Defunding DEI: Here’s how the Trump administration has undone Biden’s very prized programs

Fox News - Apr 27th, 2025

President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders immediately upon taking office to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across the federal government. These orders included the closure of DEI offices, the end of race and sex-based hiring preferences, and the rescinding of previous administration policies prioritizing DEI. This move, defended by Trump and his administration as a return to merit-based practices, also saved an estimated $420 million in canceled DEI-related contracts. The decision quickly impacted public agencies, with departments like the FAA reverting to merit-based hiring and evaluating current employees in critical positions for competency.

The broader implications of Trump's executive orders have permeated the private sector, with major corporations such as Meta, Walmart, and McDonald's following suit by terminating their DEI programs. This shift has sparked significant debate regarding the role of DEI in business and education, reflecting a national divide on the importance of these initiatives. Critics argue that dismantling DEI efforts undermines progress toward workplace equality and inclusion, while proponents of the change argue that it prevents discrimination against individuals based on race or gender. The ripple effects are expected to continue influencing both public and private sectors as companies and institutions reassess their DEI commitments.

Donald Trump Elon Musk Faa Federal Government Executive Orders Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion Dei Policies Private Sector

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant examination of President Trump's executive actions on DEI policies, addressing a topic of significant public interest. While it presents accurate information on many key points, some claims, particularly financial figures and corporate responses, require further verification. The article's perspective leans towards supporting the policy changes, with limited representation of opposing viewpoints. Despite this, the clear structure and accessible language make it an engaging read for those interested in political and social issues. However, the potential for controversy and debate is high, given the nature of the topic and the implications of the policy changes discussed.

Accuracy

The article presents several factual claims regarding President Trump's executive actions on DEI policies. Many of these claims align with verified sources, such as the closure of DEI offices and the rescinding of Biden-era policies. However, some details, like the $420 million savings attributed to Elon Musk's actions, lack independent verification. The story accurately reflects the broader narrative of Trump's DEI policy changes, but specific financial and corporate claims require further documentation.

Balance

The article predominantly presents a perspective aligned with the actions and policies of President Trump, often using language that could be perceived as supportive of these moves. There is limited representation of opposing viewpoints or the potential impacts of these policy changes on various communities. The lack of balance is evident in the absence of commentary from DEI advocates or those adversely affected by these policy shifts.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its presentation of information, with a logical flow and straightforward language. However, the tone occasionally leans towards advocacy, which can affect the perceived neutrality. The structure allows for easy comprehension, though some sections could benefit from additional context.

Source quality

The article references official actions and statements, lending some credibility to its claims. However, it primarily relies on a single media source, which may introduce bias. The inclusion of quotes from government officials adds authority, but the lack of diverse sources limits the depth and reliability of the reporting.

Transparency

The article provides a clear account of the actions taken by President Trump but lacks transparency in explaining the methodology behind certain claims, particularly financial figures. There is minimal disclosure of potential conflicts of interest or the basis for some assertions, reducing the transparency of the reporting.