Labor & Employment Blog

On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) formally rescinded its Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP) for Fiscal Years 2024–2028 and replaced it with a new National Enforcement Plan (NEP) for Fiscal Years 2025–2029. The new plan represents a significant shift in the agency’s enforcement priorities and approach to workplace discrimination investigations and litigation.

While the prior SEP focused heavily on systemic discrimination, advancing pay equity, protecting vulnerable workers, addressing emerging workplace issues, and expanding access to the legal system, the new NEP places greater emphasis on allegations of intentional discrimination, referred to as "disparate treatment," and expressly deprioritizes the use of disparate impact theories "to the maximum degree possible." The EEOC further states it will not initiate or continue litigation advancing disparate impact claims, marking one of the most notable departures from prior enforcement policy.

The NEP also signals increased scrutiny of workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The EEOC identifies as enforcement priorities cases involving employment policies, programs, or practices that allegedly use race or sex as factors in employment decisions. According to the plan, this may include challenges to hiring quotas, diverse slate requirements, diversity statements, mentorship or fellowship opportunities limited to certain demographic groups, and compensation structures tied to diversity-related goals. The agency specifically notes its intention to pursue cases that clarify the application of recent Supreme Court decisions to DEI-related employment practices.

Additionally, the EEOC identifies several areas where it intends to shape the development of employment law through strategic litigation. These include issues involving religious accommodations under Groff v. DeJoy, the scope of protections recognized in Bostock v. Clayton County, the "some harm" standard established in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, and unresolved questions under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The agency also expressed an interest in pursuing cases involving employees' rights related to single-sex workplace facilities and the expression of views regarding the binary nature of sex.

Despite these shifts, several longstanding enforcement priorities remain intact. The EEOC continues to emphasize protecting vulnerable workers, including teenagers, individuals with limited education or literacy, survivors of sexual assault, individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities, and workers in low wage occupations. The agency also reaffirmed its commitment to pursuing retaliation claims, protecting the integrity of the EEOC's investigatory processes, collaborating with state and local enforcement agencies, and encouraging early dispute resolution through mediation, conciliation, and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

For employers, the NEP underscores the importance of reviewing existing employment practices, policies, and training programs to ensure compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws. Organizations with DEI initiatives should carefully assess whether any programs could be interpreted as granting preferences, limiting opportunities, or otherwise making employment decisions based on protected characteristics. Employers also should review accommodation processes, documentation practices, anti-retaliation policies, and recordkeeping procedures in light of the EEOC's stated enforcement priorities.

For employees, the NEP suggests the EEOC will continue to prioritize claims involving intentional discrimination, retaliation, religious accommodation, and workplace harassment. However, individuals seeking to challenge facially neutral employment policies as having a disproportionate impact on protected groups may encounter a different enforcement landscape, as the agency has indicated that it will devote fewer resources to pursuing disparate impact theories.

Although the NEP does not create new legal obligations or rights, it provides valuable insight into how the EEOC intends to allocate its limited resources and exercise its enforcement discretion over the coming years. Employers and employees alike should closely monitor developments arising from the NEP, as the agency's strategic priorities are likely to influence investigations, litigation trends, and the broader evolution of federal employment discrimination law.