Federal appeals court overturns Mississippi anti-DEI ruling, removes judge over AI errors

The Fifth Circuit overturned an injunction blocking parts of Mississippi’s anti-DEI law and ordered a new judge to oversee the lawsuit.

A federal appeals court has overturned an order blocking parts of Mississippi’s anti-DEI law and directed that the lawsuit be reassigned to a different judge after errors linked to artificial intelligence were found in earlier court rulings.

Mississippi’s anti-DEI law restricts diversity initiatives at public schools and universities. Still, the decision reverses a ruling that blocked parts of the law and comes amid wider restrictions on diversity programs.

The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the preliminary injunction on Thursday (Oct. 22) and ordered the case reassigned from U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate. Per Mississippi Today. Wingate acknowledged that a law clerk used artificial intelligence while drafting an earlier order.

The appeals court faulted the order for naming people who were not involved in the lawsuit, for including unsupported factual assertions, and for misquoting the legislation. A revised version also cited a nonexistent court case.

“The proceedings in the district court were a botch job, to say the least,” the appeals court wrote.

Mississippi enacted House Bill 1193 in April 2025, restricting DEI offices, mandatory diversity training and certain instruction or activities in publicly funded educational institutions.

Teachers, parents, students and organizations challenged the measure, arguing it violated constitutional free speech protections and was too vague. Mississippi officials defended the state’s authority to regulate its publicly funded schools.

The appellate panel criticized Wingate’s handling of the case and found that his preliminary injunction applied an incorrect legal framework. It directed a new judge to reconsider the claims in light of the relevant Supreme Court precedents.

The ruling also addressed the law’s scope. It said the restrictions do not directly govern students’ own expression and identified exceptions for scholarly research, creative work and student-group activities, though state-funded activities may face limits.

Rob McDuff, the attorney for the plaintiffs, welcomed the court’s interpretation, saying it preserved room for teachers and students to discuss civil rights history.

The anti-DEI law can now move toward enforcement of the previously blocked provisions, but the constitutional challenge remains pending before a new district judge.