| | WEEKLY ISSUE 57 | Mar 27, 2026 |
|
|
|
|---|
|
Mitigate Risk. Lead with Clarity. |
|
|---|
|
IN THIS ISSUE
ALSO INCLUDED |
|
|
|---|
|
PREVIOUSLY ISSUED EXECUTIVE ORDERS | For continued reference these are the EOs targeting DEI and LGBTQ+ protections that have been issued: We will continue to monitor activities that relate to these EOs either directly or indirectly. |
|
|
|---|
|
| | | | | | OVERVIEWOn March 19, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced that Planned Parenthood of Illinois agreed to pay $500,000 to resolve an EEOC investigation into allegations of race discrimination against white employees. The matter was resolved through the agency’s administrative conciliation process after the EEOC found reasonable cause to believe violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had occurred.
The EEOC stated that the investigation examined workplace practices including the use of race-based employee affinity groups and required participation in DEI-related programming. The agency alleged that certain practices limited participation based on race and resulted in differential treatment of employees.
As part of the agreement, Planned Parenthood of Illinois will provide monetary relief and undertake corrective measures. Planned Parenthood did not admit liability, and the resolution concludes the EEOC’s investigation without litigation.
LEGAL INTERPRETATIONTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of race. The statute applies to all employees and prohibits differential treatment in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment based on race.
The EEOC is authorized to investigate charges of discrimination and, where it finds reasonable cause to believe a violation has occurred, to seek resolution through administrative conciliation. Conciliation is a voluntary process that may include monetary relief and changes to workplace practices.
Agreements reached through conciliation resolve the EEOC’s investigation without litigation and do not require an admission of liability by the employer. In this matter, Planned Parenthood of Illinois did not admit liability as part of the resolution.
BRIDGE POV Planned Parenthood of Illinois settled the case without admitting liability. This case is a reminder that programs around employee access, participation, and experience have to be built with legal precision to withstand scrutiny. According to the EEOC, employees did not have the same access or experience, and that is where risk shows up.
Under Title VII, when participation, access, or experience is defined in a way that treats employees differently based on race, it creates exposure. Given how the EEOC is operating, the focus for companies should be on how these programs function in practice, not how they are intended or described
ACTIONABLE STRATEGIES Audit how programs function in practice: Ensure leaders understand how access, participation, and benefits are applied day to day across the organization. Identify where differences in experience may exist and address them before they create exposure.
- Design for consistency and open access: Structure affinity groups, training, and development opportunities so participation is not limited by race and expectations are applied uniformly across employees.
Embed legal oversight into program governance: Align legal, HR, and business leadership on how programs are designed, implemented, and reviewed to ensure they hold up under scrutiny.
See also: Federal Enforcement Campaign Targets Corporate DEI as Legal Standards Remain Unchanged (Issue 46) | | | | | |
EXECUTIVE ORDERS & FEDERAL POLICY |
| | | | | | OVERVIEWOn March 19, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor launched a website for its Center for Faith, an office established pursuant to Executive Order 14205 directing federal agencies to create internal faith-based engagement offices. The website consolidates resources from the White House, Department of Labor, and EEOC outlining employer obligations related to religious discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, along with federal guidance and tools related to religious protections.
The launch follows broader federal efforts to expand faith-based initiatives across agencies, including the introduction of agency-sponsored prayer services. On March 23, 2026, Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed two Freedom of Information Act lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging that the Departments of Defense and Labor failed to respond within the legally required timeframe to records requests related to those services.
The records requests were filed on December 19, 2025, and sought documentation related to the planning and operation of agency-sponsored Christian prayer services, including communications, costs, and complaint data. The lawsuits are part of a series of legal challenges related to the administration’s religious liberty initiatives.
LEGAL INTERPRETATIONExecutive Order 14205 established the White House Faith Office and directed federal agencies to designate or support internal faith-based engagement functions. That order provides the administrative basis for agency initiatives such as the Department of Labor’s Center for Faith.
The Department of Labor’s website does not change the legal standards governing religious discrimination in employment. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of religion and are required to provide reasonable accommodation for sincerely held religious beliefs and practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship.
The lawsuits filed by Americans United are brought under the Freedom of Information Act. FOIA requires federal agencies to respond to records requests within a defined statutory timeframe. The claims challenge whether the Departments of Defense and Labor met those procedural obligations in responding to requests related to agency-sponsored prayer services. The cases seek the production of records and do not address the legality of the prayer services themselves.
BRIDGE POV The federal government is expanding how it is engaging in religion, both through formal structures like the Center for Faith and through agency-level practices that are now drawing legal scrutiny.
The legal standard has not changed. Employers are required to prevent religious discrimination and provide accommodation in a way that is applied consistently. What is evolving is how visible and active this space is becoming.
As this continues, companies need to be clear on how religious expression shows up inside their organizations and ensure that policies, practices, and employee experiences are aligned.
ACTIONABLE STRATEGIES - Review how religious accommodation is applied in practice
Ensure requests are handled consistently across employees, teams, and faith traditions, and that decisions are documented.
- Clarify boundaries around religious expression in the workplace
Define what is appropriate, voluntary, and non-disruptive to ensure employees are not pressured to participate.
- Align policies with how the workplace actually operates
Confirm that written policies reflect day-to-day practice and that managers are equipped to apply them correctly.
See also: The DOJ's Anti-Christian Bias Task Force, Issue 10; OPM Guidance on Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace, Issue 23 | | | | | |
FEDERAL FUNDING & OVERSIGHT |
|
|---|
| | | | | | OVERVIEWOn March 20, 2026, the Underground Railroad Education Center (UREC), a nonprofit museum in Albany, New York, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York challenging the termination of a $250,000 National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Challenge Grant awarded in January 2024. The grant was canceled in 2025 as part of a broader NEH action terminating approximately 1,400 grants identified as conflicting with Executive Order 14151, which directed federal agencies to eliminate DEI-related programs.
The complaint alleges that the termination violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections and, according to public reporting on the filing, raises First Amendment claims related to the subject matter of the funded work. The grant had supported a planned expansion of the museum, including a new interpretive center focused on the history of the Underground Railroad.
LEGAL INTERPRETATIONThe lawsuit filed by the UREC challenges the federal government’s termination of a previously awarded National Endowment for the Humanities grant issued to the organization. The grant, awarded in 2024, was canceled in 2025 following federal action taken under Executive Order 14151 directing agencies to eliminate DEI-related programs.
The complaint alleges that the termination violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections by depriving the organization of an awarded grant without a lawful basis. It also raises First Amendment claims, asserting that the cancellation was based on the subject matter of the funded work.
The case is an as-applied challenge to a specific grant termination carried out under that directive. The claims focus on whether the government’s action was motivated by impermissible considerations and whether the termination was lawfully executed. The case is ongoing.
BRIDGE POVThe Underground Railroad Education Center case brings the federal funding question into sharper focus. This is no longer about policy direction in the abstract. It is about how that direction is being applied to specific organizations, specific programs, and specific subject matter.
At the center of this case is a fundamental question: why is Black history being classified as DEI? Black history is American history. The issue here is not labeling. It is whether subject matter tied to race and culture is being redefined in a way that creates new grounds for restriction.
For companies, this underscores a broader responsibility. Preserving history and representing culture accurately is not separate from the business. It shows up in brand, product, content, and experience. As external pressure increases, organizations need to be clear on what they stand for and ensure that commitment is reflected consistently in how they operate.
ACTIONABLE STRATEGIES- Be explicit about the purpose of the work:
Ensure programs tied to history, culture, or community are clearly defined by their business, educational, or institutional purpose. Avoid broad labels that can be reinterpreted under changing policy frameworks.
- Treat preservation of history and culture as a business responsibility:
Be clear on how your organization represents history, culture, and identity across brand, content, product, and experience. This is not separate from the business and should be managed with the same rigor.
- Evaluate exposure in federally connected funding and partnerships:
If your organization receives federal funding or operates through grants, sponsorships, or public-private partnerships, assess where programs could be subject to reinterpretation or termination.
See also: Trump Signs Executive Order Targeting Historical Narratives at Federal Institutions (Issue 6); Fourth Circuit Declines Facial Challenge to Anti-DEI Orders, Keeps Door Open for Future Legal Action(Issue 52); Depositions Reveal AI-Driven Review Used to Terminate Federal DEI Grants (Issue 56) | | | | | |
|
|---|
|
FEDERAL FUNDING & OVERSIGHT |
|
|
|---|
|
| | | | | | On March 23, 2026, a coalition of 21 state attorneys general filed suit challenging new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) funding conditions requiring states to certify compliance with federal policies on DEI, gender identity, immigration, and athletics. The conditions took effect December 31, 2025.
The lawsuit alleges the conditions are unlawful, vague, and unrelated to the statutory purpose of programs including SNAP, WIC, and the National School Lunch Program, and seeks to block enforcement while the case proceeds. The filing follows USDA confirmation that it canceled a $300 million program supporting farmers’ access to land, citing conflicts with federal DEI directives. | | | | | |
|
|---|
|
| | | | | | On March 24, 2026, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from enforcing restrictions that would have limited access to federal anti-trafficking grants based on DEI-related criteria.
The court found that the administration’s conditions on grant funding likely exceeded its authority and raised constitutional concerns, including separation of powers. The injunction prevents the government from denying or conditioning funding for organizations serving trafficking victims while the case proceeds.
See also: Anti-Trafficking Groups Sue Trump Administration, Arguing DEI Bans Undermine Federal Protections for Survivors (Issue 35) | | | | | |
|
|---|
|
COMMUNITY EVENTS | BRIDGE26: Beyond the Line is where inclusion turns from intention into performance fueling innovation, resilience, and growth. It’s where workplace culture and marketplace impact advance together.
From Inclusive AI and Marketing to the CDO Role Reimagined to How Brands Win with Inclusion and the Legal State of the Union, the BRIDGE26 agenda is built around everything leaders need to move inclusion from intention to performance.
And the incredible speaker lineup represents the most visionary inclusion, marketing and business leaders who are redefining what growth looks like, and how it’s led, including:
- Alicin Williamson, Chief Diversity & Culture Officer, Yahoo!
- Jenny Yang, Former Chair EEOC, Partner, Outten & Golden
- Donna Dozier Gorden, Head of Inclusion & Diversity, Americas, H&M
- Dr. Omar Rodríguez Vilá, Professor in the Practice of Marketing, Emory University
- Ron Mendez, EVP, Cultural Investment & Strategy Lead, WPP Media
- Brandon Thompson, VP of Diversity & Inclusion, NASCAR
- Lori Goode, CMO, Index Exchange
Join us May 3–5 in Newport Beach. | | |
|
|
|---|
ABOUT BRIDGE FORWARD | | | | | | | Led by BRIDGE, FORWARD is a weekly leadership briefing that distills the most consequential legal, political, and reputational developments shaping DEI and inclusive growth. Each issue provides legal interpretation, BRIDGE’s point of view, and actionable strategies to help leaders safeguard trust, anticipate risk and make credible value-based decisions in a volatile environment.
Who it’s for: CMOs, CCOs, Chief DEI Officers, GCs, Heads of Risk, CHROs, and senior leaders across DEI, marketing, brand, policy, and legal functions. FOR PAST ISSUES OF BRIDGE FORWARD WEEKLY GUIDANCE PLEASE VISIT HERE. *These BRIDGE FORWARD updates should not be construed as legal advice or counsel. They are for educational and instructive purposes only, to aid our understanding about how best to actively continue our mission in response to this moment. | | | | | |
|
|
|
|---|
 | |
|  | |
| |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|
|
| | 1276 Auto Park Way Suite D, PMB 183, Escondido, CA 92029 |
| This email was sent to {{ contact.EMAIL }} |
| You've received it because you've subscribed to our newsletter. |
| | |
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
