Hitting Home: Executive Order Explainers
Last updated: September 3, 2025 01:36 pm
President Trump has signed a flurry of executive orders in only a few short months, causing fear, uncertainty and in some cases, panic. But don't worry! We have analyzed the ones we believe will impact Mississippians the most and in the next few pages, we provide a break-down of each. Read to find out what they mean, how you might be impacted, how we plan to fight back and what you can do to help.
No matter what lies ahead, we remain committed to defending the freedom of Mississippians.
Let's Breakdown Trump's Executive Orders
DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion)
This executive order orders the termination of DEI offices, programs, positions and equity-related grants.
Brief Description:
Executive Order No. 14173 has the purported purpose of ending “illegal” diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. From the Trump Administration’s view, diversity, equity, and inclusion policies have the effect of giving preferential treatment in violation of our civil-rights laws. Specifically, Section 2 of the EO orders: “all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements.” Following, Section 3(iv)(C)(iii) requires The Office of Budget and Management, alongside the Attorney General, to “Terminate all “diversity,” “equity,” “equitable decision-making,” “equitable deployment of financial and technical assistance,” “advancing equity,” and like mandates, requirements, programs, or activities, as appropriate.” Thus, the Executive Order orders the termination of DEI offices, positions, and programs and equity-related grants. If agencies, government contractors, and private entities refuse to do so, they are threatened with civil investigation.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional: Unconstitutional. The executive order violates the First and Fifth Amendment. It is a violation of the First Amendment for the executive to require the termination of equity-related grants because individual businesses or corporations have a different political or social viewpoint. It also violates the Fifth Amendment because it is vague in its instruction. What constitutes illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and practices is not properly defined, resulting in a failure to properly notify the public of what the law is.
What does this mean at a federal level? The Department of Justice may bring a claim against an individual business, organization, or corporate entity, or pursue litigation, against them for promoting DEI initiatives or programming. Federal workers holding positions that are designated as DEI positions may lose their jobs, if they have not already. Additionally, contractors focused on DEI initiatives or training have lost funding.
Furthermore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is assessing civil rights complaints in a different manner. Now, the door has been opened for individuals to file complaints against corporations and federal agencies for engaging in DEI programming.
What does this mean at a state level? This executive order has no legal effect on the way in which states operate, except for those state institutions that receive federal funds. However, the State of Mississippi has, under the influence of this EO, recently passed an Anti-DEI bill (HB 1193), which Gov. Reeves has signed. Mississippi educators will be subject to civil investigations, and similar to the executive order, public education institutions will be required to explain if they are in compliance with the bill and to report each year any complaints that they receive for non-compliance.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? If you are in a position that is within a DEI office, you may lose your position. If you are a federal contractor receiving federal grants (ex. AmeriCorps), you may be at risk of receiving a complaint or be subject to an investigation for:
- Referencing DEI issues in your contracts. See Mississippi AG Commission issues statement of reviewing and investigating all contracts for references to DEI or the application of funds toward DEI programs. https://agnet.mdac.ms.gov/agManage/uploads/1916.pdf
- Teaching about African American Studies or Chinese Exclusion Act because doing so makes others feel as though you are teaching that “virtually all White people contribute to racism.” https://www.mississippifreepress.org/mississippi-universities-excise-diversity-language-amid-political-attacks-on-dei-initiatives/.
- Training on racial sensitivity or discussing critical race theory. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/05/910053496/trump-tells-agencies-to-end-trainings-on-white-privilege-and-critical-race-theor. See Letter, Training in the Federal Government: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/M-20-34.pdf
According to guidance issued on February 14, 2025, you may also violate the EO by:
- “[U]s[ing] students’ personal essays, writing samples, participation in extracurriculars, or other cues as a means of determining or predicting a student’s race and favoring or disfavoring such students.”
- “[T]reat[ing] a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law.”
- “[U]sing race in decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.”
Under HB 1193, your child will likely no longer receive any education surrounding minority or immigrant history.
- HB 1193 prohibits “public schools, state accredited nonpublic schools and public postsecondary educational institutions from creating, promoting and implementing diversity, equity and inclusion programs.” This bill also prohibits these institutions from using diversity statements and training in hiring, admissions and employment practices.
- Mississippi Department of Education could amend the History curriculum to reflect HB 1193 mandates. Should this happen, educators would likely no longer have permission to:
- Teach or Celebrate Black History Month. See https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4050331/identity-months-dead-at-dod/
- Assign homework or permit homework including a study on the Civil Rights Movement or Gender politics in Mississippi. See https://mississippitoday.org/2025/04/08/mississippi-libraries-ordered-to-delete-academic-research-in-response-to-state-laws/
- Mississippi Department of Education could amend the History curriculum to reflect HB 1193 mandates. Should this happen, educators would likely no longer have permission to:
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU has filed to challenge the Department of Education’s Dear Colleague Letter threatening federal funding cuts for education institutions nationwide for engaging in DEI Efforts.
Additional Lawsuits:
- National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., Case No. 1:25-Cv-00333-ABA (D. Md. 2025). Maryland District court judge entered a preliminary injunction stopping the enforcement of the Executive Order.
- National Urban League v. Trump. OMB, Dept of Labor, et. al. in the District of Columbia District Court – 1:25-cv-00471 (Feb. 19, 2025) https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025.02.19-ECF-1-Complaint.pdf (Suit challenging the Executive Orders 14173, and others, as a violation of the Fifth Amendment for not defining the meaning of “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” as a violation Federal statutes directing that federal funds go toward programs, such as the Ryan White Program, and as a violation of First and Fourth Amendment).
- On Thursday, March 26, 2025, a federal judge for the Northern District of Illinois issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) prohibiting enforcement of portions of Executive Order 14151(“the J20 EO”) and Executive Order 14173 (“the J21 EO”), two of President Trump’s first directives seeking to eliminate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), previously explained here.
What action can I take, if any? Arm yourself with a lawyer should you receive a termination letter without cause. Reach out to ACLU of MS and submit an intake if you feel your First Amendment or Fifth Amendment rights have been violated. Reach out to your elected officials and explain why diversity, equity and inclusion is important to you and your family and how this EO harms you. Or submit your concerns to the Office of Civil Rights: OCR@ed.gov or write to the following address: Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202.
Brief Description:
Executive Order No. 14173 has the purported purpose of ending “illegal” diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. From the Trump Administration’s view, diversity, equity, and inclusion policies have the effect of giving preferential treatment in violation of our civil-rights laws. Specifically, Section 2 of the EO orders: “all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements.” Following, Section 3(iv)(C)(iii) requires The Office of Budget and Management, alongside the Attorney General, to “Terminate all “diversity,” “equity,” “equitable decision-making,” “equitable deployment of financial and technical assistance,” “advancing equity,” and like mandates, requirements, programs, or activities, as appropriate.” Thus, the Executive Order orders the termination of DEI offices, positions, and programs and equity-related grants. If agencies, government contractors, and private entities refuse to do so, they are threatened with civil investigation.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional: Unconstitutional. The executive order violates the First and Fifth Amendment. It is a violation of the First Amendment for the executive to require the termination of equity-related grants because individual businesses or corporations have a different political or social viewpoint. It also violates the Fifth Amendment because it is vague in its instruction. What constitutes illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and practices is not properly defined, resulting in a failure to properly notify the public of what the law is.
What does this mean at a federal level? The Department of Justice may bring a claim against an individual business, organization, or corporate entity, or pursue litigation, against them for promoting DEI initiatives or programming. Federal workers holding positions that are designated as DEI positions may lose their jobs, if they have not already. Additionally, contractors focused on DEI initiatives or training have lost funding.
Furthermore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is assessing civil rights complaints in a different manner. Now, the door has been opened for individuals to file complaints against corporations and federal agencies for engaging in DEI programming.
What does this mean at a state level? This executive order has no legal effect on the way in which states operate, except for those state institutions that receive federal funds. However, the State of Mississippi has, under the influence of this EO, recently passed an Anti-DEI bill (HB 1193), which Gov. Reeves has signed. Mississippi educators will be subject to civil investigations, and similar to the executive order, public education institutions will be required to explain if they are in compliance with the bill and to report each year any complaints that they receive for non-compliance.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? If you are in a position that is within a DEI office, you may lose your position. If you are a federal contractor receiving federal grants (ex. AmeriCorps), you may be at risk of receiving a complaint or be subject to an investigation for:
- Referencing DEI issues in your contracts. See Mississippi AG Commission issues statement of reviewing and investigating all contracts for references to DEI or the application of funds toward DEI programs. https://agnet.mdac.ms.gov/agManage/uploads/1916.pdf
- Teaching about African American Studies or Chinese Exclusion Act because doing so makes others feel as though you are teaching that “virtually all White people contribute to racism.” https://www.mississippifreepress.org/mississippi-universities-excise-diversity-language-amid-political-attacks-on-dei-initiatives/.
- Training on racial sensitivity or discussing critical race theory. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/05/910053496/trump-tells-agencies-to-end-trainings-on-white-privilege-and-critical-race-theor. See Letter, Training in the Federal Government: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/M-20-34.pdf
According to guidance issued on February 14, 2025, you may also violate the EO by:
- “[U]s[ing] students’ personal essays, writing samples, participation in extracurriculars, or other cues as a means of determining or predicting a student’s race and favoring or disfavoring such students.”
- “[T]reat[ing] a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law.”
- “[U]sing race in decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.”
Under HB 1193, your child will likely no longer receive any education surrounding minority or immigrant history.
- HB 1193 prohibits “public schools, state accredited nonpublic schools and public postsecondary educational institutions from creating, promoting and implementing diversity, equity and inclusion programs.” This bill also prohibits these institutions from using diversity statements and training in hiring, admissions and employment practices.
- Mississippi Department of Education could amend the History curriculum to reflect HB 1193 mandates. Should this happen, educators would likely no longer have permission to:
- Teach or Celebrate Black History Month. See https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4050331/identity-months-dead-at-dod/
- Assign homework or permit homework including a study on the Civil Rights Movement or Gender politics in Mississippi. See https://mississippitoday.org/2025/04/08/mississippi-libraries-ordered-to-delete-academic-research-in-response-to-state-laws/
- Mississippi Department of Education could amend the History curriculum to reflect HB 1193 mandates. Should this happen, educators would likely no longer have permission to:
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU has filed to challenge the Department of Education’s Dear Colleague Letter threatening federal funding cuts for education institutions nationwide for engaging in DEI Efforts.
Additional Lawsuits:
- National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., Case No. 1:25-Cv-00333-ABA (D. Md. 2025). Maryland District court judge entered a preliminary injunction stopping the enforcement of the Executive Order.
- National Urban League v. Trump. OMB, Dept of Labor, et. al. in the District of Columbia District Court – 1:25-cv-00471 (Feb. 19, 2025) https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025.02.19-ECF-1-Complaint.pdf (Suit challenging the Executive Orders 14173, and others, as a violation of the Fifth Amendment for not defining the meaning of “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” as a violation Federal statutes directing that federal funds go toward programs, such as the Ryan White Program, and as a violation of First and Fourth Amendment).
- On Thursday, March 26, 2025, a federal judge for the Northern District of Illinois issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) prohibiting enforcement of portions of Executive Order 14151(“the J20 EO”) and Executive Order 14173 (“the J21 EO”), two of President Trump’s first directives seeking to eliminate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), previously explained here.
What action can I take, if any? Arm yourself with a lawyer should you receive a termination letter without cause. Reach out to ACLU of MS and submit an intake if you feel your First Amendment or Fifth Amendment rights have been violated. Reach out to your elected officials and explain why diversity, equity and inclusion is important to you and your family and how this EO harms you. Or submit your concerns to the Office of Civil Rights: OCR@ed.gov or write to the following address: Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202.
Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections
This executive order changes several key parts of the election process: voter registration forms, review of voter lists, voter verification and technology changes, and mail-in ballots.
Brief Description:
This executive order changes several key parts of the election process:
- Changes to Voter Registration Forms:
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is required to revise voter registration forms used nationwide. The new forms will require you to show a photo ID as proof of citizenship to register to vote. - Review of Voter Lists:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will work with other agencies, including the administrator of "DOGE" (a specific government department), to review state voter registration lists. They will also cross-check these lists with federal immigration records and other state records to ensure everyone on the list is eligible to vote. - Voter Verification & Technology Changes:
The order prohibits using bar codes or QR codes in voting systems. It also mandates that voting machines provide a paper record of each vote that voters can verify, ensuring transparency and accuracy in the voting process. - Mail-in Ballots:
The order establishes a requirement that all mail-in ballots must be received by election day to be counted. States that want to receive federal grants for elections will be required to enforce this rule, potentially limiting how many mail-in ballots are accepted.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional?
Many legal experts believe the order may be unconstitutional for the following reasons:
- Limits on the President’s Power:
The President does not have the constitutional authority to direct the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to make changes to voter registration forms. Congress created the EAC, and it is meant to operate independently, not under the President’s control. - States’ Rights Over Elections:
States have the constitutional right to determine their own election procedures. The President cannot force states to require photo IDs or documentation proving citizenship to register voters. Only Congress can make these types of changes, not the President. - Changes to Voter Registration Forms:
Congress set the rules for voter registration forms. The President cannot bypass these laws. The federal form only requires certain minimal information necessary for voter registration. Adding requirements like a photo ID goes against Congress’s laws. - Barriers to Voting:
The requirement for proof of citizenship and the strict deadlines for mail-in ballots could create significant barriers to voting, especially for vulnerable populations. This could violate the constitutional right to vote by making it harder for some people to participate. - Congress Controls Funding for Elections:
The President and the Election Assistance Commission cannot unilaterally decide how federal election funds are distributed. That power lies with Congress. The requirement to meet specific conditions, such as restricting mail-in ballots, is not authorized by Congress.
What does this mean at a federal level?
- Potential for Election Confusion:
The changes could lead to more confusion, delays, and errors in elections. Voter rolls might be more inaccurate, and voters may face unnecessary barriers to participation. This could make elections less fair, slower, and less efficient. - Impact on Vulnerable Populations:
Vulnerable groups, including low-income individuals, seniors, people with disabilities, and people from minority communities, may be disproportionately affected. They may struggle to provide the necessary documentation or meet new requirements, potentially losing their right to vote.
What does this mean at a state level?
- Pressure on States to Change Voting Procedures:
States may have to make significant changes to their voting systems to comply with the new requirements or risk losing federal funding. This could lead to inconsistent election procedures across the country, making it harder for voters to understand how to register or cast their ballots. - Increased Costs for States:
States may also face higher costs to implement these changes, including updating voting systems and processing additional documentation.
What are the most common ways this could impact me?
- Barriers to Voter Registration:
If you don’t currently have photo ID or additional proof of citizenship, this new requirement could stop you from being able to register to vote or cast a ballot. - Mail-in Voting Restrictions:
If you vote by mail, your vote may not count if it isn’t received by election day, even if it’s postmarked on time.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has taken action by filing a federal lawsuit against this executive order. The lawsuit argues that the order is illegal and violates the U.S. Constitution by overstepping the President’s powers. The ACLU is working with other organizations, including the League of Women Voters, NAACP, and several others, to protect voting rights and stop this executive order from being enforced.
What action can I take, if any?
- Contact Your Congressperson:
Reach out to your representatives in Congress to express your concerns about this executive order. Urge them to protect voters' rights and stop the President from overstepping his powers by changing how elections are run. - Get Involved in Advocacy Groups:
Consider joining or supporting organizations like the ACLU or the League of Women Voters, which are actively fighting to protect your right to vote and ensure that elections remain free and fair. - Stay Informed:
Stay up-to-date on any legal challenges or changes to this executive order. Knowing your rights is the first step in protecting them.
Together, We Can Protect Our Right to Vote!
Your voice matters! Stand up for fair and free elections, and help ensure that all Americans have access to their fundamental right to vote.
Brief Description:
This executive order changes several key parts of the election process:
- Changes to Voter Registration Forms:
The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is required to revise voter registration forms used nationwide. The new forms will require you to show a photo ID as proof of citizenship to register to vote. - Review of Voter Lists:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will work with other agencies, including the administrator of "DOGE" (a specific government department), to review state voter registration lists. They will also cross-check these lists with federal immigration records and other state records to ensure everyone on the list is eligible to vote. - Voter Verification & Technology Changes:
The order prohibits using bar codes or QR codes in voting systems. It also mandates that voting machines provide a paper record of each vote that voters can verify, ensuring transparency and accuracy in the voting process. - Mail-in Ballots:
The order establishes a requirement that all mail-in ballots must be received by election day to be counted. States that want to receive federal grants for elections will be required to enforce this rule, potentially limiting how many mail-in ballots are accepted.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional?
Many legal experts believe the order may be unconstitutional for the following reasons:
- Limits on the President’s Power:
The President does not have the constitutional authority to direct the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to make changes to voter registration forms. Congress created the EAC, and it is meant to operate independently, not under the President’s control. - States’ Rights Over Elections:
States have the constitutional right to determine their own election procedures. The President cannot force states to require photo IDs or documentation proving citizenship to register voters. Only Congress can make these types of changes, not the President. - Changes to Voter Registration Forms:
Congress set the rules for voter registration forms. The President cannot bypass these laws. The federal form only requires certain minimal information necessary for voter registration. Adding requirements like a photo ID goes against Congress’s laws. - Barriers to Voting:
The requirement for proof of citizenship and the strict deadlines for mail-in ballots could create significant barriers to voting, especially for vulnerable populations. This could violate the constitutional right to vote by making it harder for some people to participate. - Congress Controls Funding for Elections:
The President and the Election Assistance Commission cannot unilaterally decide how federal election funds are distributed. That power lies with Congress. The requirement to meet specific conditions, such as restricting mail-in ballots, is not authorized by Congress.
What does this mean at a federal level?
- Potential for Election Confusion:
The changes could lead to more confusion, delays, and errors in elections. Voter rolls might be more inaccurate, and voters may face unnecessary barriers to participation. This could make elections less fair, slower, and less efficient. - Impact on Vulnerable Populations:
Vulnerable groups, including low-income individuals, seniors, people with disabilities, and people from minority communities, may be disproportionately affected. They may struggle to provide the necessary documentation or meet new requirements, potentially losing their right to vote.
What does this mean at a state level?
- Pressure on States to Change Voting Procedures:
States may have to make significant changes to their voting systems to comply with the new requirements or risk losing federal funding. This could lead to inconsistent election procedures across the country, making it harder for voters to understand how to register or cast their ballots. - Increased Costs for States:
States may also face higher costs to implement these changes, including updating voting systems and processing additional documentation.
What are the most common ways this could impact me?
- Barriers to Voter Registration:
If you don’t currently have photo ID or additional proof of citizenship, this new requirement could stop you from being able to register to vote or cast a ballot. - Mail-in Voting Restrictions:
If you vote by mail, your vote may not count if it isn’t received by election day, even if it’s postmarked on time.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has taken action by filing a federal lawsuit against this executive order. The lawsuit argues that the order is illegal and violates the U.S. Constitution by overstepping the President’s powers. The ACLU is working with other organizations, including the League of Women Voters, NAACP, and several others, to protect voting rights and stop this executive order from being enforced.
What action can I take, if any?
- Contact Your Congressperson:
Reach out to your representatives in Congress to express your concerns about this executive order. Urge them to protect voters' rights and stop the President from overstepping his powers by changing how elections are run. - Get Involved in Advocacy Groups:
Consider joining or supporting organizations like the ACLU or the League of Women Voters, which are actively fighting to protect your right to vote and ensure that elections remain free and fair. - Stay Informed:
Stay up-to-date on any legal challenges or changes to this executive order. Knowing your rights is the first step in protecting them.
Together, We Can Protect Our Right to Vote!
Your voice matters! Stand up for fair and free elections, and help ensure that all Americans have access to their fundamental right to vote.
Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism & Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government
This is a far-reaching executive order that redefines "sex," while further requiring federal agencies to discriminate against transgender people.
Brief description:
President Trump signed a far-reaching executive order, which redefines “sex” while further requiring federal agencies to discriminate against transgender people.
Trump’s signed order states: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.” The order defines terms like “man” and “woman” based on whether a person “at conception” belongs “to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell” or that “produces the small reproductive cell.”
Trump’s order then directs federal agencies to “enforce laws governing sex-based rights, protections, opportunities, and accommodations” using his cramped definitions, including designating sex on passports and other federal identification documents, or determining where transgender people are confined in federal custody. The order also includes a sweeping mandate to all agencies to “end the Federal funding of gender ideology.” The order does not explain this mandate or how agencies are to accomplish such a task.
- This EO attempts to impose a government-wide policy that transgender, nonbinary, and some intersex people do not exist. It further intends to roll back protections to a time where “biological differences” were used to legitimize legal discrimination. Declares that gender identity is a “false” idea
- Commands that federal funds “shall not be used to promote gender ideology”
- Directs the State Department to stop issuing passports that accurately reflect a trans person’s gender
- Directs the federal Bureau of Prisons to deny incarcerated transgender people healthcare and appropriate housing
- Directs the Department of Housing and Urban Development to reverse rules that give trans people safe access to shelters
Requires federal agencies to remove mention of gender identity from language and forms
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? An executive order alone does not take away any of your rights. Trump’s executive orders by themselves do not change Mississippi or federal statutes, and it has not been incorporated into any official federal regulations issued by any federal administrative agencies. However, some federal agencies have begun taking steps to implement the executive orders, and both federal agencies and Congress could take additional future actions that would impact Mississippians.
Trump is often acting outside of the constitutional authority of the executive branch through executive order. This EO is unconstitutional and threatens the freedom of self-determination and self-expression for all.
What does this mean at a federal level? Very few executive orders change policy immediately, and they cannot change laws passed by Congress or protections guaranteed by the Constitution. It is still unclear how the Trump administration will enforce this order as applied to educational settings, health care access, housing, federally-funded programs, and many other areas where federal law or policy references “sex” or “gender.”
The order specifically calls on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ignore the guidelines of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) and enforce a blanket policy forcing transgender women into men’s prisons and detention centers against their will. This puts them at a severely heightened risk of sexual assault and abuse by other incarcerated persons and prison staff. The order also mandates that BOP withdraw critical health care from trans people in federal prison.
We have seen immediate impacts on access to updated sex designations on U.S. passports. Transgender people frequently update the sex designation on documents like birth certificates, driver’s licenses, and passports to reflect their gender identity rather than the sex they were assigned at birth. Requiring transgender peoples’ passports to show the sex they were assigned at birth effectively outs them as transgender whenever they have to present the document.
All information on gender issues relating to travel has been taken down from federal agency websites.
What does this mean at a federal level? Very few executive orders change policy immediately, and they cannot change laws passed by Congress or protections guaranteed by the Constitution. It is still unclear how the Trump administration will enforce this order as applied to educational settings, health care access, housing, federally-funded programs, and many other areas where federal law or policy references “sex” or “gender.”
The order specifically calls on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ignore the guidelines of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) and enforce a blanket policy forcing transgender women into men’s prisons and detention centers against their will. This puts them at a severely heightened risk of sexual assault and abuse by other incarcerated persons and prison staff. The order also mandates that BOP withdraw critical health care from trans people in federal prison.
We have seen immediate impacts on access to updated sex designations on U.S. passports. Transgender people frequently update the sex designation on documents like birth certificates, driver’s licenses, and passports to reflect their gender identity rather than the sex they were assigned at birth. Requiring transgender peoples’ passports to show the sex they were assigned at birth effectively outs them as transgender whenever they have to present the document.
All information on gender issues relating to travel has been taken down from federal agency websites.
What does this mean at a state level? Transgender people have previously applied for passports to have easier access to gender-affirming identity documentation, but that is no longer an option. Transgender folx in Mississippi must seek state remedies to update their ID documents such as changing their name and gender marker in state court.
Travel within Mississippi remains the same. Mississippi law allows people to change their name through state court.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? By stoking fears about trans people, those pushing anti-trans narratives and policies are denying transgender people the rights, freedoms, and health care we need to live. This dehumanizing strategy is intended to sow division, and one form of personal resistance is to find ways to take care of yourself. Stay active, find joy, support your community and stay informed.
If you are a transgender Mississippian, act immediately to ensure your access to accurate identity documents. For more information, visit https://www.aclu-ms.org/en/identity-document-resources
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU has filed a lawsuit, Orr v. Trump, challenging the State Department’s refusal to issue passports with accurate sex designations on behalf of seven transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people. https://www.aclu.org/trumps-assault-on-transgender-rights/qa-orr-v-trump
The ACLU has also filed a lawsuit, Kingdom v. Trump, on behalf of three transgender people serving sentences in federal prisons, arguing this EO violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual punishments,” which federal courts have long held includes the denial of medically-necessary health care, including access to gender-affirming care.
https://www.aclu.org/cases/kingdom-v-trump
What action can I take, if any? Update your state identification documents ASAP. For more information, visit https://www.aclu-ms.org/en/identity-document-resources.
Although federal law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, during this administration we do not recommend attempting to file discrimination complaints on those bases with any federal agency.
More concrete ACLU suggestions to push back are found here:
https://www.aclu.org/firewall-for-freedom-states-must-safeguard-our-rights
Brief description:
President Trump signed a far-reaching executive order, which redefines “sex” while further requiring federal agencies to discriminate against transgender people.
Trump’s signed order states: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.” The order defines terms like “man” and “woman” based on whether a person “at conception” belongs “to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell” or that “produces the small reproductive cell.”
Trump’s order then directs federal agencies to “enforce laws governing sex-based rights, protections, opportunities, and accommodations” using his cramped definitions, including designating sex on passports and other federal identification documents, or determining where transgender people are confined in federal custody. The order also includes a sweeping mandate to all agencies to “end the Federal funding of gender ideology.” The order does not explain this mandate or how agencies are to accomplish such a task.
- This EO attempts to impose a government-wide policy that transgender, nonbinary, and some intersex people do not exist. It further intends to roll back protections to a time where “biological differences” were used to legitimize legal discrimination. Declares that gender identity is a “false” idea
- Commands that federal funds “shall not be used to promote gender ideology”
- Directs the State Department to stop issuing passports that accurately reflect a trans person’s gender
- Directs the federal Bureau of Prisons to deny incarcerated transgender people healthcare and appropriate housing
- Directs the Department of Housing and Urban Development to reverse rules that give trans people safe access to shelters
Requires federal agencies to remove mention of gender identity from language and forms
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? An executive order alone does not take away any of your rights. Trump’s executive orders by themselves do not change Mississippi or federal statutes, and it has not been incorporated into any official federal regulations issued by any federal administrative agencies. However, some federal agencies have begun taking steps to implement the executive orders, and both federal agencies and Congress could take additional future actions that would impact Mississippians.
Trump is often acting outside of the constitutional authority of the executive branch through executive order. This EO is unconstitutional and threatens the freedom of self-determination and self-expression for all.
What does this mean at a federal level? Very few executive orders change policy immediately, and they cannot change laws passed by Congress or protections guaranteed by the Constitution. It is still unclear how the Trump administration will enforce this order as applied to educational settings, health care access, housing, federally-funded programs, and many other areas where federal law or policy references “sex” or “gender.”
The order specifically calls on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ignore the guidelines of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) and enforce a blanket policy forcing transgender women into men’s prisons and detention centers against their will. This puts them at a severely heightened risk of sexual assault and abuse by other incarcerated persons and prison staff. The order also mandates that BOP withdraw critical health care from trans people in federal prison.
We have seen immediate impacts on access to updated sex designations on U.S. passports. Transgender people frequently update the sex designation on documents like birth certificates, driver’s licenses, and passports to reflect their gender identity rather than the sex they were assigned at birth. Requiring transgender peoples’ passports to show the sex they were assigned at birth effectively outs them as transgender whenever they have to present the document.
All information on gender issues relating to travel has been taken down from federal agency websites.
What does this mean at a federal level? Very few executive orders change policy immediately, and they cannot change laws passed by Congress or protections guaranteed by the Constitution. It is still unclear how the Trump administration will enforce this order as applied to educational settings, health care access, housing, federally-funded programs, and many other areas where federal law or policy references “sex” or “gender.”
The order specifically calls on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ignore the guidelines of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) and enforce a blanket policy forcing transgender women into men’s prisons and detention centers against their will. This puts them at a severely heightened risk of sexual assault and abuse by other incarcerated persons and prison staff. The order also mandates that BOP withdraw critical health care from trans people in federal prison.
We have seen immediate impacts on access to updated sex designations on U.S. passports. Transgender people frequently update the sex designation on documents like birth certificates, driver’s licenses, and passports to reflect their gender identity rather than the sex they were assigned at birth. Requiring transgender peoples’ passports to show the sex they were assigned at birth effectively outs them as transgender whenever they have to present the document.
All information on gender issues relating to travel has been taken down from federal agency websites.
What does this mean at a state level? Transgender people have previously applied for passports to have easier access to gender-affirming identity documentation, but that is no longer an option. Transgender folx in Mississippi must seek state remedies to update their ID documents such as changing their name and gender marker in state court.
Travel within Mississippi remains the same. Mississippi law allows people to change their name through state court.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? By stoking fears about trans people, those pushing anti-trans narratives and policies are denying transgender people the rights, freedoms, and health care we need to live. This dehumanizing strategy is intended to sow division, and one form of personal resistance is to find ways to take care of yourself. Stay active, find joy, support your community and stay informed.
If you are a transgender Mississippian, act immediately to ensure your access to accurate identity documents. For more information, visit https://www.aclu-ms.org/en/identity-document-resources
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU has filed a lawsuit, Orr v. Trump, challenging the State Department’s refusal to issue passports with accurate sex designations on behalf of seven transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people. https://www.aclu.org/trumps-assault-on-transgender-rights/qa-orr-v-trump
The ACLU has also filed a lawsuit, Kingdom v. Trump, on behalf of three transgender people serving sentences in federal prisons, arguing this EO violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual punishments,” which federal courts have long held includes the denial of medically-necessary health care, including access to gender-affirming care.
https://www.aclu.org/cases/kingdom-v-trump
What action can I take, if any? Update your state identification documents ASAP. For more information, visit https://www.aclu-ms.org/en/identity-document-resources.
Although federal law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, during this administration we do not recommend attempting to file discrimination complaints on those bases with any federal agency.
More concrete ACLU suggestions to push back are found here:
https://www.aclu.org/firewall-for-freedom-states-must-safeguard-our-rights
Closure of the Department of Education
This executive roder seeks to return authority over education to the States and local communities to have greater control over educational policies and practices.
Brief Description:
On March 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the Department of Education (ED) to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities." The order emphasizes empowering states and local communities to have greater control over educational policies and practices.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? While the President can issue executive orders to direct the operations of the executive branch, the ED was established by Congress through the Department of Education Organization Act of 1979. Therefore, fully dissolving the department would require legislative action by Congress. Unilateral attempts to dismantle it via executive order may face legal challenges asserting overreach of executive authority.
What Does This Mean at a Federal Level? At the federal level, the executive order initiates steps toward dismantling the ED. This includes significant staff reductions and the proposed transfer of key functions to other federal agencies—for example, shifting the administration of federal student loans to the Small Business Administration (SBA) and special education programs to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
While framed as a decentralization effort, this restructuring threatens vital federal protections. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which guarantees children with disabilities access to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), could be severely weakened without the ED to enforce compliance. Millions of students who rely on IDEA for services like specialized instruction and assistive technology may face disruptions or lose access entirely.
Additionally, reports indicate that the ED has already eliminated staff in seven of the Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) 12 regional offices. This undermines federal capacity to investigate and address discrimination in schools—leaving students without crucial protections based on race, color, national origin, sex, LGBTQ+ status, disability, and more. Weakening the OCR makes it harder for students and families to seek justice and allows discriminatory practices—like the disproportionate disciplining of students of color and students with disabilities, or denial of accommodations for English learners—to persist unchecked.
Crucial federal programs are also at risk, including Title I funding for schools with high concentrations of low-income students, and financial aid programs such as student loans, Pell Grants, and work-study. Stripping the ED of these responsibilities threatens to deepen existing racial and economic disparities in education.
What Does This Mean at a State Level? While it’s true that states already have significant control over education—including setting curriculum standards, teacher certification requirements, and local assessments—the federal government still plays a critical role in enforcing civil rights laws, distributing billions in federal funding, and ensuring national protections for vulnerable student populations.
The executive order would shift responsibilities that have traditionally been federally enforced—such as monitoring compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Title VI (race and national origin discrimination), Title IX (sex-based discrimination), and Section 504 (disability protections)—entirely to the states. Most states do not currently have the infrastructure, resources, or legal authority in place to effectively take on these responsibilities. Without those federal guardrails, students—especially those from marginalized or underserved communities—could see inconsistent protections and services depending on where they live.
The ED was created in part from a desire to ensure that all individuals, regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex, have access to quality educational opportunities. For example, without federal oversight, implementation of IDEA could vary widely—some states may maintain strong protections for students with disabilities, while others may struggle to provide even the basic services required by law. This risks creating a patchwork of unequal education systems, where students' rights and access to resources depend heavily on where they live.
The loss of federal enforcement doesn’t just shift technical responsibilities to states—it places the burden of protecting students’ rights squarely on systems that may not be equipped or willing to do so. States will be expected to take on critical roles in preventing discrimination, providing language access for English learners, and ensuring adequate support for low-income schools. Without strong and consistent infrastructure across all states, students in historically marginalized communities are at risk of falling even further behind, deepening existing inequities in education across the country.
What are the most common ways this could impact me?
1. Disruption of Special Education Services
IDEA guarantees students with disabilities the right to a free and appropriate public education. If federal oversight is removed and responsibility shifts to individual states, how special education services are delivered—and how consistently they’re funded—could vary significantly.
What this means for you:
- Your child may see delays, reductions, or changes in their Individualized Education Program (IEP).
- The quality and availability of specialized services like speech therapy, behavioral support, or assistive technology may decrease—especially in underfunded districts.
2. Unequal Access Across States
Without federal enforcement, protections under IDEA could be interpreted and implemented differently from state to state.
What this means for you:
- If you move, your child’s services might not transfer seamlessly.
- You may face more hurdles advocating for the services your child needs, depending on where you live.
3. Fewer Avenues for Accountability
The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) plays a vital role in investigating complaints about disability discrimination in schools. Reports indicate that staff have already been terminated in several regional OCR offices.
What this means for you:
- If your child is denied services or experiences discrimination, there may be fewer options to file complaints or seek justice.
- Violations of your child’s rights could go unaddressed due to reduced federal oversight and enforcement.
4. Risk to Federal Funding That Supports Special Education
The elimination of the ED could put federal programs like Title I at risk, which support schools serving students with the greatest needs—including many students with disabilities.
What this means for you:
- Your child’s school may lose critical funding for staff, programs, and support services.
- Reduced resources may lead to larger class sizes, fewer specialists, and less support for inclusive classrooms.
5. Greater Burden on Families to Navigate the System
As responsibilities shift to state and local authorities, navigating special education services could become more confusing and inconsistent.
What this means for you:
- You may need to advocate more forcefully to get the services your child is entitled to.
- Families without time, resources, or legal knowledge may be left behind in the process.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has a long history of advocating for civil rights in education, including protecting the rights of students with disabilities and ensuring equal access to quality learning environments. For over a hundred years, the ACLU has been at the forefront of the fight for educational equity—most notably in Brown v. Board of Education, where we argued that “segregation and equality cannot coexist. That which is unequal in fact cannot be equal in law.” Yet today, far too many marginalized students are still denied access to quality education, a reality that continues to betray the core promise of Brown.
In response to actions that may undermine these rights, the ACLU has consistently engaged in litigation and advocacy.
We are very concerned that MS will fail to protect students with special needs, especially without a federal mandate. Prior to the executive order, we formed the Mississippi Special Education Coalition, a statewide alliance of advocacy organizations dedicated to tackling systemic challenges in special education and school discipline across Mississippi. MSEC has launched a statewide initiative focused on safeguarding the educational rights of disabled students and their families in both public and private schools. As part of this effort, MSEC provides ongoing Special Education Continuing Legal Education (CLE) sessions and pro bono clinics to train attorneys, advocates, parents, and educators, equipping them with the skills needed to effectively advocate for children with special needs and ensure their educational rights are upheld.
Additionally, MSEC is actively engaged in policy and regulatory compliance efforts at the local and state levels, producing an annual report on the state of special education in Mississippi and offering policy recommendations to strengthen enforcement of special education laws within school districts. The ACLU-MS will continue to serve children with special needs and their families.
What action can I take, if any?
- Stay Informed: Keep abreast of developments related to the executive order and understand how changes may affect your educational rights or those of your children.
- Engage with State and Local Education Authorities: As states assume more control, participating in local school board meetings and state education forums becomes crucial. Your input can influence how education policies are shaped in your community.
- Advocate for Accountability: Support organizations like the ACLU and initiatives that promote transparency and accountability in education policy. This includes backing groups that monitor civil rights compliance and equitable resource distribution in schools.
- Seek Legal Advice if Necessary: If you believe that changes resulting from the executive order infringe upon your or your child's educational rights, consult legal experts or advocacy organizations for guidance on potential remedies.
By taking these steps, you can play an active and important role in shaping the educational landscape during this period of transition.
Brief Description:
On March 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the Department of Education (ED) to "take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities." The order emphasizes empowering states and local communities to have greater control over educational policies and practices.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? While the President can issue executive orders to direct the operations of the executive branch, the ED was established by Congress through the Department of Education Organization Act of 1979. Therefore, fully dissolving the department would require legislative action by Congress. Unilateral attempts to dismantle it via executive order may face legal challenges asserting overreach of executive authority.
What Does This Mean at a Federal Level? At the federal level, the executive order initiates steps toward dismantling the ED. This includes significant staff reductions and the proposed transfer of key functions to other federal agencies—for example, shifting the administration of federal student loans to the Small Business Administration (SBA) and special education programs to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
While framed as a decentralization effort, this restructuring threatens vital federal protections. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which guarantees children with disabilities access to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), could be severely weakened without the ED to enforce compliance. Millions of students who rely on IDEA for services like specialized instruction and assistive technology may face disruptions or lose access entirely.
Additionally, reports indicate that the ED has already eliminated staff in seven of the Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) 12 regional offices. This undermines federal capacity to investigate and address discrimination in schools—leaving students without crucial protections based on race, color, national origin, sex, LGBTQ+ status, disability, and more. Weakening the OCR makes it harder for students and families to seek justice and allows discriminatory practices—like the disproportionate disciplining of students of color and students with disabilities, or denial of accommodations for English learners—to persist unchecked.
Crucial federal programs are also at risk, including Title I funding for schools with high concentrations of low-income students, and financial aid programs such as student loans, Pell Grants, and work-study. Stripping the ED of these responsibilities threatens to deepen existing racial and economic disparities in education.
What Does This Mean at a State Level? While it’s true that states already have significant control over education—including setting curriculum standards, teacher certification requirements, and local assessments—the federal government still plays a critical role in enforcing civil rights laws, distributing billions in federal funding, and ensuring national protections for vulnerable student populations.
The executive order would shift responsibilities that have traditionally been federally enforced—such as monitoring compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Title VI (race and national origin discrimination), Title IX (sex-based discrimination), and Section 504 (disability protections)—entirely to the states. Most states do not currently have the infrastructure, resources, or legal authority in place to effectively take on these responsibilities. Without those federal guardrails, students—especially those from marginalized or underserved communities—could see inconsistent protections and services depending on where they live.
The ED was created in part from a desire to ensure that all individuals, regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex, have access to quality educational opportunities. For example, without federal oversight, implementation of IDEA could vary widely—some states may maintain strong protections for students with disabilities, while others may struggle to provide even the basic services required by law. This risks creating a patchwork of unequal education systems, where students' rights and access to resources depend heavily on where they live.
The loss of federal enforcement doesn’t just shift technical responsibilities to states—it places the burden of protecting students’ rights squarely on systems that may not be equipped or willing to do so. States will be expected to take on critical roles in preventing discrimination, providing language access for English learners, and ensuring adequate support for low-income schools. Without strong and consistent infrastructure across all states, students in historically marginalized communities are at risk of falling even further behind, deepening existing inequities in education across the country.
What are the most common ways this could impact me?
1. Disruption of Special Education Services
IDEA guarantees students with disabilities the right to a free and appropriate public education. If federal oversight is removed and responsibility shifts to individual states, how special education services are delivered—and how consistently they’re funded—could vary significantly.
What this means for you:
- Your child may see delays, reductions, or changes in their Individualized Education Program (IEP).
- The quality and availability of specialized services like speech therapy, behavioral support, or assistive technology may decrease—especially in underfunded districts.
2. Unequal Access Across States
Without federal enforcement, protections under IDEA could be interpreted and implemented differently from state to state.
What this means for you:
- If you move, your child’s services might not transfer seamlessly.
- You may face more hurdles advocating for the services your child needs, depending on where you live.
3. Fewer Avenues for Accountability
The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) plays a vital role in investigating complaints about disability discrimination in schools. Reports indicate that staff have already been terminated in several regional OCR offices.
What this means for you:
- If your child is denied services or experiences discrimination, there may be fewer options to file complaints or seek justice.
- Violations of your child’s rights could go unaddressed due to reduced federal oversight and enforcement.
4. Risk to Federal Funding That Supports Special Education
The elimination of the ED could put federal programs like Title I at risk, which support schools serving students with the greatest needs—including many students with disabilities.
What this means for you:
- Your child’s school may lose critical funding for staff, programs, and support services.
- Reduced resources may lead to larger class sizes, fewer specialists, and less support for inclusive classrooms.
5. Greater Burden on Families to Navigate the System
As responsibilities shift to state and local authorities, navigating special education services could become more confusing and inconsistent.
What this means for you:
- You may need to advocate more forcefully to get the services your child is entitled to.
- Families without time, resources, or legal knowledge may be left behind in the process.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has a long history of advocating for civil rights in education, including protecting the rights of students with disabilities and ensuring equal access to quality learning environments. For over a hundred years, the ACLU has been at the forefront of the fight for educational equity—most notably in Brown v. Board of Education, where we argued that “segregation and equality cannot coexist. That which is unequal in fact cannot be equal in law.” Yet today, far too many marginalized students are still denied access to quality education, a reality that continues to betray the core promise of Brown.
In response to actions that may undermine these rights, the ACLU has consistently engaged in litigation and advocacy.
We are very concerned that MS will fail to protect students with special needs, especially without a federal mandate. Prior to the executive order, we formed the Mississippi Special Education Coalition, a statewide alliance of advocacy organizations dedicated to tackling systemic challenges in special education and school discipline across Mississippi. MSEC has launched a statewide initiative focused on safeguarding the educational rights of disabled students and their families in both public and private schools. As part of this effort, MSEC provides ongoing Special Education Continuing Legal Education (CLE) sessions and pro bono clinics to train attorneys, advocates, parents, and educators, equipping them with the skills needed to effectively advocate for children with special needs and ensure their educational rights are upheld.
Additionally, MSEC is actively engaged in policy and regulatory compliance efforts at the local and state levels, producing an annual report on the state of special education in Mississippi and offering policy recommendations to strengthen enforcement of special education laws within school districts. The ACLU-MS will continue to serve children with special needs and their families.
What action can I take, if any?
- Stay Informed: Keep abreast of developments related to the executive order and understand how changes may affect your educational rights or those of your children.
- Engage with State and Local Education Authorities: As states assume more control, participating in local school board meetings and state education forums becomes crucial. Your input can influence how education policies are shaped in your community.
- Advocate for Accountability: Support organizations like the ACLU and initiatives that promote transparency and accountability in education policy. This includes backing groups that monitor civil rights compliance and equitable resource distribution in schools.
- Seek Legal Advice if Necessary: If you believe that changes resulting from the executive order infringe upon your or your child's educational rights, consult legal experts or advocacy organizations for guidance on potential remedies.
By taking these steps, you can play an active and important role in shaping the educational landscape during this period of transition.
Litigation Freeze Prevents DOJ from Pursing New Civil Right Cases
Done by DOJ memo rather than by executive order, in January 2025, the Trump administration halted much of the work of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.
Brief description:
Upon entering office the Trump Administration in January 2025 halted much of the work of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Unlike other actions, this was done by DOJ memo rather than by EO. The Civil Rights Division is tasked with enforcing laws prohibiting discrimination, including disability rights, housing, education, and civil rights, and tasked with enforcing voting and election laws. The Trump Administration also suggested that it may reconsider agreements and consent decrees entered during the Biden Administration by the Civil Rights Division.
This leaves a large gap in the enforcement of federal antidiscrimination laws. It could also result in the abandonment of agreements reached in Louisville, KY after the police killing of Breonna Taylor and with Minneapolis after the murder of George Floyd.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? While legal, this move exhibits a turn away from the Biden Administration’s focus on civil rights enforcement, which included the investigation of law enforcement agencies across the country that were suspected or admitted to have engaged in patterns and practices of unconstitutional conduct.
What does this mean at a federal level? The Civil Rights Division has a “litigation freeze,” which prevents it from filing any new cases. The Civil Rights Division may also back out of previous agreements it reached with such places as Louisville and Minneapolis.
What does this mean at a state level? Much of the discrimination that occurs across the country often goes unchecked, whether denying a disabled student equitable access to education or using excessive force during an arrest by a police officer. The federal government and the Civil Rights Division can act as a backstop to help ensure people’s civil rights are upheld and people are not discriminated against. Without the federal government, a significant gap opens leaving many civil rights violations and discriminatory acts unaddressed.
For example, the Civil Rights Division investigated two law enforcement agencies in Mississippi, the Lexington Police Department and the Rankin County Sheriff. After a year-long investigation, the DOJ issued a report detailing widespread abuse and unconstitutional practices by LPD. The DOJ was at the beginning stages of its investigation into the Rankin County Sheriff after egregious abuse by its “Goon Squad” came to light. Despite substantial findings of misconduct in Lexington and admitted misconduct in Rankin County, the DOJ’s work to reform these departments has now ceased.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? If you, a family member, a friend or neighbor are subject to discrimination at school, in housing, at your workplace or by the police, you are not currently able to complain to or enlist the help of the Department of Justice who in the past was tasked with addressing these issues.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU of MS and our partners ensure parents and students with special needs are able to advocate for their rights at school through a special education coalition. In the area of policing, the ACLU of MS and its partners helped bring to light systematic misconduct by police in Lexington, MS and currently has sued that police department on behalf of four individuals whose rights were violated. The ACLU of MS also advocates for the rights of LGBTQ students in school.
What action can I take, if any?
- Reach out to your elected officials and explain to them the importance of enforcing civil rights laws and combatting discrimination including by telling your own story.
- Donate to organizations like the ACLU of MS who ensure our country’s civil rights and anti-discrimination laws are upheld.
- Reach out to the ACLU of MS if you think your rights have been violated, https://www.aclu-ms.org/en.
Brief description:
Upon entering office the Trump Administration in January 2025 halted much of the work of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Unlike other actions, this was done by DOJ memo rather than by EO. The Civil Rights Division is tasked with enforcing laws prohibiting discrimination, including disability rights, housing, education, and civil rights, and tasked with enforcing voting and election laws. The Trump Administration also suggested that it may reconsider agreements and consent decrees entered during the Biden Administration by the Civil Rights Division.
This leaves a large gap in the enforcement of federal antidiscrimination laws. It could also result in the abandonment of agreements reached in Louisville, KY after the police killing of Breonna Taylor and with Minneapolis after the murder of George Floyd.
Is this Constitutional or Unconstitutional? While legal, this move exhibits a turn away from the Biden Administration’s focus on civil rights enforcement, which included the investigation of law enforcement agencies across the country that were suspected or admitted to have engaged in patterns and practices of unconstitutional conduct.
What does this mean at a federal level? The Civil Rights Division has a “litigation freeze,” which prevents it from filing any new cases. The Civil Rights Division may also back out of previous agreements it reached with such places as Louisville and Minneapolis.
What does this mean at a state level? Much of the discrimination that occurs across the country often goes unchecked, whether denying a disabled student equitable access to education or using excessive force during an arrest by a police officer. The federal government and the Civil Rights Division can act as a backstop to help ensure people’s civil rights are upheld and people are not discriminated against. Without the federal government, a significant gap opens leaving many civil rights violations and discriminatory acts unaddressed.
For example, the Civil Rights Division investigated two law enforcement agencies in Mississippi, the Lexington Police Department and the Rankin County Sheriff. After a year-long investigation, the DOJ issued a report detailing widespread abuse and unconstitutional practices by LPD. The DOJ was at the beginning stages of its investigation into the Rankin County Sheriff after egregious abuse by its “Goon Squad” came to light. Despite substantial findings of misconduct in Lexington and admitted misconduct in Rankin County, the DOJ’s work to reform these departments has now ceased.
What are the most common ways this could impact me? If you, a family member, a friend or neighbor are subject to discrimination at school, in housing, at your workplace or by the police, you are not currently able to complain to or enlist the help of the Department of Justice who in the past was tasked with addressing these issues.
What has the ACLU done to protect me? The ACLU of MS and our partners ensure parents and students with special needs are able to advocate for their rights at school through a special education coalition. In the area of policing, the ACLU of MS and its partners helped bring to light systematic misconduct by police in Lexington, MS and currently has sued that police department on behalf of four individuals whose rights were violated. The ACLU of MS also advocates for the rights of LGBTQ students in school.
What action can I take, if any?
- Reach out to your elected officials and explain to them the importance of enforcing civil rights laws and combatting discrimination including by telling your own story.
- Donate to organizations like the ACLU of MS who ensure our country’s civil rights and anti-discrimination laws are upheld.
- Reach out to the ACLU of MS if you think your rights have been violated, https://www.aclu-ms.org/en.
Stay Informed
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.