EEOC Releases National Enforcement Plan: Here’s What to Know

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released its National Enforcement Plan (NEP), a blueprint for how the Commission plans to enforce the employment discrimination laws within its purview. The NEP covers the years 2025-2029 and replaces the Commission’s previous NEP, which covered the years 2024-2028. The purpose of the NEP is to “focus and coordinate the agency’s work over a multiple fiscal year…period to have a sustained impact in advancing equal employment opportunity.” Because the EEOC is the sole federal authority authorized to enforce federal antidiscrimination law, both employers and employees should heed its NEP. Below, our Norfolk employment lawyers cover its most important provisions. 

What Types of Employment Discrimination Is the EEOC Focused On?

The EEOC is focused on combatting disparate treatment discrimination. This type of discrimination is based on intentional acts of discrimination (e.g., only hiring employees under the age of 40), which the EEOC characterizes as the most egregious form of employment discrimination. The EEOC contrasts disparate treatment discrimination with disparate impact discrimination, which is a form of discrimination in which a facially neutral policy (e.g., a ban on head coverings) nonetheless creates unintentional disparities among workers. While the EEOC is authorized to pursue both forms of discrimination, the NEP states that the EEOC will “eliminate the use of disparate impact liability theories in investigations ‘to the maximum degree possible.’” 

What Are the EEOC’s Enforcement Priorities? 

The NEP identifies several categories of substantive priorities, the most significant of which are: 

Cases Involving Repeated or Overt Discrimination 

This is “disparate treatment” discrimination. Examples of overt discrimination include: 

• Job advertisements that exclude or discourage certain individuals from applying (e.g., advertisements that privilege certain applicants based on their race) 
• Staffing agencies that exclude individuals from employment on the basis of a protected characteristic
• Channeling, steering, or segregating individuals into specific jobs based on protected characteristics
• Company-wide policies that violate antidiscrimination laws (e.g., mass denials of accommodations) 
• Systemic harassment 

Cases Involving Intentional Discrimination Arising from Broad-Based Employment Policies

These cases allege patterns of discrimination in hiring, terminations, job mobility, pay, and fringe benefits. The NEP provides several examples of problematic broad-based employment policies that can result in intentional discrimination, including: 

• Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs
• Race- or sex-based quotas, including “aspirational goals” for race- or sex-based representation
• Limitations on access to on-the-job training, internships, fellowships, mentorships, and other benefits
• The use of race and/or sex in employment decisions, including diverse-slate policies, diverse hiring panel policies, and policies that require applicants to provide diversity statements

Cases Having the Potential of Promoting the Development of Antidiscrimination Law 

The NEP states that it will prioritize claims involving the application or scope of recent Supreme Court precedents, particularly: 

• Analysis under Title VII of certain DEI practices pursuant to Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard 
• Analysis of voluntary affirmative action programs pursuant to United Steelworkers v. Weber and Johnson v. Santa Clara County Transportation Agency following Ames, Muldrow, and Students for Fair Admissions
• Employers’ obligation to reasonably accommodate religious practices after Groff v. DeJoy 
• Clarifying the scope of Bostock v. Clayton County with respect to employees’ right to single-sex intimate spaces
• The scope of liability for pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

For more information about structuring employment policies so as not to run afoul of the EEOC’s enforcement priorities, please work with a Norfolk employment lawyer. 

How Are the Trump EEOC’s Priorities Different Than Those of Previous Administrations? 

The Trump EEOC is significantly more focused on combating majority group discrimination (i.e., “reverse discrimination”), national origin discrimination against American citizens, and religious discrimination against Christians than the EEOC under previous administrations. The EEOC in its current form is also significantly less focused on combatting disparate impact discrimination, preferring to focus more on intentional discrimination via overt acts and intentional discrimination via broad-based employment policies (e.g., DEI programs). While the EEOC’s precise enforcement priorities varied by presidential administration, it previously was more focused on combatting discrimination against racial minorities, religious minorities, and women, including through the use of disparate impact analysis. 

How Does the EEOC Enforce Its Priorities? 

The EEOC is committed to a three-pronged enforcement plan: (1) prevention through educational outreach; (2) voluntary resolution of disputes through alternative dispute resolution, pre-determination settlements, and conciliation agreements; and (3) strong and even-handed enforcement through the Commission’s litigation arm. 

Other elements of the EEOC’s enforcement methods include: 

• Strategic prioritization of charges based on constrained resources
• Coordination among the EEOC’s field offices and the Office of General Counsel
• Use of discretion in the deployment of its enforcement authority to advance the presidential administration’s objectives and to comply with Executive Orders
• Individualized assessment of matters
• Collaboration with other federal agencies
• Collaboration with state and local agencies

For more information about the EEOC complaint, investigation, and litigation process from both the employer and employee perspectives, please contact a Norfolk employment lawyer. 

Who Is the Chair of the EEOC and What Are Her Priorities? 

The Chair of the EEOC under the second Trump administration is Andrea Lucas, whom President Trump designated as Chair in November 2025. She has served on the EEOC since 2020. Prior to her work at the EEOC, she was a member of the labor and employment litigation group at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, D.C. According to the NEP, her priorities align closely with those of the EEOC at large: 

• Remedying DEI-related discrimination
• Protecting American workers from national origin discrimination
• Defending women’s rights to single-sex spaces
• Protecting workers’ religious liberty 

Structure EEOC-Compliant Policies With Help From a Norfolk Employment Lawyer

The EEOC’s enforcement priorities under the second Trump administration are a significant departure from those under previous administrations. As such, employers should review their company policies to ensure that they consider the current risk profile. To get started, please contact a Norfolk employment lawyer at Pierce / Jewett by calling 757-624-9323 or using our online contact form.