New US Policy Declares Diversity Initiatives as Human Rights Infringements

Fri Nov 21 2025 14:08:02 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

The Trump administration's latest directive categorizes race and gender diversity policies as potential violations of human rights, prompting widespread criticism from human rights advocates.

The recent directive issued by the Trump administration states that countries implementing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies may be violating human rights. This new approach will be integrated into the State Department's reports on global human rights abuses, further extending the U.S. focus on foreign policy amid internal ideological divides. Critics argue this marks a significant departure from established human rights norms to pursue a politically motivated agenda.

The Trump administration has declared that countries enforcing race or gender diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies could be seen as infringing upon human rights. This new directive was recently issued by the State Department to all US embassies and consulates tasked with compiling the annual report on global human rights abuses.

Under this new policy, nations that provide funding for abortions or promote mass migration will also fall under scrutiny as human rights infringers. The State Department claims these changes aim to curtail what they call 'destructive ideologies', although rights advocates argue this move significantly alters long-established human rights principles for ideological purposes.

This shift indicates a broader movement within the Trump administration to intertwine its domestic agenda with foreign policy, particularly on controversial social issues that have split public opinion domestically. A senior State Department official described the new rules as tools designed to change the behaviors of other governments.

The DEI policies in question are typically focused on enhancing opportunities for marginalized racial and identity groups. The administration has adopted a stance against these policies, promoting instead merit-based systems.

The official emphasized the belief that rights are inherent and granted by a higher power, not by governments, asserting that the administration remains committed to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

Other specific examples the State Department identified as human rights violations include: subsidizing abortions, providing gender-transition surgeries for minors, facilitating unauthorized migration, and restricting free speech through legal mechanisms aimed at curtailing online hate speech.

Critics have condemned the administration's approach, which they argue weaponizes human rights oversight for domestic political gain. Uzra Zeya, a former State Department official, criticized this direction as a dangerous precedent that undermines the rights of numerous marginalized communities.

The annual human rights report produced by the State Department has long been regarded as one of the most exhaustive analyses of global human rights issues, but this new directive could potentially reshape its focus and impact. Critics warn that it will diminish coverage of significant human rights issues while amplifying reporting on favored narratives.