Employees’ use of moral framing to justify diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives is gaining popularity as a socially desirable alternative to the business case justification. Yet, it remains unclear if moral framing is effective at motivating leaders—particularly majority group leaders (e.g., White, male leaders)—to support DEI initiatives. In this dissertation, I integrate research on moral framing and social norms in organizations to argue that employees’ use of moral frames to sell the importance of DEI issues can be a double-edged sword for motivating majority group leaders to support DEI initiatives. On the one hand, moral framing heightens majority group leaders’ psychological standing, and thus indirectly increases their support for DEI initiatives. On the other hand, moral framing triggers psychological reactance for majority group leaders, and thus indirectly reduces their support for DEI initiatives. Finally, when employees emphasize majority group leaders’ problem-solving autonomy concerning how to address DEI issues, moral framing has a stronger effect on psychological standing and a weaker effect on psychological reactance—thus enhancing majority group leaders’ overall support for DEI initiatives. I find support for these predictions across several studies that cover racial and gender equity issues. I discuss theoretical and practical implications.