(Image Courtesy of AP News) “Trump speaking to reporters after he signs executive orders to end DEI.”

Sam Murray & Fabienne Bien-Aime

Connector Contributors

There has been confusion and worry among members of UMass Lowell about changes the university might face following the Jan. 20 and 21 executive orders banning programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion among people of different backgrounds.

President Trump issued two executive orders in the first days of his presidency, the Jan. 20 order “Ending Radical and Wasteful DEI Programs and Preferencing,” (Executive Order 14151, 2025), and the Jan. 21 order, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” (Executive Order 14173, 2025).

The goal is to end “illegal and immoral” DEI policies because, according to Executive Order 14151, these policies are discriminatory. On Feb. 14, a Dear Colleague letter was released by the White House to remind academic institutions who receive federal financial assistance from the Department of Education of their non-discrimination obligations. DEI policies have long been understood to lessen the impact and prevalence of discrimination, however, so much confusion has been caused by the seemingly contradictory nature of these communications from the government (Salon, 2025).

On Feb. 3, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), with two other organizations and the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, filed a lawsuit in the District of Maryland challenging President Trump’s Executive Orders. The lawsuit argues that

the executive orders cannot claim the power to spend the government’s money because that power belongs to Congress, and that the orders fail to sufficiently define what is meant by “DEI.”

Michelle Veilleux, Director of legal studies at UMass Lowell, commented “The question is, are these executive orders exceeding executive authority,” and “It’s very difficult to determine what may be interpreted as discriminatory versus what provides support for all types of students.”

On Feb. 13, attorney generals of sixteen states, including Massachusetts, issued “Multi-State Guidance Concerning Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Employment Initiatives.” This guidance emphasizes that the government cannot prohibit lawful activities in the private sector, even if they receive federal funding in some way. At the same time, it reiterates that DEI practices are not illegal.

When asked about the executive orders, Taisiya D. Petrova, a general biology major at UMass Lowell, said they are “stupid.” Petrova further explained the importance of DEI programs for some students: “Some people from non-marginalized communities don’t have the same experience where they were disadvantaged, so they are coming from a different perspective than people from marginalized communities.”

Petrova also described how even if her financial aid hasn’t been directly affected yet: “It is nerve-racking. Yes, we are not feeling much of the effect here, but at the same time, it is going on at the highest level of the government”.

Another student, Mellisa Hope Antoine, a marketing international businesses major at UMass Lowell, echoed similar sentiments. When asked about the executive orders, she said, “It was written in an ignorant manner.”

Antoine is particularly worried about her disability accommodations: “I use disability services; they do hold a lot of professors accountable for enforcing my accommodations. Professors are really rigid unless they have Section 504 specifically making them do that.” She expressed worry that the services she relies on will be terminated.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Individualized Education Programs (IEP) are education programs designed to accommodate students with disabilities and are funded by the federal government.

Antoine also expressed her frustration about the executive orders’ effect in removing information from certain government websites. According to the New York Times, over 8,000 web pages have been taken down from .gov websites, including information on, “Vaccines, veterans’ care, hate crimes and scientific research.”

Many programs that people rely on are funded by the federal government, and since there is some confusion on what DEI refers to, a wide variety of programs are at risk. Veilleux says, “The issues that are presented will definitely affect all schools, not just higher education, from preschools to colleges and universities.” These are things such as: “Title 9, student loan programs, funding for curriculum development, funding and support for students with special needs, and in the preschool level, free or reduced school lunch” (NPR, 2025).

According to the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, as of March 10, 2025, the legal power of Executive Orders 14151 and 14173 to ban DEI programs from schools and other organizations throughout the country was challenged in court. A preliminary injunction was issued by District Judge Adam B. Abelson to specify that the government cannot stop any funding on the basis of DEIA under the executive orders’ provisions.

Amidst the ongoing legal battles UMass Lowell community members await clearer guidance on the future of DEI programs. As Veilleux expressed it, “I have more questions than answers, as I think most people do, and I’m anxious to see how the courts will handle this.”