�鶹ֱ��

On August 19, 2026, the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) , which regulated the OFCCP’s race and sex bias enforcement regime. If Executive Order (EO) 11246 is well and fully dead, it had a truly epic run. But, as any good employment lawyer knows, the end of one regulation is often just the beginning of new compliance headaches. So, grab your coffee — here’s what employers, HR teams, and in-house counsel need to know about the EO 11246 and what comes next.

EO 11246 Fell Just Shy of Social Security Age

Signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson on September 24, 1965 — back when the Beatles were still touring and a gallon of gas cost about 31 cents — EO 11246 became the backbone of equal employment opportunity obligations for federal contractors and remained as much for nearly six decades. It required nondiscrimination, affirmative action plans, and gave the OFCCP the authority to audit companies doing business with the federal government for race and sex bias.

However, almost immediately after President Trump took office in 2025, he issued Executive Order 14173 to rescind EO 11246; courts from Illinois to the Fourth Circuit were asked to weigh in on the constitutionality of EO 14173’s rescission of EO 11246; and federal contractors were left in the proverbial twilight zone between the regulations that had been required for sixty years and the expectations of the new administration under the new Executive Order. Now? The curtain has fallen.

The Final Nail: Regulations Officially Rescinded

While it should not come as a surprise, the Trump administration recently finalized the elimination of the regulations implementing EO 11246. The former regulations under EO 11246 required federal contractors to create affirmative action plans (AAPs) and allowed OFCCP to conduct compliance audits for potential race and sex bias. Those obligations (and related audits) are now formally off the books.

The administration also finalized rules to remove cross-references to EO 11246 from two other anti-bias laws enforced by OFCCP: the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act (VEVRAA) and Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibit bias against veterans and individuals with disabilities, respectively. And, in a particularly significant move, the administration eliminated the 7% utilization goal under Section 503 that had encouraged federal contractors to recruit and employ qualified individuals with disabilities.

These changes shake the very foundations of the federal contractor management regime. Think of it this way: if the OFCCP were a house, EO 11246 was a load-bearing wall. Since 2025, the White House’s budget plans have sought to defund the agency entirely, raising serious questions about whether the OFCCP — an office that, like EO 11246, has been around for decades — will continue to exist in any meaningful form.

But Wait — Is EO 11246 Really Dead?

Here’s where it gets interesting, and where the dutiful readers of this blog earn their keep. While EO 11246 itself is gone, federal contractors are not free to just throw their compliance binders into the office shredder. The replacement framework under EO 14173 introduced its own set of obligations, including a requirement that contractors certify they do not operate any programs “promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.” That certification is tied to the False Claims Act, meaning a contractor who later turns out to have been running an “illegal” DEI program could face significant financial liability.

The catch? EO 14173 never actually defined what constitutes an “illegal” DEI or DEIA program, which is a bit like being told you must certify that you’ve never committed a “bad” act without anyone telling you what “bad” actually means. This ambiguity has become the central battleground in ongoing litigation. That hasn’t stopped the Department of Justice (DOJ) from pursuing False Claims Act actions over “illegal DEI” programs.

The Courts and DOJ Weigh In: A Legal Rollercoaster

The legal challenges were anything but boring. In late February 2025, a federal district court entered a nationwide injunction blocking enforcement of EO 14173’s DEI-related provisions, finding the certification requirement unconstitutionally vague and potentially a violation of the First Amendment. The reasoning was straightforward: how can contractors certify compliance with a standard that hasn’t been defined? But the Trump administration appealed swiftly, and on March 14, 2025, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the nationwide injunction, holding that the executive order itself merely directs agency action and is likely not unconstitutional on its face. The appellate court essentially said: let’s wait to see how federal agencies actually implement these directives before declaring them unconstitutional.

Similarly, on March 27, 2025, a parallel chapter opened. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly of the Northern District of Illinois issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking the Department of Labor (DOL) from enforcing certain provisions of EOs 14173 and 14151 against Chicago Women in Trades (CWIT), a nonprofit receiving federal DOL funding. Judge Kennelly found that the certification provision was problematic precisely because EO 14173 fails to define what “illegal” DEI means, and that CWIT was likely to succeed on its First Amendment claims. Notably, the court’s ruling on the certification provision extended beyond CWIT to all DOL grants and contracts — though it did not reach other federal agencies.

For its part, the government sought to clarify the issue, first with the DOJ on March 19, 2025, and formal rulemaking in .

What Employers Should Do Right Now

So, what should a well-meaning employer, HR professional, or in-house employment lawyer do now? Here are our thoughts:

• Don’t assume the old rules still apply. EO 11246 is officially rescinded and its implementing regulations are gone. Contractors are no longer officially required to maintain written AAPs under the old framework.
• Don’t assume you’re off the hook, either. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal anti-discrimination statutes remain fully in effect. The end of EO 11246 does not mean the end of nondiscrimination obligations — it means the end of the specific affirmative action obligations as they existed under EO 11246.
• Take the DEI certification seriously. If your organization contracts with the federal government, be prepared in the event your organization is asked to certify that you do not operate programs promoting DEI that violate federal anti-discrimination laws. Given the False Claims Act exposure, treat this certification the way you would any representation to the government: carefully, with legal review, and with documentation to back it up.
• Conduct a risk assessment. Review your existing diversity programs, training, and policies. As we’ve previously written about, the goal is not to abandon efforts to build a fair and inclusive workplace — it is to ensure those efforts are grounded in lawful, merit-based practices that do not cross into the kind of race- or sex-based preferencing the current administration views as illegal.
• Watch the courts. The legal landscape is shifting in real time. What is enforceable today may be enjoined tomorrow and vice versa. Build a relationship with outside counsel who can keep you current on this ever-shifting landscape and continue to monitor for the next installment of this legal drama.

Takeaways

EO 11246 had a remarkable 60-year run; longer than most executive orders survive. The official rescission of its implementing regulations marks a genuine sea change in the federal contractor compliance world. With this announcement, the OFCCP appears to be substantially diminished. So too are race and sex-related affirmative action plans leaving the legal grey area. But, at bottom, the obligation to treat workers fairly, and the legal risk of getting it wrong, is not going anywhere, and employers must keep these bedrock guiding principles in mind as they chart their next course.