Plaintiff challenges President Trump's executive orders on "Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing" and "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity," arguing that key provisions are unconstitutional.

Plaintiff argues that the executive orders fail to properly identify or define the specific speech and expressive conduct that is prohibited, and chill Plaintiff from engaging in constitutionally protected speech, in violation of the First Amendment. Plaintiff also argues that the executive orders involve viewpoint discrimination, and that they unconstitutionally condition federal funds on an agreement not to engage in protected speech.

Plaintiff also alleges that the executive orders are unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Finally, Plaintiff alleges that the executive orders exceed the president's statutory authority and usurp Congress's spending powers.

On March 28, 2025, the court issued a nationwide temporary restraining order blocking implementation of the provision requiring grant recipients and contractors to certify they do not operate unlawful DEI programs. The court held that the provision likely violates the First Amendment. Its reference to "programs promoting DEI" targets constitutionally protected speech and advocacy, and the provision is also vague, putting grantees and contractors in a "difficult and perhaps impossible position" of trying to ensure compliance with a rule that leaves key terms undefined.

The court also blocked a separate provision requiring each agency to terminate "equity-related grants," also on First Amendment grounds, but limited the injunction only to the plaintiff, Chicago Women in Trades.