Corporate America is dramatically backing away from diversity promises amid legal scrutiny

A new report from the far-left Human Rights Campaign shows a notable shift: a 65% drop in the number of Fortune 500 companies publicly communicating their commitment to diversity and inclusion initiatives. Just a few years ago, companies were trying to outdo each other with ever-increasing DEI commitments. Today, many are quietly taking a step back.

This is not a retreat from honesty. It is a return to common sense.

For years, corporate America has embraced an ideological experiment that blurred the line between equal opportunity and preferential treatment. What started as a push for broader inclusivity turned into quota-based mandates, demographic scorecards and internal political signaling exercises that often had little to do with company performance.

Now the legal system — and increasingly federal regulators — are pushing back.

INVESTIGATIONS INTO NIKE’S DEI PRACTICES COULD HAVE A MAJOR NATIONAL IMPACT ON RECRUITMENT, SAYS ALAN DERSHOWITZ

Consider the recent lawsuit against Starbucks, in which Missouri’s attorney general alleged “systemic discrimination” in hiring and promotion practices related to DEI goals. While a federal judge dismissed the case on procedural grounds, the filing itself indicated that there is growing scrutiny of whether corporate diversity initiatives lead to unlawful discrimination.

Nike is currently facing a federal investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission into allegations that certain DEI-related employment practices may have resulted in race-based discrimination against white employees. Whether the agency ultimately finds misconduct or not, the investigation underscores a new reality: DEI programs are no longer insulated from legal challenges.

And JPMorgan Chase has been sued over allegations of “systemic” racial bias, including claims that the bank conducted “fake interviews” to meet internal diversity goals. This claim – that a company might interview candidates solely to meet demographic criteria – illustrates how performative compliance can undermine both fairness and trust.

But the control does not stop with labor law.

CONSERVATIVE LEGAL GROUP OBJECTIVES CFPB RULE MANDATORY RACE, GENDER INFORMATION IN HOME LOANS

In recent weeks, the Federal Trade Commission reportedly sent letters to 42 of the largest and most profitable law firms in the United States, warning that racially discriminatory hiring practices — even if employed under the banner of DEI — could constitute unfair or anticompetitive conduct. According to reports, the companies participated in a program overseen by the Diversity Lab that required at least 30% of leadership candidates to come from underrepresented groups.

That kind of sector-wide coordination raises serious questions.

First, there’s the obvious concern of the Civil Rights Act: employment decisions cannot be made on the basis of race, period. But there is also a broader antitrust dimension. When competitors collectively adopt demographic quotas or coordinate hiring mandates, they may be guilty of collusion, effectively setting industry standards through collaboration rather than competing freely for the best talent.

This theory is not new. Federal antitrust authorities have previously warned climate and ESG coalitions that there is no “ESG exception” to antitrust laws. As former FTC Chair Lina Khan clearly stated, competitors are not allowed to coordinate with each other simply because the coordination is considered socially beneficial. The same logic applies here. There is no DEI exception to the Sherman Antitrust Act.

For years, corporate America has embraced an ideological experiment that blurred the line between equal opportunity and preferential treatment.

The consequences are enormous.

Retailers such as Nordstrom, Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s, Ulta and Sephora signed the “Fifteen Percent Pledge,” committing to dedicate 15% of shelf space exclusively to Black-owned brands. More than 70 major companies — including competitors like Nike, Levi Strauss, Ralph Lauren and American Eagle — signed the “Count Us In” pledge, coordinating policies that include funding for transgender surgeries for employees and participating in shared lobbying efforts.

The legal question is no longer just whether these initiatives are politically popular. At issue is whether they create exposure under antitrust law by reducing competition or creating coordinated market standards among competitors.

Corporate America is beginning to recognize the risk.

Ameshia Cross slams Trump’s anti-DEI initiatives on MSNBC. (Screenshot)

Public companies exist to create shareholder value – not to serve as enforcement weapons for changing social movements. When executives adopted DEI mandates that required race-based hiring targets, demographic quotas, or coordinated commitments with competitors, they exposed their companies to liability on multiple fronts: employee discrimination claims, regulatory investigations, shareholder lawsuits, and now possible antitrust investigations.

The 65% drop in DEI messaging signals something important: boards and CEOs are recalibrating.

That recalibration is healthy.

There’s nothing wrong with expanding opportunities, recruiting broadly, or fostering a respectful workplace culture. But the law demands equal treatment – ​​not equal outcomes achieved through quotas or industry collusion. When companies forget that distinction, they risk violating both civil rights statutes and competition laws designed to protect markets.

Markets function best when companies compete – for customers, for innovation and, yes, for talent. As competitors coordinate around hiring mandates or collective commitments, they drift away from competition and toward centralized standard setting. That is exactly what antitrust law is designed to prevent.

The pendulum swings back to merit.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS ADVICE

Employees want to know they were hired for their abilities. Shareholders want disciplined capital allocation. Customers want quality products at fair prices. None of these priorities require demographic quotas or declarations of public virtue.

The cuts we are witnessing are not an attack on diversity. It is a rejection of coercion and coordination masquerading as virtue. It reminds us that equal opportunity under the law applies to everyone – white, black, male, female – and that industry competitors should not suspend antitrust principles simply because the goal sounds noble.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Corporate America is finally rediscovering a simple truth: treat people equally, compete vigorously, and let merit determine outcomes.

That is not only legally responsible. It is economically healthy. And it’s been a long time.

CLICK HERE TO ANSON FRERICKS