LANSING, Mich. — The Michigan Supreme Court has renamed and redefined the mission of one of its key commissions, removing references to diversity, equity and inclusion as debates over DEI continue to dominate national politics.
In an order issued Wednesday, Nov, 26, the court announced that its Commission on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion — formed in 2021 — will now be known as the Commission on Fairness and Public Trust. The revised panel will shift its stated purpose away from explicitly addressing demographic disparities within the justice system and toward ensuring that “all those served by the justice system are heard, valued, and respected.”
Justice Elizabeth Welch, who served as one of the commission’s initial co-chairs, acknowledged the political climate surrounding the decision in a concurring opinion.
“The Commission became aware of two seemingly contradictory facts: that ‘DEI’ is now a polarizing concept in American life, while, at the same time, a commitment to fairness, acceptance of others, and equity is not,” Welch wrote, calling DEI a “political lightning rod.”
The commission’s structure — including membership and terms — will remain largely the same. However, its responsibilities will broaden to address any disparities in the courts rather than focusing specifically on demographic ones. The change arrives as DEI programs face heightened scrutiny across state and federal levels; on his first day in office, President Donald Trump labeled such initiatives “radical” and “shameful discrimination.”
The decision drew criticism from some advocacy groups, including Michigan Voices.
“The action of the Michigan Supreme Court is disappointing,” said Lynna Kaucheck, the organization’s director of communications and coalitions. “What remains to be seen is if this name change negatively impacts the original intent of the commission; the consequences of that could devastate the progress that many of Michigan’s marginalized communities have made in recent years.”
Kaucheck argued that a continued focus on fairness requires more, not less, commitment to DEI principles.
“Now more than ever we must remain committed to ensuring that no matter what you look [like], where you come from, or how much money you have in your wallet you should have equitable access to all the resources and opportunities that are necessary to thrive,” she said. “Removing references to DEI amounts to nothing more than kowtowing to the Administration’s continued attacks on marginalized communities.”
Justice Brian Zahra, the court’s lone Republican, issued a dissenting opinion questioning the transparency of the change.
“What does it say about our commitment to transparency that this Court is willing to scrape the name off its DEI Commission at a time when DEI just so happens to be losing its popularity among the people?” Zahra wrote. He argued that the shift alters the commission’s name but not its authority or original mission. “This is a DEI Commission, no matter what name the Court now intends to give it or how vaguely the Court intends to phrase its goals.”
Zahra added that the court should have kept the original DEI label and allowed the public to judge the commission’s work on its merits.
Welch countered Zahra’s transparency concerns by pointing to similarities between the new commission and the Justice for All Commission, which Zahra chairs. Both, she noted, aim to improve access and fairness in the legal system.
“The FPT Commission was created precisely to ensure that we center service to the people of the state and remain steadfast in our commitment to transparency, best practices for retaining and attracting talent, and processes that ensure dignity and fairness for every person who walks through our courthouse doors,” Welch wrote.
The order marks a significant rebranding of the Supreme Court’s equity-focused work, even as debate continues over whether the change reflects a substantive shift in direction or a symbolic response to broader political pressures.
