimate power.” DOGE head Elon Musk called for a federal judge to be impeached after he temporarily blocked his agency from accessing the Treasury Department’s payment system.What People Are SayingIn his judgment Abelson wrote: “The White House and attorney general have made clear, through their ongoing implementation of various aspects of the J21 order, that viewpoints and speech considered to be in favor of or supportive of DEI or DEIA (diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility) are viewpoints the government wishes to punish and, apparently, attempt to extinguish.”The supreme court has made clear time and time again, the government cannot rely on the ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion’ to suppress disfavored speech.'”Judiciary Department attorney Pardis Gheibi said: “The government doesn’t have the obligation to subsidize plaintiffs’ exercise of speech.”What Happens NextAbelson only granted a preliminary injunction on Friday while the matter is further assessed, meaning the legal battle over federal DEI funding will almost certainly continue.With Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress as well as the White House, the judiciary has emerged as arguably the chief block on their power, potentially setting up a future confrontation with the Trump administration.
