A federal judge in Maryland has left President Donald Trump’s federal contractor DEI order in force for now, rejecting a request to block it while litigation continues. In an October 14 opinion, U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson said the order’s contested contract language reaches conduct already prohibited by federal antidiscrimination law. Five associations had asked him to pause the order, citing its possible effect on members that hold government contracts.
- Executive order
- Executive Order 14398, issued March 26, 2026
- Preliminary injunction
- Denied October 14, 2026
- Earlier contract deadline
- July 24, 2026, for agencies to modify existing contracts
The contract clause covers employment decisions
The March 26 executive order directs federal agencies to add contract language barring disparate treatment based on race or ethnicity in recruitment, employment, contracting, program participation, and the allocation of resources. In his signed opinion, Abelson said the phrase “disparate treatment” has a settled meaning in federal law: intentional discrimination.
The clause says a contract can be canceled, terminated, or suspended if a contractor or subcontractor fails to comply. It also says a contractor may be declared ineligible for future federal contracts. The judge’s reading limits the clause to conduct already prohibited by federal antidiscrimination law. It does not erase the clause from contracts.
The associations lost their request for an immediate pause
Five associations brought the challenge. Their members include colleges and universities, construction contractors, and people working for federal contractors. They argued that the order was too broad and vague and could chill lawful speech and activity, as HR Dive reported after the ruling.
Abelson found that the groups had not shown they were likely to win their constitutional claims or that they faced irreparable harm warranting emergency relief. The opinion addresses a request for a preliminary injunction. It does not decide the lawsuit’s final merits or settle whether the order is constitutional.
The ruling sets no new compliance date
The opinion’s procedural history says the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council had directed agencies to modify existing contracts by July 24. The government had also agreed to delay False Claims Act enforcement tied to the order until August 7. Both dates had passed by the time the judge ruled on October 14.
The ruling leaves the order in force while the case continues, with a narrower interpretation of what the disputed language prohibits. Abelson did not announce a replacement deadline. For workers and employers connected to government contracts, the immediate change is clarity about the provision’s stated reach, while the broader legal challenge remains unresolved.
Primary source
Check the original source
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland is the source to consult for the underlying data, statement, ruling or live context.