A federal judge in California has blocked the Trump administration’s push to attach anti-DEI strings to federal grant money. The court ruled this week that the executive branch overstepped its constitutional authority by imposing the conditions on a group of West Coast cities and counties.
Obama-nominated U.S. District Judge William Orrick granted a preliminary injunction Thursday barring the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and the Interior from enforcing the contested conditions against 11 local governments, concluding in a 68-page order that the restrictions likely run afoul of both the separation-of-powers doctrine and the Administrative Procedure Act.
“What defendants seek to do likely violates the Constitution (separation of powers and Spending Clause) and the Administrative Procedures Act,” Orrick wrote.
The suit was filed by the cities of Fresno, Santa Clara, Redwood City, Santa Cruz, Stockton, Beaverton, Corvallis and Hillsboro, along with Los Angeles, San Diego and Santa Barbara counties, all of which argued the administration attached ideological requirements to grants Congress had already approved for public safety, disaster preparedness, policing, fire protection, water conservation and crime victim services.
Orrick sided with the localities, finding the new certification requirements “have nothing to do with or contradict the Congressional purpose” behind the underlying grant programs, and affirming that spending authority ultimately rests with Congress rather than the White House.
“Plaintiffs maintain that ‘[n]othing in the Constitution or federal statutes authorizes Defendants to impose the Challenged Conditions, or anything of the kind, on funds administered through congressional grant programs,'” Orrick wrote. “I agree.”
The conditions at issue required grant recipients to certify they were not running programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion in violation of federal anti-discrimination law, along with separate provisions encouraging cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and compliance with related executive orders.
The administration has said such conditions are a legitimate use of executive authority to ensure federal dollars aren’t used to fund discriminatory practices, and the Justice Department is expected to appeal Thursday’s ruling.
Orrick found that letting the conditions stand while the case proceeds would jeopardize funding for programs including anti-terrorism initiatives, disaster mitigation, flood protection, wildfire preparedness, law enforcement training, forensic science, and human trafficking and crime-victim services — writing that the disruption would “irreparably injure plaintiffs and their ability to provide critical services, as well as would threaten public safety.”
The preliminary injunction will remain in effect while the underlying lawsuit moves forward, leaving the administration’s broader anti-DEI funding strategy in legal limbo pending the expected appeal.
Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 10:40Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,
The stunning transformation of Great Britain in recent years - from a beacon of decorum and stiff upper lips to a cautionary tale of wokeness run amok - has been blamed on everything from socialism to satanism.
However, Rupert Lowe, a member of the British Parliament and founder of the organization Restore Britain, said the reality may be even more sinister.
In a recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, he said a shadowy group of elites known as the Fabian Society was deliberately trying to wreck the country.
“I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of the Fabian Society, but if you go and have a look at it, it was basically most of the Labour Party for many, many years,” Lowe said, referring to England’s leading left-wing party, the equivalent of U.S. Democrats.
The British people need to understand the powerful malign influence of the Fabian Society. pic.twitter.com/i3uY9sJfj8
— Rupert Lowe MP (@RupertLowe10) July 11, 2026America’s Left may be facing a similar identity crisis as it tries to shake off the subversive influence of the Justice Democrats, Democrat Socialists of America and other fringe elements that are pushing neo-Marxist ideas.
But the British version has been around for nearly 150 years. The club, founded in 1884, was a direct reaction to the philosophy of Karl Marx (who died a year earlier in London).
Rather than forcing a collectivist government as Marx suggested, through class struggle — which generally led to uncomfortable outcomes for aristocrats — the society advocated for a socialist society to take root slowly and incrementally.
It was the brainchild of intellectuals including the man who first created “My Fair Lady” heroine Eliza Doolittle — playwright George Bernard Shaw. Science-fiction visionary H.G. Wells also counted himself a member.
“It’s the most extraordinary organization,” Lowe told Rogan. “Their emblem is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, as if that doesn’t tell you what they’re doing.”
Among the beliefs it endorsed was eugenics, the idea of breeding out unwanted attributes through various means, scientific and otherwise.
While the Nazis would go on to run with the idea — and ultimately help to effect its demise — the Fabian Society also was rumored to have inspired author George Orwell, whose dystopian 1984 (written in the late 1940s) was set exactly 100 years after the society’s founding.
The Fabian Society was created in 1884, & why George Orwells book is called 1984, as he figured the Fabian Society would have completed their mission within 100 years.
He was a bit off with the timing, but not with their evil agenda & what they are trying to achieve. pic.twitter.com/70LA5kyaHW
According to Lowe, not all of the society’s ideas have vanished entirely. Rather, some of them simply evolved into a modern political framework.
“Everyone should look at the Fabian Society, because that runs deep through the veins of Labour,” he said.
Writing for The Telegraph, former Fabian research director Stephen Pollard sought to dismantle the claims by attacking Lowe as a conspiracy theorist. However, his argument may have only helped to make the case for some that “basically what it wants to do is destroy all good and create a dependency culture.”
After defending ideas like eugenics as having been widely accepted in their time, Pollard insisted that the current society was more concerned with selling magazine subscriptions than world domination.
Many of its policy papers now deal with addressing the nation’s housing crisis.
“To take that and conclude that they are in fact part of a secret cabal dedicated to destroying Britain is not so much misguided as a sign that someone is truly away with the fairies,” he claimed.
Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 10:00