Federal employees in many government agencies filed a collective complaint on Wednesday against the Trump administration, claiming that they had illegally fired employees of Dei’s activities as part of President Donald Trump’s executive order that prohibited diversity, fairness and integration throughout the federal government.
The administration has launched employees who considered it linked to the Dei, as it is claimed to deposit, including those who did not participate in any Dei’s activities or their only activities related to DEI is to participate in a group of training training or resources.
In the complaint, it was submitted to the American Marawah Systems Protection Council-an independent and semi-judicial agency that was established to protect federal employees from violations, including political shooting, and not a federal court-former employees said that the mass fire violates their first rights to amend the visible political positions.
In addition, the complaint claims that the anti -Dei executive orders have violated the seventh chapter of the Civil Rights Law by discriminating federal workers in an impartially proportional man who were not white men for hostility, suspicion of jobs, and termination.
The complaint was submitted by the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, DC, private law firms and democracy striker. The complaint was filed along with many discriminatory charges of federal employment offices, related to Trump’s executive orders on January 20, that the Personnel Management Office ends all Dei activities throughout the government.
“The decision to follow up on Dei’s work is no longer to make the real motive of the administration: to punish employees who believe they keep values related to the agenda of the extremist president,” said Scott Michelian, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The complaint was submitted on behalf of the Mahri Stanak from the Personnel Management Office. Among the other appellates are Paige Brown and C. Scott from the Ministry of Labor, and Ronisca Chambers of the Federal Aviation Administration. The number of people who joined the complaint of the collective lawsuit is not clear, but dozens have filed complaints, according to the USA Rights Agency in the capital
Federal employees ask to return their previous positions and to be compensated for lost wages and other damage.
Other federal workers who believed they were targeted, shot on concerted political affiliations or discrimination against them on the basis of their gender or race to join the complaint.
“The team that I belong to in the administrative vacation was the majority of women and the colored majority,” Sherrill Payat, who was on an administrative leave from her job in the Ministry of Internal Security, told NBC News. It plans to join the complaint complaint.
“It is frustrated,” she added. “I am an educated woman, I am an arduous worker … I consider myself an expert in my fields, so I know that all of this can be ignored is unfortunate and cancellation of the American audience.”
Stanac also expressed his feeling of treason. “By illegally targeting employees across the government, the Trump administration actually hurts all people who live and work in this country by depriving them of the important services we provide,” said Stanak, who has worked in the federal government for nearly 17 years.
Kelly M. said. Dermoudi, administrative partner in Lev, Cabraser, Heiman and Bernstein, there is a “assumption that made women of all races, non -bilateral employees, and people with colors in general, under some cloud of doubts” when the executive orders set what will be shot on employees. “They were enemies of the ideas of this administration, and that there should be reasons to get rid of them.”
“This entire approach is not merely discrimination under the seventh chapter of the Civil Rights Law, but it is also a violation of the principles of the first amendment.”
In addition to this complaint, DEI’s anti -executive orders are also challenged in a pair of lawsuits in the Federal Court.
In late February, a federal judge in Maryland temporarily prevented from the Trump administration from ending the grants and federal contracts related to the Dei initiatives, and finds that the prosecutors are likely to prevail in allegations that the language on Trump’s orders was “unconstitutionally vague” and that the government was interacting in “distinguishing the point of view.”
The Federal Court of Appeal remained the order of the American provincial judge Adam Abilson earlier this month, when the case passes the appeal process, as the three judges expressed concern about the judge’s order. Two judges indicated that Trump’s executive orders do not seem unconstitutional on their own, but they have concerns about implementing the matter.
In a separate case in Washington, the National Urban Association and two non -profit organizations filed a lawsuit against Trump and the office and budget office, on the pretext that orders “explicitly depriving colored persons, women, gay people, and people who suffer from disabilities in the face of defects or inequality in getting rid of those that activate those targeted efforts and ventilation that have been specifically created.
Executive orders “are designed to use people in an inconsistent manner from a specific race (white people) with an inconsistent harm from people from another race (black, indigenous people, Latin people, and the American -Asian people, among others),” charged lawsuit, with a constitutionality of orders.
The Ministry of Justice wondered whether the organizations have a legal status to prosecute, and maintained Trump’s orders that do not violate the rights of prosecutors to freedom of expression. The judge did not judge in this case after requesting the prosecutor to issue a judicial order.