Policies & Analysis

Harvard University filed this action against multiple federal agencies, challenging the federal government’s conditioning of the University’s receipt of federal funds on the implementation of programmatic and structural changes purportedly addressing antisemitism. Harvard contends that the termination of funding violated the Administrative Procedure Act, exceeded the government’s statutory authority under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, infringed upon First Amendment rights, and was effectuated without adherence to applicable regulatory procedures. The complaint further asserts that the government acted ultra vires in taking these actions. The case was marked related to a separate lawsuit filed by the American Association of University Professors – Harvard Faculty Chapter, which raised similar issues.

The Harvard Faculty Chapter of the American Association of University Professors, the American Association of University Professors, and a union representing university workers have filed a lawsuit in response to the Trump administration's demands that Harvard University restrict speech and restructure its core operations or else face the cancellation of $8.7 billion in federal funding for the university and its affiliated hospitals. The plaintiffs allege these actions are unlawful because they violate the Administrative Procedure Act, Title VI and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the First Amendment, the separation of powers, the Spending Clause of the Constitution, and the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief.

A coalition of sixteen states sued the Trump administration for its attempt to disrupt and terminate grant funding issued by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The grants were cancelled in response to President Trump's Executive Orders limiting work on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and transgender matters. The plaintiffs allege that the administration does not have the authority to terminate congressionally-appropriated funds. The plaintiffs argue the administration has violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the separation of powers, the Spending Clause, the Public Health Service Act, and federal regulations governing NIH grants. On May 29, 2025, the parties agreed that the case should proceed to the merits without resolution of the requests for temporary relief. They also agreed that the case should proceed on a two-track basis, with the first phase of litigation focusing on the plaintiffs' claims as related to the termination of grants, and the second phase of litigation focusing on plaintiffs' unreasonable-delay claims.

Neonu Jewell, the former Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer and EEO Director at the U.S. Development Finance Corporation (DFC), has filed suit against the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the DFC. Jewell alleges that she was unlawfully placed on administrative leave and later terminated without severance, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. Jewell alleges that her classification as a “DEIA employee” was inaccurate and stigmatizing, and that her termination violated her rights to free speech, due process, and equal protection. She further claims she was denied reassignment and severance benefits provided to similarly situated employees, and that DFC’s actions were retaliatory and based on her perceived political views.

The Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc. (MAEC), the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the NAACP Tennessee State Conference, and the Somerville-Fayette NAACP filed suit against the U.S. Department of Education and its Secretary, challenging the termination of the Equity Assistance Center (EAC) grant awarded to MAEC. The plaintiffs contend that the Department’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional, violating civil rights law, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the First Amendment, the constitutional rights to equal protection and due process, and the separation of powers. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief to reinstate the EAC grant and prevent future unlawful terminations.

A coalition of nonprofit organizations that provide services to survivors of domestic violence, victims of sexual assault, and homeless individuals filed suit against the Trump administration to challenge a number of federal grant conditions, including anti-diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEI/DEIA) requirements, “Gender Ideology” conditions under Executive Order 14168, and a “Housing and Urban Development Abortion Condition” under Executive Order 14182. Plaintiffs assert that these conditions are ideologically motivated and arbitrary, lack statutory authorization, and do not advance the purposes of the grant programs. Plaintiffs further assert that the conditions expose grantees to civil and criminal liability under the False Claims Act. Plaintiffs argue that the conditions violate the Administrative Procedure Act, the Separation of Powers, the Spending Clause, and the First and Fifth Amendments, and argue that the rules are otherwise ultra vires. Plaintiffs seek a declaration that the challenged conditions are unlawful, vacatur of the conditions and related grant decisions, and preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting enforcement.

The State of Washington has sued the Trump administration for withholding congressionally-authorized funding for infrastructure protecting against the impacts of climate change. Washington was a recipient of two National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grants for climate resilience that emphasized equity, inclusion and engagement with underserved communities. Both of these grants were cut as a result of President Trump's Executive Order 14151, which orders federal agencies to eliminate any grant or program that involves diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The plaintiff argued that the cancellation of these funds on anti-DEI grounds violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The plaintiff requested that the court declare the cancellation unlawful and order the defendants to restore funding.

The County of Erie in New York sued the Trump administration for its decision to terminate a Retired and Senior Volunteer Program grant, which funded hundreds of senior volunteers in positions across the community, including at food pantries, hospitals, schools, and senior centers. Americorps approved the three-year grant in January 2024. However, in compliance with Executive Orders 14151 and 14173, the Trump administration threatened Erie County with terminating its grant unless the County certified that it did not operate any programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. On April 14, 2025, plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntarily Dismissal after Americorps withdrew its certification requirement.

Civil servants working at the Department of Veterans Affairs sued the Department based on being identified as Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) employees. Their firings were a result of President Trump’s executive order that directed the elimination of all DEIA-related offices and positions in the federal government. None of the 12 terminated civil servants were probationary employees, and none had been subject to complaints of poor performance or misconduct. Plaintiffs argue that the administration is in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. On July 17, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice. 

The National Urban League and the AIDS Foundation of Chicago have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration challenging three executive orders (EO 14151, EO 14168, and EO 14173) that terminate federal grants related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), remove legal recognition for transgender people, and forbid federally-funded organizations from operating DEI programs. As a result of these EOs, federal federal that plaintiffs rely on to promote civil rights and provide direct services to marginalized communities has been terminated. The plaintiffs argue that EOs 14151, 14168, and 14173 violate their First Amendment right to freedom of speech and Fifth Amendment rights to due process and equality under the law. The plaintiffs asked the court to declare the executive orders unconstitutional and issue a permanent injunction preventing the orders from being enforced.

The plaintiffs in this case are nineteen civil servants working on temporary assignments related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). All of the plaintiffs were fired or placed on administrative leave for their temporary involvement with DEIA programs, pursuant to President Trump's Executive Order 14151, which directs the Office of Management and Budget to terminate federal programs and employees promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The plaintiffs have filed a lawsuit against the ODNI and CIA challenging their terminations. They argue that the CIA and ODNI have violated the Administrative Procedure Act and Administrative Leave Act. The plaintiffs also argue that termination for involvement in DEI programs violates their First Amendment right to freedom of speech, as well as their Fifth Amendment right to due process. The plaintiffs request that the court grant them injunctive relief.

A coalition of organizations representing educators and researchers has filed a lawsuit against the National Science Foundation (NSF). The plaintiffs challenge the Trump administration's termination of over $1 billion in scientific grants en masse, without alleging any wrongdoing by the recipients. The plaintiffs argue that these terminations violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the separation of powers, the Spending Clause, the Appropriations Clause, and the Due Process Clause.

The Board of Education for Silver Consolidated Schools filed a suit against the Trump administration for revoking a $6 million grant awarded under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. They argue the termination, which followed the Department’s Dear Colleague Letter, violated multiple constitutional and statutory protections. Specifically, plaintiffs allege infringements of their First Amendment right to free speech and their Fifth Amendment right to due process. They also argue that the administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act and had arbitrary and capricious conduct.

A coalition of higher education workers, academics, restaurant workers, and the City of Baltimore have filed a lawsuit to block two of President Trump's anti-Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) executive orders. On January 20th and 21st, 2025, Trump issued Executive Orders 14151 and 14173, respectively titled "Ending Radical Government DEI Programs and Preferencing" and "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity." Executive Order 14151 directs the Office of Management and Budget to remove DEI and environmental justice programs from all executive branch agencies and government contracts, and Executive Order 14173 threatens to defund and/or conduct civil investigations against any institution, government contractor, or grant award that utilizes DEI programs. The plaintiffs argue that these executive orders violate their First Amendment right to freedom of speech, as well as their Fifth Amendment right to due process.