EEOC Faces Lawsuit Over Disparate Impact Enforcement

An Amazon driver has sued the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) after the agency declined to investigate her unintentional discrimination charge, following its decision to deprioritize cases based on disparate impact. Outlined in Section 703(k) of Title VII, disparate impact, or adverse impact, occurs when policies, practices, rules, or other systems that appear to be neutral result in a disproportionate impact on a protected group. An employer can incur liability for disparate impact if the action is not shown to be necessary for the job or business, or if a better, effective alternative exists.

The shift comes in the wake of President Donald Trump’s April 23 executive order (EO) titled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” which directed federal enforcement agencies to deprioritize actions that rely solely on disparate impact theory. The EO emphasized evaluating employment decisions primarily through the lens of intentional discrimination, rather than focusing on neutral practices that may result in unintentional disparities.

While the EEOC remains the primary enforcer of Title VII, its reduced focus on disparate impact may lead to fewer formal investigations, limited technical guidance, and decreased participation in litigation, including amicus briefs. As a result, private lawsuits may become an increasingly important avenue for addressing discrimination claims.

The EO’s influence will affect broader federal enforcement trends and may impact employer behavior across sectors. Importantly, the EO does not alter the text of Title VII or its immediate application to private employers; however, this area of law is likely to continue developing as courts, employers, and the EEOC respond to evolving guidance and enforcement priorities.