A federal judge in California, whom former President Donald Trump once dismissed as an “Obama judge,” leading to a rare criticism from Chief Justice John Roberts, has partially stopped government agencies from implementing parts of anti-DEI executive orders made by Trump during his presidency due to concerns about unlawful censorship.

In a decision spanning 52 pages, U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, who was appointed by Barack Obama, determined that a collective of pro-LGBTQ organizations has likely established the right to contest three out of nine sections of Trump’s executive orders initiated at the beginning of his second term.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Those blocked provisions, according to the ruling:

The contested sections include: (1) a mandate requiring the certification that no programs promoting DEI contravene federal anti-discrimination laws (the “Certification Provision”); (2) an order to cease funding for all “equity-related grants or contracts” (the “Equity Termination Provision”); and (3) two directives to stop funding for any programs that encourage “gender ideology” (the “Gender Termination Provision” and “Gender Promotion Provision”).

The provisions appear in three executive orders Trump signed on the first day of his second term as president — one order targeting transgender people by “recogniz[ing] two sexes, male and female,” and two orders purportedly aimed at bringing down diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and initiatives.

In Tigar’s view, the plaintiffs, led by the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, won a partial injunction because they are likely to succeed with their arguments that the Trump administration is violating the Constitution and engaging in a censorship campaign.

“These three funding provisions reflect an effort to censor constitutionally protected speech and services promoting DEI and recognizing the existence of transgender individuals,” the judge wrote. “These provisions seek to strip funding from programs that serve historically disenfranchised populations in direct contravention of several statutes under which Plaintiffs receive funding.”

“Plaintiffs have therefore demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits that these provisions violate their rights under the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and the Separation of Powers,” Tigar added. “Plaintiffs, however, have not demonstrated that they likely to succeed in their challenge to the Certification Provision because they have not shown at this juncture that the provision goes beyond targeting DEI programs that violate federal antidiscrimination law.”

The judge noted that the Trump administration is “still bound by the Constitution” and “cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities” through “vague” orders.

Read the ruling here.