DOJ Declares EEOC Disparate-Impact Rules Unconstitutional After June 2 Supreme Court Ruling
Updated
Updated · Courthouse News Service · Jun 9
DOJ Declares EEOC Disparate-Impact Rules Unconstitutional After June 2 Supreme Court Ruling
3 articles · Updated · Courthouse News Service · Jun 9
Summary
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel said Tuesday that EEOC guidance allowing liability for policies with unequal racial effects violates Title VII and the Constitution unless plaintiffs can show a strong likelihood of intentional discrimination.
The opinion leans on the Supreme Court’s June 2 Allen v. Milligan decision and Louisiana v. Callais, saying civil-rights law cannot punish outcomes alone and cannot pressure employers into race-conscious decision-making.
OLC proposed a narrower test: employers should face only a low business-necessity bar, challenged practices should be presumed job-related, and plaintiffs must prove the specific policy caused the disparity and identify an equally effective alternative.
Background checks, aptitude tests and SAT scores were cited as presumptively valid examples, while Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas said the opinion would curb DEI-style racial balancing and restore merit-based hiring.
The opinion advances Trump’s April 23, 2025 order to eliminate federal disparate-impact policies, signaling a broader rollback of civil-rights enforcement that targets discriminatory effects rather than proven intent.