Dismantling DEI

A second order on January 21 revoked Executive Order 11246, which had long required covered federal contractors to take affirmative action, while maintaining obligations under federal anti-discrimination law. OPM then instructed agencies to begin closing DEIA offices and placing affected staff on administrative leave.

What the administration says it is doing

The administration describes its policy as restoring individual merit and equal treatment and argues that some DEI practices amount to unlawful discrimination or preferences. The orders direct agencies to remove DEI-related requirements and change federal contracting policy.

Critics of the rollback argue that DEI and affirmative-action systems were tools for widening access and monitoring inequity and that removing them can reduce institutional attention to disparities. That is a policy dispute; the underlying executive actions are documented.

What the labor numbers show

In August 2026, BLS reported a seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 5.6% for Black women age 20 and older, a labor-force participation rate of 60.6%, and about 10.264 million employed Black women age 20 and older.

Those are important measurements of the labor market. They are not, by themselves, evidence that the DEI orders caused any particular employment outcome. National labor data reflect many industries, employers and economic forces.

Read policy and data side by side

A useful way to cover this moment is to separate three things: what the executive orders actually direct, what agencies and employers change in response, and what labor-market outcomes are later observed.

That keeps the article grounded. The policy change is real. Employment disparities are real. A causal link requires more specific evidence than timing alone.