Mission change at Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is deeply problematic

By Mel Wilson, NASW Senior Policy Advisor

The recent “dramatic realignment”  of the Justice Department’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division ordered by President Trump has sparked widespread alarm among legal experts and civil rights advocates.

The division – historically tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination laws in areas such as voting rights, housing, and employment – has been repurposed to pursue priorities laid out in Trump’s executive orders, such as “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports” and “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.”

This major shift of priorities and philosophies for the Civil Rights Division raises serious concerns and has evoked anger because it jeopardizes protection of  marginalized communities against inequitable  policies and practices.

To many, the work of the Civil Rights Division epitomizes the meaning of democracy and America’s commitment to equality. The tragedy of Trump’s decision to redirect the division’s mission is that it negates its undeniable importance to American history.

Division’s history dates back ot the Civil Rights Act of 1957

The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was established on December 9, 1957, following the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957.  The creation of a division within the DOJ that was solely dedicated to enforcing civil rights laws was indicative of the federal government’s commitment to equal protections for all people – as codified in the 14th Amendment.  Over the following decades, the division evolved into a highly professional organization that was, for the most part, energized and committed to its mission of fully enforcing the civil rights laws as mandated by Congress. The following timeline provides a picture of milestones and achievements of the Civil Rights Division:

• 1957: The division was founded to enforce civil rights laws.
• 1964: The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expanded its authority to combat discrimination in public facilities, employment, and education.
• 1965: The Voting Rights Act of 1965 empowered the division to protect voting rights, particularly for African Americans in the South.
• 1980s-1990s: The division took on broader responsibilities, including enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and addressing police misconduct.
• 2000-Present: The division has continued to evolve, tackling issues such as continued instances of police misconduct, hate crimes, human trafficking, and LGBTQ+ rights.

Trump Administration has subverted original purpose of division

From the day of its inception the Civil Rights Division stayed true to its purpose as defined in the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964. However, the Trump Administration immediately disregarded the division’s primary mission. Consequently, most of the division’s past achievements and integrity, to a significant degree, could be lost to history.

Before discussing the actual and anticipated impact of the major changes to the division, it is useful to look at the background and political philosophy its new director Harmeet Dhillon. It is not hyperbolic to state flatly that Ms. Dhilon’s world view is anathema to the civil and human rights community. She has a long and problematic history of being a far-right activist – particularly when it comes to voting rights. An adherent to Trump’s MAGA movement, her firm (Center for American Liberty (CAL) received more $8 million from Trump-aligned PACs for legal services.

AlthoughTrump and his attorney general authorized changes in the Civil Rights Division’s mission, it was Dhillon who shaped the realignment. She described the approach to reshaping the mission of the division as a being a “paradigm shift” in civil rights enforcement . The shift is an ill-defined focus on blocking racial quotas, restricting transgender rights, and emphasizing religious protections. All of which is a departure from the division’s historical mission.

As the newly installed Deputy AG for Civil Rights, Dhillon has taken steps to implement the following:

• Dropping voting rights cases aimed at combating racial discrimination in elections.
• Backing away from pay discrimination lawsuits, such as the case against the Mississippi State Senate.
• Terminating environmental justice settlements, including the one in Lowndes County, Alabama.
• Shifting focus toward voter fraud investigations, rather than protecting voting access.
• Opposing transgender protections, particularly in sports and public accommodations.
• Prioritizing cases on religious liberty and gun rights, aligning with conservative legal agendas.
• Shifting Priorities by putting a high priority on eliminating diversity initiatives, opposing transgender rights, and investigating campus protests under the guise of combating antisemitism .

These changes are not simply bureaucratic adjustments that most incoming administrations make. These particular revisions are part and parcel to the far-right’s blueprint —  Project 2025— for reversing or undercutting decades of civil rights protections. With that in mind, to suggest that these comprehensive changes represent policy “realignments” is far too benign. The Trump DOJ’s overhaul of the Civil Rights Division is a destructive shift from the Civil Rights Division’s mission created in 1965 — as well as being a step in the long-term effort to reverse gains made in protecting civil rights.

Immediate Impact Linked to Undermining the Civil Rights Division

If fully implemented, there is little doubt that the effect of the amended approach to civil rights cases  will be felt in several highly significant areas including voting rights, criminal justice reform, police accountability, fair housing and employment discrimination. The following is a summary of some, but not all, of anticipated impact of the modifications initiated by the Trump/ DOJ (Civil Rights Division):

Voting Rights: It bears repeating that Deputy AG Dhillon was –  and still is – a vocal election denier. It is important to mention this fact because Dhillon has been tasked by Trump with publicly rolling out the administration’s new voting rights directives that represents a major shift in the voting protection mission of the DOJ Civil Rights Division . A central feature of these new priorities is that the division’s focus will no longer be on voting rights enforcement – which, in previous years, proved to be an iconic model for holding states accountable for adhering to the Voting Rights Act. The new civil rights division mission under Deputy AG Dhillon moves towards Donald Trump’s priorities, which includes hunting for noncitizen voters and protecting white people from discrimination.

This mission shift has ominous implications. It is telling that the amended priorities for the Civil Rights Division’s voting section – which owes much of its authorship to Project 2025 – makes only a cursory mention to the Voting Rights Act of 1964. Moreover, the new priorities make no mention of the voter protection enforcement mandates that are the cornerstone of the rationale for creating a voting section within the Civil Rights Division decades ago. Instead, the division  now defines its reasons to exist along the lines of the far-right’s demand for “protections” against fully debunked conspiracy theory-related voter fraud.

It should be noted that Democratic senators have demanded answers regarding these changes, citing concerns that the directives may be inconsistent with Congressional intent in enacting civil rights legislation. They have requested an oversight hearing to review the division’s restructuring and its impact on voting rights enforcement. In addition to the mission change, DOJ “ removed all of the senior civil servants working as managers in the department’s voting section and directed attorneys to dismiss all active cases, part of a broader attack on the department’s civil rights division.”  This action effectively negates the intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Criminal Justice Reforms and Police Accountability: Since AG Pamela Bondi’s appointment as U.S. Attorney General, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has undergone significant shifts in priorities related to criminal justice reform, police accountability, and racial inequities, including:

• • • Elimination of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Initiatives:  DOJ issued directives rescinding all DOJ materials that encouraged race- or sex-based preferences in compliance with federal civil rights laws. The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division was tasked with investigating and penalizing DEI-related policies in federally funded institutions and private sector organizations.
    • Review of Police Reform Agreements: The Trump DOJ has been reviewing consent decrees – court monitored mandates for reform in police departments – and eliminating those deemed to “unduly impede law enforcement functions.” This move has raised concerns about the rollback of federal oversight in police accountability efforts.
    • Cuts to Federal Grants Supporting DEI in Policing: The administration has halted federal programs supporting diversity in law enforcement, raising concerns among Black police officers and DEI professionals about the potential erosion of diversity gains made after the George Floyd protests. DOJ also eliminated more 865 grants, ostensibly for cost cutting reasons, that supported community-based reform and equity programs.

 Fair Housing Act Enforcement: In line with Trump’s executive orders, AG Bondi has issued DOJ directives that have led to the suspension of certain approvals – previously required for state-level U.S. Attorneys – to pursue cases related to housing discrimination as stipulated in the Fair Housing Act of 1968. This 180-degree change in the division’s approach to enforcement will significantly limit federal intervention in housing discrimination.

Disparate Impact Liability: Relatedly, Trump’s  executive order entitled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” targets the use of disparate-impact liability. Since the 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case Griggs v. Duke Power Co., disparate-impact liability has been a major tool in fighting systemic discrimination. It has allowed courts to examine outcomes of policies, not just intent, to see if they unfairly harm protected groups. This has been essential in areas like employment, housing, and education. Courts have been able to intervene when certain rules – like tests or screening processes – unintentionally exclude people of color or women from opportunities.

Employment Discrimination and Protections: The disparate impact executive order is also in the forefront of changes to the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division’s polices. DOJ, under Attorney General Pam Bondi, has taken a new approach to employment discrimination, particularly regarding disparate impact claims. For example, DOJ has ordered the dismissal of lawsuits that challenged hiring practices in police and fire departments based on written and physical fitness tests – which are disproportionately biased against Black and female applicants. DOJ based the change by insisting that written and physical exams are the only measures of merit and qualifications, further suggesting that to do otherwise would violate Trump’s executive orders barring the use of DEI and quotas in hiring. The end result of these revised policies is that existing federal investigations and lawsuits relying on statistical disparities rather than direct evidence of discrimination will be dropped or revised.

Mass Exodus of Civil Rights Division Lawyers and other Key Staff

The immediate  aftermath of the Trump administration’s  wholesale dismantling of the DOJ Civil Rights Division’s enforcement priorities has been described as a “bloodbath”  within ranks of the division’s key staff. New DOJ leadership and implementation of the Trump executive order has forced out a majority of career managers and senior litigation employees.

In addition, many other of the division’s seasoned frontline staff were appalled by what they saw as an abandonment of a decades-long mission of successfully enforcing laws.  As stated recently by a former Civil Rights Division career attorney, “The impact (of the division’s mission changes is catastrophic. They are scaling back possibly, nearly all enforcement that they have been doing for decades on civil rights statutes they’re required to enforce. “This is a monumental shift in the way the division operates, and it’s going to result in American civil rights not being protected as they almost always have been.”

There is anticipation that additional division attorneys and managers will leave DOJ in protest.

Scuttling the Civil Rights Division Mission is an Affront to the Civil Rights Act of 1964

At this point, it is relevant to mention that Whitney Young, the great Civil Rights leader of the 1960s, was a past president of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). This fact reinforces NASW’s connection to and commitment to one of the most important pieces of legislation of the American Democracy —- the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Whitney Young was present in the East Room of the White House when President Johnson,msurrounded by the nation’s Civil Rights era brain trust, signed the historic act into law. That 61years later, President Trump would issue an executive order that essentially destroys the objectives and intent of the Civil Rights Act is both galling and anger provoking.

To  paraphrase an online article on this issue,  while the executive order on the DOJ Civil Rights Division does not repeal civil rights legislative statutes outright, it is an unmistakable, purposeful effort to reinterpret the Civil Rights Act statutes in a way that renders them virtually ineffective. The deeper concern is that the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) will uphold Trump’s executive order when it hears inevitable legal challenges. Recent decisions on affirmative action and voting rights demonstrate that the Court leans toward dismantling race-conscious protections. Therefore, one could conclude that there is a 50-50 chance that SCOTUS would rule in Trump’s favor if his executive order is challenged in court.

We should also take into consideration the executive order doesn’t merely revise enforcement priorities – it redefines the very meaning of civil rights in American law. The underlying message of the Civil Rights Division executive order – especially when it is coupled with Trump’s DEI executive order – is to signal a return to an era when equal protection only had a figurative meaning without the force of law.

Mobilization to Restore the Civil Rights Division to its Original Mandate

As expected, the aggressive Trump executive order to dismantle the Civil Rights Division will not progress without a major challenge from national civil rights organizations, especially from legacy civil rights groups such as the NAACP, the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights (LCCHR), and the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law. In fact, the LCCHR coalition, of which NASW is a member, recently submitted a letter of opposition – signed  by 68 national organizations – to the Department of Justice. This action by the LCCHR coalition is the beginning of an ongoing mobilization and public pressure to fight against this unacceptable disregard for equal protection under the law.

In addition to organizing a national response to scuttling the Civil Rights Division’s mission, the LCCHR coalition is – along with other advocates – leading the effort to educate the public about the seriousness of Trump’s executive order eliminating disparate-impact liability. The coalition has developed and is disseminating tools for member organizations to inform their constituents about the meaning of this term. The coalition also seeks to inform the public that there is an intersection with the Civil Rights Division executive order and the far-right’s decades-old desire to neuter the enforcement provisions of the Civil Rights Act.

Resources

Associated Press –  Civil rights groups say push to dismantle Education Department will undo hard-won gains

Brennen Center for Justice – What’s Next for Elections Under the Project 2025 Agenda

Human Rights Watch –  Civil Rights Watchdog under Assault by Trump Administration

Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (LCCHR) – Discrimination in All Its Forms: Different Treatment and Disparate Impact

League of Conservation Voters – The Trump Administration Gutting the DOJ Civil Rights Division will Harm our Fundamental Rights, Including our Freedom to Vote

Legal Defense Fund (LDF) – LDF Denounces Updated Justice Department Civil Rights Division Mission Statement

 Senator Alex Padilla – Padilla, Schiff Demand Answers on Politicization of DOJ’s Civil Rights Division