Listen to the article
The Justice Department launched a new initiative Monday to investigate and prosecute recipients of federal funds who violate civil rights laws, marking a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the “Civil Rights Fraud Initiative” in a memorandum released May 19, 2025, detailing how the Department of Justice will use the False Claims Act to target government contractors, universities, and other federal funding recipients that “knowingly violate federal civil rights laws” while certifying compliance.
The initiative establishes a joint enforcement effort between the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and the Fraud Section of the Civil Division. Both divisions will dedicate teams of attorneys to “aggressively pursue” potential violations, with each U.S. Attorney’s Office required to assign at least one prosecutor to these cases.
“Many corporations and schools continue to adhere to racist policies and preferences — albeit camouflaged with cosmetic changes that disguise their discriminatory nature,” Blanche wrote in the memorandum, specifically targeting higher education institutions.
The announcement follows President Donald Trump’s January 21 Executive Order titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” which directed federal agencies to eliminate DEI programs. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued guidance for investigating and penalizing “illegal DEI and DEIA preferences” in both private companies and educational institutions receiving federal funds.
While the memorandum doesn’t specify which section within the Civil Rights Division will lead the effort, historically such work has fallen to the Federal Coordination and Compliance Section, which enforces Title VI civil rights protections.
The initiative’s reach extends beyond the Justice Department. Blanche indicated that the DOJ will coordinate with the Criminal Division and several federal agencies, including the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Labor. Additionally, the DOJ plans to partner with state attorneys general and local law enforcement to “share information and coordinate enforcement actions.”
In an unusual move, the memorandum explicitly encourages private citizens to file lawsuits under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions, which allow whistleblowers to share in monetary recoveries obtained through successful litigation.
The financial implications could be substantial. In fiscal year 2024, the federal government awarded over $770 billion to more than 100,000 companies, all of whom could potentially face scrutiny under this initiative.
Blanche specifically cited several examples of potential violations, stating that “a university that accepts federal funds could violate the [FCA] when it encourages antisemitism, refuses to protect Jewish students, allows men to intrude into women’s bathrooms, or requires women to compete against men in athletic competitions.”
Legal experts note that successful prosecution under the False Claims Act requires proving that contractors or grant recipients knowingly made false statements when certifying compliance with civil rights laws. The FCA includes provisions protecting defendants who had a good-faith belief their programs were lawful, even if later found to be non-compliant.
The initiative represents a significant legal challenge for institutions with DEI programs. Government contractors, universities, and other federal funding recipients now face heightened scrutiny of their diversity initiatives and potential liability under the False Claims Act, which permits treble damages and substantial penalties.
Educational institutions and corporations receiving federal funds are advised to carefully review their existing DEI policies and compliance certifications. Many organizations are already consulting with legal counsel to evaluate potential exposure and implement appropriate risk-mitigation strategies.
As the initiative unfolds, it will likely generate substantial litigation testing the boundaries between prohibited discrimination and legally permissible diversity efforts, creating uncertainty for organizations that have invested in DEI programs in recent years.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
This raises some complex questions around the role of DEI programs and how to balance inclusion efforts with anti-discrimination laws. It’ll be important for the DOJ to provide clear guidance and consistent enforcement.
Absolutely, this is a nuanced issue and I hope the DOJ initiative can find the right balance. Rooting out true fraud is reasonable, but we don’t want to undermine legitimate, well-intentioned DEI programs either.
While I understand the intent behind this initiative, I have some concerns about the potential for overreach or overzealous enforcement. We’ll need to watch this closely to ensure it’s implemented judiciously.
Given the political sensitivity around this topic, I’m curious to see how the public and affected organizations respond. Robust civil rights protections are crucial, but the DOJ will need to tread carefully.
As someone who works in the mining industry, I’m glad to see the DOJ taking these issues seriously. Diversity and inclusion are important, but should never come at the expense of fair and equitable treatment.
As an investor in mining and energy companies, I’ll be watching how this initiative impacts the industry. Compliance with civil rights laws is critical, but overly aggressive enforcement could create unnecessary disruption.
This is a complex and politically-charged topic. I hope the DOJ can provide clear, consistent guidance that upholds civil rights without unduly burdening organizations trying to promote diversity in good faith.
Interesting to see the DOJ taking a hard stance against fraudulent DEI programs that violate civil rights. It’s important to ensure federal funds are used appropriately and not misused for discriminatory practices, even if disguised as ‘diversity’ initiatives.
I agree, the False Claims Act seems like an appropriate legal mechanism to hold organizations accountable if they’re falsely certifying compliance. Transparency and equal treatment should be the priority.