My approach whenever DEI comes up now is to not express a position or opinion supporting or opposing DEI itself but to simply cite statute and recent case law.

My approach whenever DEI comes up now is to not express a position or opinion supporting or opposing DEI itself but to simply cite statute and recent case law. Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Section 703): >"It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer - (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." Duvall v. Novant Health, Inc. >"To be clear, employers may, if they so choose, utilize D&I-type programs. What they cannot do is take adverse employment actions against employees based on their race or gender to implement such a program." Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which applied specifically to higher educational institutions, gives a very good indication as to how SCOTUS is likely to rule when a case involving private employment inevitably lands on its docket in the near future. Taking race into account when making employment decisions will be prohibited. Full stop. That includes setting race based targets/quotas, tying bonuses to their achievement, and establishing set aside jobs. What will likely be permissible will be efforts to expand candidate pools and training initiatives that focus on eliminating biases.