USA 
United Kingdom
Since President Trump returned to the White House, legal uncertainty has pushed US employers to rethink and pull back from DEI programs in the workplace - but experts and DEI proponents are warning companies not to pull back too far.
As the US Government increases scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), many employers, including well-known names such as Target, AT&T, Paramount, and Wells Fargo among others, are backing away from it for fear of legal repercussions.
EEO Leaders, a group of former officials of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), warns that recent guidance “ignores or misstates key legal principles and significantly misleads readers,” creating confusion about what is lawful.
In an open letter to Fortune 500 companies, the group urged leaders not to pull away from DEI and anti-discrimination practices and outlined clear guidelines around what is and isn’t permissible under new Trump administration laws and existing legislation.
“We are concerned that recent efforts by the EEOC may discourage you from engaging in lawful efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion,” said the letter. “We urge you to avoid pulling back from this work. Lawful DEI efforts support your compliance responsibilities under Title VII, making them vital to effective risk management. Without these efforts, you may be more vulnerable to discrimination charges and lawsuits. Such programs also support your key business and talent objectives. Retreating from practices that advance equal opportunity is not the prudent or safe choice — it is an unnecessary risk.”
The group has pushed back on a memo from US Attorney General Pam Bondi, which forms the basis of the Trump administration’s DEI policy, warning that it could place them in contravention of existing civil rights legislation.
Policy pressure | The Target DEI boycott is over…or is it?
“In July 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a document titled "Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination". Although its stated goal is to achieve grantee and contractor “compliance” with employment anti-discrimination laws, the July 2025 DOJ Memo ignores or misstates key legal principles and significantly misleads readers.
“Where the Memo’s advice departs from well-established law, employers follow it at their legal peril. Where the Memo chills lawful efforts to advance equal employment opportunity, employers that follow its advice actually undermine compliance with civil rights laws and miss out on practices that could advance their missions and operations.”
The group has produced a document that clarifies where the legal boundary around DEI now is and what you should and shouldn’t do.
“Our goal is to help employers and employees; lawyers, human resources (HR) and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) staff; and the general public to understand what employers can, and should, still be doing to lawfully advance equal employment opportunity as envisioned by this nation’s aspirational founding principles and federal employment law.”
DEI DO'S AND DON'TS
DO: Expand recruitment to widen opportunity
Engage in broad outreach and recruitment strategies to promote equal opportunity, which can advance an employer’s talent objectives and business success. Expanded outreach strategies designed to achieve a broad applicant pool are clearly lawful and advance non-discrimination goals. Making outreach more expansive and inclusive and then hiring the best qualified candidate is not discrimination.
DON’T: Treat expanded outreach as unlawful
The DOJ Memo incorrectly portrays common and appropriate strategies to advance equal opportunity and business objectives as risky and even intentionally discriminatory. An employer that chooses not to expand its recruitment based solely on an assertion by the DOJ that such expanded recruitment is a proxy for discrimination risks losing an opportunity to expand its applicant pool in a positive manner.
DO: Hire based on skills, including cultural competency
Engage in merit-based hiring based on the full range of skills and competencies that are relevant to the workplace and the job. Using cultural competency as a hiring criterion is entirely consistent with equal employment opportunity. Hiring based on relevant skills and qualifications rather than identity is the touchstone of equal opportunity.
DON’T: Avoid personal narratives or holistic hiring tools
The Supreme Court has explicitly approved of using individualized descriptions of personal experiences for merit-based evaluation. The assumption that use of such narratives is a proxy for unlawful discrimination is simply not supported by any facts or case law.
Turning workforce data into early warnings for high-cost employees
DO: Actively monitor hiring processes for fairness
Actively evaluate applicant pools, interview panels, candidate slates, and other aspects of the hiring process, to ensure they reflect a commitment to equal opportunity for all. Evaluating candidate pools at each step of the hiring process… can operate as a safeguard to flag situations for further investigation to avoid a risk of discrimination.
DON’T: Dismantle DEI programs out of fear
Properly designed and implemented DEI employment programs are not a cover for illegal employment discrimination. Employers who dismantle equal opportunity efforts face legal liability under existing civil rights laws. Employers who pull back on their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion may lose the competitive advantages they have developed through significant long-term investments.
DO: Provide inclusive training and prevent discrimination
Provide training on non-discrimination that addresses racial, gender-based, and other forms of bias, through promoting respectful conduct and inclusive culture. Courts – and the EEOC – have clearly approved of well-designed training programs to support non-discriminatory and inclusive workplaces. Many trainings that employers provide are not only consistent with Title VII, but are essential for the employer to show it has taken reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and harassment in the workplace.
DON’T: Assume inclusion equals unlawful segregation
This framing wrongly implies that eliminating any mention of identity is the only appropriate course of action to guard against ‘segregation.’ There is a third alternative, which is to recognize and value the experiences of employees of all backgrounds in the workplace.
DO: Support employee resource groups correctly
Support employee resource groups that are open to participation by all employees. There is no legal prohibition on setting up voluntary employee groups that address common experiences and provide a supportive environment, as long as such groups are open to all employees.
DO: Allow appropriate workplace policies for transgender employees
Provide all employees the freedom to use facilities consistent with their gender identity. Transgender employees’ right to use facilities consistent with their gender identity has been upheld by courts and the EEOC. It is more prudent to allow transgender employees to use the restrooms consistent with their gender identity than to prohibit them from doing so.
DON’T: Ignore retaliation protections
Establish strong anti-retaliation protections that ensure employees can voice concerns and identify potential discrimination on any basis protected under the law. It is illegal to retaliate against employees for any protected activities raising concerns about discrimination. Employers should also refrain from taking adverse actions against employees who express concern that removing an existing DEI program has resulted in discrimination.
“Decades of experience have shown how proactive work to expand opportunity and prevent discrimination supports sound risk management. Employers may face additional risk if they dismantle those programs,” the document said. “We urge all employers to carefully assess their options and to stand together in support of the rule of law and America’s promise of fair and equal workplaces.”
