This article was written by Elissa Rossi, Vice President of Compliance Services at Traliant, a leading provider of online compliance training available through OpenSesame.
Not sure what the new Executive Orders or EEOC and DOJ guidance mean for your organization? You’re not alone.
Between the recent Executive Orders on DEI, sex, and gender Identity and guidance jointly issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Justice (DOJ), employers across the country are asking the same questions: What’s changed? What’s allowed? And how should we update our training programs?
Traliant’s legal and compliance team put together the quick guidance below to keep your organization informed, compliant, and aligned with the latest legal standards.
1. DEI programs are not banned, but must be legally sound
Let’s be clear: the Executive Orders do not ban DEI programs. The Orders also don’t change the law or create new law. Instead, the Orders set out that the Administration will focus on ending discrimination that occurs in the context of DEI efforts. In other words, just as in other areas, DEI initiatives should not include practices that reflect unlawful preferences based on race, sex, or other protected characteristics.
This means:
- Employers can still invest in DEI.
- DEI training is still permitted — and recommended.
- DEI programs must align with existing federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Put simply, DEI that is thoughtful, inclusive, and legally compliant remains not only permissible, but essential.
2. Scrutiny is rising — and so should your awareness
In line with the Executive Orders, the EEOC and DOJ’s March 2025 guidance emphasizes enforcement against unlawful discrimination — not DEI itself.
The takeaway? Now’s the time to review your DEI policies, training content, and messaging for potential legal risks.
3. Executive Order on gender identity seems to conflict with existing law
The January 2025 Executive Order says that the Executive Branch will interpret and apply federal law and policy so that the term sex means a “biological classification”. The Order also provides that the term sex does “not include the concept of ‘gender identity.’” The Order appears to conflict with existing federal law. In a 2020 decision, the Supreme Court held that workplace discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation is discrimination on the basis of sex and thus violates Title VII.
The Order doesn’t change your obligations as an employer. Under federal law, employees are still protected from discrimination and harassment on the basis of gender identity, and employers are still required to prevent this type of unlawful conduct. For example, courts have ruled that intentionally misgendering someone could be considered evidence of gender identity harassment.
4. Compliance training remains a critical tool
Rather than pulling back, many organizations are using this moment to modernize and reinforce their harassment prevention and inclusion training. Why?
- It shows a commitment to a respectful, inclusive workplace culture.
- It prepares managers and employees for a more complex legal environment.
- It reduces the risk of legal liability stemming from confusion or inconsistent practices.
The most effective training avoids ideology and instead focuses on explaining legal standards clearly and teaching employees and managers practical skills to navigate discrimination prevention, diversity, and inclusion.
Final thoughts
DEI isn’t dead — but it is entering a new chapter. As public debate intensifies and legal standards evolve, compliance training has a unique role to play: helping clients navigate uncertainty with clarity, compliance, and confidence.
Whether you’re updating existing programs or building new ones, now is the time to ensure your training is inclusive, effective, and legally aligned.
About the author
Elissa Rossi is Vice President of Compliance Services at Traliant. She practiced employment law and litigation at various law firms, including Boyd Richards and Wilkie Farr. She has also served as an Assistant Attorney General in New York’s Attorney General’s Office. Elissa has represented clients in state and federal actions and in administrative proceedings before the EEOC and other regulatory bodies. She is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Chicago Law School.
