How the Supreme Court’s decision in SFFA is affecting Discrimination Law

There’s been a lot of confusion lately about what’s really changed with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. President Trump’s recent Executive Order on “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” has received wide attention — but its reach is limited. The order applies directly to federal agencies, contractors, and grant recipients, not all private employers. Some parts of it have already been challenged in court, so enforcement remains uncertain and will likely vary by agency until the courts clarify what can stand. That said, the order clearly signals a new federal posture against DEI programs that use race or gender as a factor in hiring, contracting, or training, and organizations tied to federal funding should be reviewing their certifications carefully.

The Supreme Court’s Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) decision doesn’t directly change employment law either — it dealt with college admissions under the Equal Protection Clause — but its logic is spreading. The ruling emphasized that any use of race must meet strict scrutiny, and that “racial balancing” is unconstitutional. Employment law already follows a similar principle under Title VII, but after SFFA, some judges and agencies are interpreting DEI hiring or promotion goals more narrowly. In practice, this means that employers who use race-based preferences, quotas, or “diversity statements” as hiring criteria could face greater risk of reverse-discrimination claims.