The Sword Master G ij,j =0 Thoth Unveiling Key policies, reforms, recognitions, and programs removed or scaled back under Trump

This is a compiled list (as of now) of many of the holidays, commemorations, programs, and reforms tied to minorities / cultural-heritage / inclusion that have been scaled back, paused, or removed since Donald J. Trump took office (2025 onward), along with notes on what changed. I focus on what has been lost or reduced, rather than what has been preserved.

Key policies, reforms, recognitions, and programs removed or scaled back under Trump

What was altered / removed / paused	What changed (or was lost) / effect
Executive Order 14151 (“Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing”)	This order calls for the termination of all federal-government DEIA/DEI programs, offices, positions and related activities — including chief-diversity officers, DEIA offices, equity-action plans, DEIA-related grants/contracts, and DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, grantees. (Wikipedia)
Executive Order 14173 (the next-day order)	This rescinded previous policies (including the longstanding Executive Order 11246) that required federal contractors to practice non-discrimination and encouraged affirmative-action / equal-opportunity measures — effectively removing structural obligations for diversity among government contractors. (Wikipedia)
Closure or elimination of DEI-related offices, programs, and grants	Many DEI offices, staff roles, and DEI-related grant/contract opportunities have been shut down within federal agencies. (Wikipedia)
Suspension of “identity-months” and special observances in parts of the federal government / military	For example, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) ordered a pause on all activities and events for multiple cultural and heritage observances, including Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, Pride Month, National American Indian Heritage Month, Holocaust Remembrance Day, Women’s History Month, and more. (Army Times)
Removal of certain minority-history / civil-rights holidays from public-benefit calendars (like national-park fee-free days)	The National Park Service (NPS) removed MLK Day and Juneteenth from its list of “fee-free days” for 2026 — meaning US residents will no longer get free admission to many national parks on those days. Instead, a new free day was added: the birthday of Donald Trump (which coincides with Flag Day). (The Washington Post)
Change in emphasis from group-based recognition (race, heritage, identity) toward a “merit-based / neutral” government / workplace policy	According to the administration’s stated rationale: hiring, promotion, retention in federal government and related contractors/grantees should no longer consider DEI factors — but focus purely on “merit,” which critics argue removes structural supports for historically marginalized groups. (The White House)

What this means in practice / What has been impacted

Fewer institutional supports for minority representation: With DEI programs dismantled, there is less structural effort within federal agencies to recruit, support, or promote historically underrepresented or marginalized groups.

Fewer official celebrations or recognitions of cultural identity / heritage / minority history: Events like Black History Month, Pride Month, heritage-month observances, Holocaust Remembrance Day, and associated programming inside at least some agencies (like military/intelligence) have been paused or canceled. That affects visibility, awareness, education, and community-building around minority heritage.
Reduced access to public-benefit services tied to minority-history holidays: Removing MLK Day and Juneteenth from free-entry days to national parks reduces accessibility for families and communities — especially those relying on free public recreation or community events.
Less diversity among contractors and government-affiliated workplaces: With the rescinding of affirmative-action style policies (via revoking EO 11246), federal contractors are no longer legally required to maintain equal-opportunity hiring quotas or goals — potentially leading to fewer hires of underrepresented minorities, women, or other marginalized groups.
A shift in tone for how the government acknowledges identity / race / heritage / equity: The broad renunciation of DEI and identity-based programs suggests a pivot toward “color-blind” bureaucracy — but critics argue this ignores systemic inequalities that DEI policies were designed to address

What about “legal holidays” — have they been abolished?

No — holidays like MLK Day and Juneteenth remain federal holidays on paper. (Wikipedia)
BUT — their institutional recognition, commemoration, associated programming or public-benefit acknowledgments (like free-entry days at national parks) may be removed or drastically reduced (as shown above).
In other words: the legal designation stays, but many of the practical supports, traditions, or observances that gave those holidays meaning for communities are being undone (or diminished).

This is a list of major lawsuits and legal challenges (≈ 5–10) that have emerged in response to the rollbacks under Donald J. Trump — especially his orders dismantling DEI/DEIA-related programs. Some are ongoing; some have won temporary injunctions or court rulings. I include a brief summary of each.

Major Lawsuits and Legal Challenges Against DEI Rollbacks

Case / Lawsuit	What is being challenged / What plaintiffs say / Key developments
National Urban League v. Trump (filed Feb 19, 2025)	Civil-rights organizations (including the National Urban League, National Fair Housing Alliance, and AIDS Foundation of Chicago) sued to challenge three executive orders issued by Trump (including Executive Order 14151 and Executive Order 14173). They argue the EOs infringe free-speech rights, equal-protection, and due process — because they cut off federal grants to and recognition of organizations serving marginalized communities. The case is still pending. (Wikipedia)
Fell v. Trump (class-action filed Dec 3, 2025)	Four former federal employees — whose jobs were DEI-related — filed a class-action suit challenging the mass termination of DEI personnel across agencies. They assert that the firings violate the First Amendment (free speech), federal civil-service protections, and federal employment law (including anti-discrimination protections under Title VII). (Lieff Cabraser)
Challenge by Higher-Ed & Civil-Rights Groups to Education Department anti-DEI guidance (various)	Following directives that threatened to cut federal funding to schools/universities that continued DEI programs or “race-based decision-making,” groups including the American Federation of Teachers filed suit arguing the new guidance (and threat of funding withdrawal) is unlawful. A federal judge (in Maryland) struck down much of that guidance — finding it violated procedural rules. (KPBS Public Media)
Legal complaint against National Institutes of Health (NIH) over funding cuts	Researchers and health-justice organizations (including the American Public Health Association and United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW)) sued, claiming NIH canceled hundreds of grants — many related to DEI topics, health disparities (race, gender identity), and public-health issues like HIV prevention, Alzheimer’s research, pregnancy care for underserved communities, etc. Plaintiffs argue NIH abandoned its usual peer-review and science-based criteria, in favor of ideological directives. The case highlights the downstream harm to minority communities whose health-outcome research depends on federal funding. (The Guardian)
Preliminary-injunction / nationwide block on enforcement of anti-DEI EOs (early 2025)	Soon after the EOs were issued, a federal judge (in Maryland) granted a nationwide preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the anti-DEI orders. The court found the EOs likely violated constitutional protections (First Amendment free speech, vagueness/overbreadth) and due-process requirements. (DirectEmployers Association)
Federal-contractor and grant-recipient lawsuits / shareholder & financial-risk claims	Some publicly traded companies, non-profits, universities, and other entities have faced lawsuits or shareholder lawsuits arguing that abandoning DEI efforts abruptly, and under political pressure, may expose them to legal or financial liability — especially if “equity-related” grant funding or contract obligations are abruptly removed. (Reuters)

Notable Court Rulings & Legal Developments (so far)

A federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of the anti-DEI EOs, temporarily protecting many DEI-related programs from being shut down. (DirectEmployers Association)
In the education-sector case, a judge struck down federal guidance that threatened schools/universities with funding loss for continuing DEI or race-conscious programs. (KPBS Public Media)
Despite litigation, some parts of the EOs remain enforceable. A three-judge appeals panel partially lifted certain blocks, allowing aspects of the anti-DEI program to move forward — while noting that constitutional and free-speech concerns remain relevant. (The Guardian)

What’s at Stake — Why These Lawsuits Matter (Especially for Minorities)

Many of these lawsuits concern the removal of institutional support for groups historically marginalized — meaning fewer resources, less representation, and reduced protections for racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, immigrants, and others.
Cuts to grant funding — especially in areas like minority-health research, HIV prevention, maternal health disparities, and social-justice programming — can worsen disparities in public health and access to services.
The targeting of DEI offices and personnel — including firings — means loss of advocacy and structural support within government, which can erode enforcement of civil-rights protections over time.
Legal uncertainty: Many organizations, universities, and contractors are forced to choose between compliance (dropping DEI efforts) or risking litigation/losing funding. This chilling effect may discourage future efforts to address systemic inequality.
reuters.com
AP News
AP News
AP News
reuters.com