It is no secret that since the start of 2025, the Trump administration in the US has moved quickly against government-run diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes. The beginning of President Trump’s second term saw a flurry of executive orders that ended government DEI programmes, ended affirmative action for federal contractors, and restricted federal recognition of gender. Multinational businesses operating in the United States and the European Union had to quickly navigate this evolving landscape, with major knock-on effects in the private sector, and uniquely, Big Law. Many leading US law firms scaled back their visible DEI commitments and redirected their pro bono work to meet Trump-era settlement deals. There was a significant retreat from US firms as they downplayed DEI terminology and changed public-facing commitments under mounting scrutiny.
If we come back across the pond and look at the UK, the general legal environment points in a different direction. The UK Equality Act 2010 remains the baseline, meaning any firm that rolled back its DEI policies to US-firm levels in response to President Trump’s executive orders would have exposed themselves to a significant risk of discrimination cases and reputational damage. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) reiterated that all regulated firms must collect and publish workforce diversity data in 2025 by the 4th of July. While some firms shifted their DEI messaging to highlight more subtle or neutral language, there was a stark difference to the responses from US firms and their UK counterparts.
So, what does this mean for trans-Atlantic firms and their communications teams? In the US, the risks are regulatory in nature, but in the UK, the main risks stem more from under-compliance with equality law and regulator expectations on transparency and harassment prevention. News coverage over the past few months has shown that some firms’ DEI targets outside the US were not reviewed or changed in response to Trump’s executive orders, but that US targets and initiatives had to be abandoned or significantly scaled back. Firms have had to straddle this fine line between aligning with US policies and UK compliance – wherever the risks lie cross-border, the reputational risk is universal. For PR professionals and internal communication teams, this translates into a messaging nightmare.
The divergence in DEI sentiment between the US and UK is unlikely to close soon. US regulatory pushback and political polarisation will continue to drive firms toward compliance-heavy DEI strategies, while UK regulators will continue to expect visible and measurable progress. For law firms with operations in both the UK and US, this means any existing silos between legal risk management and brand messaging will need to be closed and compliance, communications, and leadership functions must be integrated into a single approach to DEI. DEI policies and initiatives should be seen and leveraged as business-critical strategy points that are communicated through clear jurisdiction-specific positioning and a reinforced global narrative grounded in values and client service. This is essential in maintaining credibility and will help firms successfully balance competing pressures while staying compliant. By clarifying global values and tailoring local proof points, firms can maintain consistency and avoid triggering unnecessary risk.
As PR professionals, we must remember that our ability to control the precision of public messaging is our superpower. For transatlantic law firms, the challenge isn’t choosing sides. It’s crafting narratives that honour global values and respect local realities. Firms that can align purpose with compliance, anticipate scrutiny before it comes their way, and communicate clearly will not only safeguard their reputations but also set the tone for the legal industry, one that is constantly under a microscope. In today’s climate, thoughtful messaging isn’t just a brand asset to leverage: It’s a strategic imperative and the differentiator between making it or breaking it.
