The Trump administration has recently implemented significant changes to federal contracting regulations, marking a contentious shift in policy toward racial segregation in public facilities. As of March 18, 2025, federal agencies no longer explicitly prohibit contractors from maintaining segregated spaces, such as restaurants, waiting rooms, and drinking fountains. This change comes in the wake of President Donald Trump revoking an executive order instituted by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965, which mandated nondiscrimination among federal contractors.
This alteration was formalized in a memo from the General Services Administration (GSA), which instructed federal agencies to remove the clause concerning the prohibition of segregated facilities from new solicitations and contracts. The memo emphasized that this decision was made in accordance with Trump’s executive order targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion policies designed to uplift historically marginalized groups. Such orders, critics argue, dismantle decades of progress in civil rights and often favor a narrative of "reverse discrimination" against white individuals.
According to the memo, federal contractors are now allowed to segregate facilities based on “race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin” if they choose to do so. Although federal laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 continue to outlaw segregation, the removal of this clause raises concerns among civil rights advocates, who fear this change sends a troubling message that the government may tolerate forms of segregation. “While segregation is still illegal, this change sends a CLEAR message,” said civil rights attorney Ben Crump, highlighting the symbolic weight of the administration's actions.
The rescinded clause, formally known as FAR 52.222-21, previously mandated that federal contractors adhere to civil rights laws and required them to provide integrated rather than segregated services. Notably, this provision had been revised under former President Barack Obama to include gender identity, which is also being rescinded by Trump’s order. This targeted removal of protections tied to gender identity is reflective of the larger trend in the current administration, where policies aimed at diversifying opportunities are increasingly being dismantled.
Federal agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, have already begun implementing these changes by issuing notices to their personnel. A statement from the NIH confirmed that the prohibition of segregated facilities will no longer be considered for contract awards. One federal employee expressed deep concern saying, “The way that they’re implementing this in the contracting field is essentially subverting democracy,” referring to the expedited process devoid of the usual public notice and comment period typically required for such significant regulatory changes.
The GSA's spokesperson, Will Powell, defended the agency's actions, stating, “GSA has taken immediate action to fully implement all current executive orders and is committed to taking action to implement any new executive orders.” However, critics argue that eliminating these provisions undermines civil rights and allows for new forms of segregation to emerge, especially regarding gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals whom the government historically protected against discrimination.
Experts warn that such symbolic moves signal a retreat from efforts to uphold civil rights in federal contracting. Melissa Murray, a constitutional law professor, reflected on how these provisions represented the government’s commitment to maintaining integrated workplaces. “The fact that they are now excluding those provisions from the requirements for federal contractors, I think, speaks volumes,” she stated, emphasizing the importance of maintaining these protections.
Moreover, the historical context cannot be ignored. The 1965 executive order was a critical step aimed at dismantling the entrenched racial segregation that had long pervaded American society. Many fear that the removal of such protections signifies a significant regression in the country’s efforts toward civil rights.
Just as the nation may seem to countries where segregation is more overtly practiced, this subtle shift raises alarms among civil rights activists who argue that the government should not roll back decades of progress in confronting inequality based on race and gender. Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations commented on the danger of such moves, stating, “As our nation unfortunately becomes more divided and polarized, the last thing we need is any effort that could be perceived as allowing racial segregation.”
As federal services and facilities shift toward a landscape where segregation could be permissible again under government contracts, the immediate practical implications for the American public remain uncertain. Civil rights organizations are already gearing up to contest these changes, expressing that backlash is likely inevitable as citizens across the nation rally against these policy rollbacks. The debate surrounding inclusion versus segregation once again occupies the national discourse, reminding citizens that vigilance in protecting hard-earned civil rights remains ever crucial.
Ultimately, while the legal framework against segregation remains intact—thanks to critical laws like the Civil Rights Act—these changes reflect a broader ideological shift in the political realm. The implications will be felt greatly across various sectors, putting into question the very foundation for which the federal government once stood in the fight against inequality.
