Trends in EEOC Enforcement

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has significantly shifted its enforcement priorities. Varnum’s Labor and Employment Practice Team recently presented a webinar on these changes and what they mean for employers.

In June 2026, the EEOC rescinded its fiscal 2024-28 Strategic Enforcement Plan and replaced it with a National Enforcement Plan (NEP) covering fiscal year 2025-29. Although the NEP does not create new legal obligations, it signals where the agency is directing resources and which disputes it considers most significant.

A Shift Away from Disparate Impact Claims

The NEP prioritizes intentional discrimination, known as disparate treatment, over disparate impact claims. Consistent with Executive Order 14281, issued in April 2025, the EEOC has stated it will eliminate disparate impact liability “to the maximum degree possible” and will not commence, develop, or continue disparate impact litigation.

However, courts still recognize disparate impact claims, and private plaintiffs may pursue them. Employers planning large reductions in force should continue to conduct disparate impact analyses.

The EEOC’s Current Enforcement Priorities

1. DEI-Related Discrimination

This is the EEOC’s top enforcement target. The agency is scrutinizing practices it considers unlawful race- or sex-based discrimination, including:

• Race- or sex-based quotas, even when described as aspirational goals.
• Diverse candidate slates and hiring panels.
• Diversity statements required of candidates.
• Executive compensation or bonuses tied to diversity goals.
• Sharing race or sex data with managers, the public, or personnel outside human resources.

2. National Origin Discrimination Against American Workers

Recent enforcement has targeted what the EEOC characterizes as anti-American national origin discrimination, including policies that favor guest worker visa holders or Program Electronic Review Management (PERM) applicants over U.S. workers.

3. Pregnancy Accommodations and Sex-Based Rights

The EEOC has actively litigated under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) since its final rule took effect in June 2024. Key enforcement issues include:

• Forced leaves of absence.
• Failure to engage in the interactive process.
• Rigid attendance policies.
• Denial of reasonable accommodation.

The EEOC has also addressed the scope of Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), particularly employees’ access to single-sex intimate spaces, employers’ ability to provide those spaces, and the right to express views about the binary nature of sex.

In January 2026, the EEOC rescinded its 2024 harassment guidance, which addressed sexual orientation and gender identity. Employers must still comply with applicable federal and state laws, including those governing Michigan employers.

4. Religious Discrimination and Accommodation

The EEOC has significantly increased religious discrimination litigation since 2024. These cases focus on protecting employees from religious discrimination and harassment and ensuring access to religious accommodation under the undue-hardship standard established in Groff v. DeJoy (2023).

Artificial Intelligence as an Emerging Enforcement Priority

Although AI-related enforcement has not yet produced major EEOC litigation, the agency continues to identify this as an area of focus. Potential concerns include algorithmic decision-making in hiring, resume screening, workplace surveillance, and pay recommendations.

What Employers Are Seeing in EEOC Enforcement

The EEOC is prioritizing its private-sector charge backlog. Varnum attorneys have observed that response deadlines for certain charges appear to have shortened from 30 days to 15 days, leaving employers less time to prepare position statements and gather evidence.

Other observed trends include:

• Longer case timelines and fewer determinations based on insufficient evidence.
• More right-to-sue notices are issued quickly, sometimes before an investigation.
• More situations involving workplace safety or direct-threat concerns related to an employee’s physical or mental condition.
• An overall increase in charges, potentially aided by AI tools.
• More dual filings with the EEOC and state agencies, such as the Michigan Department of Civil Rights.

Key Takeaways for Employers

Employers should consider the following steps to address changing EEOC enforcement priorities:

• Review hiring, promotion, compensation, training, and data-sharing practices for potential discrimination risks related to DEI initiatives.
• Confirm recruiting and visa-related practices comply with applicable nondiscrimination requirements.
• Review pregnancy accommodation procedures for compliance with the PWFA.
• Apply the Groff undue-hardship standard to religious accommodations and document decisions.
• Continue disparate impact analysis for large reductions in force.
• Assess AI tools used in hiring, screening, monitoring, and pay decisions for potential bias.
• Prepare to respond promptly to EEOC charges and verify deadlines upon receipt.
• Remember that state law requirements remain in effect even when federal enforcement policies change.

For assistance with EEOC charges, employment compliance, or other human resources issues, please contact a member of Varnum’s Labor and Employment Practice Team.