Trump-Aligned Legal Group Expands Civil Rights Complaints Against Virginia Cities Over DEI Practices

America First Legal (AFL) has intensified its campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in Democratic-leaning municipalities by filing civil rights complaints against three Virginia cities. The organization has asked the Department of Justice to investigate Richmond, Alexandria, and Arlington for allegedly violating Title VI and Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as President Donald Trump’s recent Executive Orders targeting DEI programs.

The complaints allege that these cities are improperly using federal grant money to fund discriminatory practices across various city departments and public services. AFL contends that these practices constitute systemic discrimination based on race and other protected characteristics.

“Race-based policies do not create justice—they destroy it,” AFL stated in its press release. “As Virginia lurches to the Left, America First Legal will continue leading the fight to ensure that federal funds never support programs that divide citizens, weaken public safety, or erode the rule of law.”

These latest filings follow similar complaints AFL has lodged against the cities of Austin, Seattle, and Portland. The Justice Department has already launched an investigation into Austin’s DEI practices in response to the group’s advocacy.

In the complaint against Richmond, AFL accuses Virginia’s capital city of creating a “government-wide pattern or practice of discrimination” by embedding racial equity initiatives throughout all departments. The legal group specifically cites hiring materials it claims contain discriminatory elements, mandatory DEI training programs, Richmond’s Equity Agenda, and the establishment of an Office of Equity and Inclusion.

The complaint alleges Richmond’s fiscal budgets have measured departmental performance based on employee participation in “equity training,” with a stated goal of complete participation. AFL further claims that initiatives such as Richmond’s “Climate Equity Action Plan” and “Racial Equity and Environmental Justice program” improperly direct resources to specific racial groups rather than distributing them based on merit.

Similar allegations have been made against Alexandria and Arlington. In Alexandria, AFL targets the city’s Office of Race and Social Equity (RASE), which it claims works to embed “racial and social equity into all city policies, programs, decisions, and environments.” The complaint specifically highlights the Alexandria Police Department’s “Racial Equity Plan,” which AFL alleges pushes hiring preferences based on demographic considerations rather than qualifications.

In Arlington, AFL’s complaint focuses on the county’s “Affirmative Action Plan,” which allegedly establishes “underutilization goals” based on race for specific job categories. According to the complaint, these goals include increasing minority representation in senior administration from 35.23% to 45%, and in police officer positions from 27.38% to 38%.

To demonstrate the practical consequences of these policies, AFL cited a controversial incident at an Arlington public school last year involving a transgender student, claiming it showed how “race- and sex-conscious policies not only violate federal civil rights law but also compromise student safety.”

The legal group has already claimed one victory in its campaign against municipal DEI programs. Last month, AFL reached a settlement with the City of Philadelphia over alleged race- and sex-based quotas in public contracting that dated back to 2019. Under the agreement, Philadelphia agreed to rewrite its “Project Labor Agreements” to make workforce diversity goals “strictly aspirational” rather than mandatory.

These complaints reflect a broader national debate over DEI initiatives following the 2024 presidential election. The Trump administration has signaled its intent to scale back diversity programs across government agencies and federally-funded institutions, while supporters of such programs argue they are necessary to address historical inequities and ensure equal opportunity.

As these investigations proceed, they could establish significant legal precedents regarding the permissible scope of DEI programs in local governments that receive federal funding.