Compliance Stuff

The Trump administration has continued its efforts to step back from enforcing “unintentional” workplace bias liability and is focused on intentional discrimination instead. The EEOC announced earlier this month that it would continue to only prioritize enforcement in intentional discrimination cases (known as disparate treatment liability ), with a focus on bias in DEI programs. The agency will not focus on workplace discrimination stemming from a policy or practice that unintentionally discriminates against a population of employees (which is known as disparate impact liability ). Notably, the Department of Justice (DOJ) backed that position in a June 9 memo giving its opinion that the disparate impact theory of liability is likely unconstitutional. According to the DOJ, the government has been holding employers to an unfairly high standard when it comes to defending everyday workplace practices like background checks, skills tests, and education requirements . The DOJ’s position h...

Takeaways The DOJ analysis bolsters EEOC’s shift away from disparate impact liability theories of employment discrimination.  The DOJ memo proposes stricter limits on disparate impact claims. Related links DOJ Office of Legal Counsel Memo   EEOC Releases New National Enforcement Plan   Does Employer Disparate Impact Liability Still Exist? The Latest EO Pushes to Eliminate It EEOC to Halt Investigations into Disparate Impact Claims Article On June 9, 2026, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel released a memorandum opinion finding the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) existing guidelines on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act’s disparate impact provisions to be unconstitutional. EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas had requested that the DOJ review the EEOC’s interpretative rules and guidance documents to advise whether the Title VII disparate impact provisions were constitutional as currently interpreted and applied. The memo’s conclusions align with ...

We’ve all heard the horror stories. A job seeker spends hours tailoring his resume, finally hits “submit,” and within seconds receives a rejection email in his inbox. Clearly, no human could have actually reviewed the resume. The applicant wasn’t rejected by a person; he was rejected by a pattern-matching algorithm. The “ No Robot Bosses Act ” could curtail these scenarios. The bill has bipartisan support in Congress, having been co-sponsored by Democrats Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon and Christopher Deluzio of Pennsylvania, and the Republican Delegate from Guam, James Moylan. The core premise of the proposed No Robot Bosses Act?  Employers would be prohibited from relying exclusively on automated decision systems to make employment-related decisions , including whether to hire or fire. Under the proposed law, an “automated decision system” is defined broadly as follows: a system, software, or process that . . . uses computation, in whole or in part, to determine outcomes, make or aid...

GovDocs’ Webinar  Employment Law Shifts: First 120 Days of Trump Administration  tackles several of the notable employment law changes initiated by President Trump’s Second Administration. As stated by Presenter Jana Bjorklund, GovDocs Senior Counsel and Director, the Trump Administration has been “wildly busy” over the last four months, and much of it has been directed towards employment law.    In the webinar, Bjorklund identifies several key employment law shifts – including DEI, disparate impact liability, and federal contractor compliance – and discusses how these changes impact employers. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion   There should be no surprise to employers that DEI has been a “hot button” since the start of Trump’s second term, as indicated by Bjorklund . Notably, she discusses two executive orders signed by President Trump earlier this year that had immediate impact to DEI:  Executive Order 14151 – Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Pr...