Trump Administration Removes Protections Against Segregated Contracts in Bold Move

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a controversial move, the Trump administration has eliminated a federal contracting clause that prohibited the use of segregated facilities, a regulation that dates back to the civil rights reforms of the 1960s. This significant policy change impacts all civil federal agencies and contractors, raising concerns about potential regressions in workplace integration.

The General Services Administration (GSA) issued a memo last month detailing the repeal of the ‘Prohibition of Segregated Facilities’ clause, which required contractors to eliminate segregated waiting rooms, drinking fountains, and other facilities based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin. Legal experts warn that while federal laws against discrimination remain in effect, the removal of this clause symbolizes a troubling shift in federal contracting policies.

“It’s symbolic, but it’s incredibly meaningful in its symbolism,” said Martha Murray, a constitutional law professor at New York University. “These provisions were part of the federal government’s efforts to facilitate the settlement that led to integration in the 1950s and 1960s. Excluding them from federal contractor requirements speaks volumes.”

The clause, embedded in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), was intended to ensure compliance with civil rights laws, mandating that federal contractors maintain integrated workplaces. The GSA’s recent memo implies that contractors can now operate segregated facilities, effectively undermining decades of civil rights progress.

Communication circulated within multiple federal agencies, including the Departments of Health and Human Services, State, and Defense, guiding them to implement these changes immediately. A recent notice from the National Institutes of Health confirmed this policy shift’s rapid enactment, stating that the segregation clause would not be considered in future contract awards.

“Many people were shocked to learn about these changes,” said a federal employee involved in contract oversight who requested anonymity. “The way it was implemented, without public notice or a comment period, feels undemocratic. It seems designed to slip through without detection.”

The GSA has not provided clarity on why standard procedures for public notification and comment were bypassed. Will Powell, a spokesperson for the GSA, stated only that the agency is committed to implementing current executive orders, including those related to non-discrimination.

Legal analyst Tanya Hsu from Washington, D.C., noted that the clause’s removal coincides with a trend of rescinding regulations instituted during the Obama administration, particularly those that expanded protections based on gender identity. “The exclusion was likely prompted by elements within the executive orders from the Trump administration,” Hsu explained.

As history weighs on the current situation, experts caution that the fight against segregation in the U.S. is far from over. Murray reflects on her family’s history and futility in the face of systemic racism. “When my father, a Jamaican immigrant, took me to a department store in D.C., he couldn’t work on the sales floor because of his race,” she shared. “Remembering that, I realize segregation is not as far away as some might think.”