DEI - diversity, equity, and inclusion - is a set of principals promoting participation and representation of all people, and particularly historically disadvantaged groups, in areas like employment, academia, and public accommodation. It's a socio-legal initiative, a successor to "affirmative action" and "political correctness".
However laudable its social goals, DEI is not a legal doctrine. Human resources practices based on DEI aren't required. In fact, they could create unnecessary risks for your venture.
"You can't use race, gender, and similar classifications to make hiring and firing decisions. Adopting policies requiring you to do so is an invitation to litigation."
Most employment laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, national origin, or religion. Period. There are no carve outs for DEI or affirmative action. Any policy that permits otherwise prohibited discrimination - even considering race, gender, or a similar classification for the "right" reasons - is potentially problematic.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently struck down DEI-type initiatives in university admissions. It has not done so with respect to employment. Yet. And while we can't predict the future, recent cases suggest the anti-discrimination legal framework that's been in place since 1964 isn't changing, meaning some DEI initiatives in the workplace could eventually be prohibited.
The Takeaway
The goal of DEI - a more inclusive, accommodating working environment for all - is laudable. DEI programs may include some compliant practices. But you can't use race, gender, and similar classifications to make hiring and firing decisions. Adopting policies requiring you to do so is an invitation to litigation. The Supreme Court may decide DEI initiatives in employment are OK. But that seems unlikely. The court has already struck them down in college admissions. It also reaffirmed (and even expanded) the scope of the existing framework for civil rights in employment. DEI "intentional hiring" programs remain at odds with existing employment law.