Trump moves against controversial disparate impact standard, setting off outrage

Another nail was hammered in the coffin of DEI as an opinion from the Justice Department deemed a specific kind of hiring practice to be unconstitutional.

A key element of President Donald Trump’s agenda since the beginning of his second administration has been dismantling woke structures erected throughout government and funded institutions. On Tuesday, that manifested in the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel taking measures to restore “our colorblind Constitution” by working with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to consider disparate-impact liability guidelines as unconstitutional.

In a joint release from the agencies, the DOJ detailed, “The Office of Legal Counsel found that EEOC’s guidelines pressured employers to engage in racial discrimination. Under those guidelines, employers could be held liable for unequal hiring and promotion outcomes among different groups, without regard to the employer’s likely intent.”

“Despite trying to promote equality, EEOC’s disparate impact liability interpretation under Title VII actually fosters the very discrimination its guidelines seek to address,” stated Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. “This opinion will now allow businesses to hire based on performance, restoring equal opportunities to the American workplace.”

Likewise, EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas expressed, “The EEOC is grateful for the thoughtful and insightful analysis provided by Assistant Attorney General Gaiser and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Craddock regarding disparate impact under Title VII.”

“We believe this opinion will provide clarity regarding the Constitutional limits of disparate impact in employment discrimination matters,” she went on before addressing her gratitude for the partnership with the DOJ to restore “our colorblind Constitution.”

The release itself referred to President Donald Trump’s April 2025 executive order on the matter: “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.”

The order states, “Disparate-impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability. It not only undermines our national values, but also runs contrary to equal protection under the law, and therefore, violates our Constitution.”

Under the new guidance, a plaintiff wishing to bring a claim must prove a specific hiring practice to be responsible for unequal outcomes and present an alternative that is both effective for employers and results in fewer unequal outcomes.

Seemingly non-discriminatory metrics like aptitude tests and SAT scores would continue to be treated as such, as the opinion detailed, “Only irrational or arbitrary practices with no plausible job-relatedness can create disparate-impact liability.”

As OLC Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser put it in the opinion, “The fundamental problem is that disparate-impact liability tends to incent–and even coerce–employers to make race-based decisions to avoid liability or the threat of liability.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Tuesday’s release came six months after the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division announced it similarly did away with disparate-impact liability under Title VI.

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

BPR INSIDER COMMENTS

Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Leave a Reply

Latest Articles