June 10, 2026

Under each Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) develops a National Enforcement Plan (NEP) identifying its enforcement priorities and the areas where it intends to focus its investigative and litigation resources. Although the NEP does not create new law, it provides valuable insight into the EEOC’s enforcement priorities and litigation strategy.

Recent shifts in enforcement priorities require employers to reassess certain workplace policies and practices. Although federal and state anti-discrimination laws remain unchanged, the EEOC has signaled that several prior priorities will receive less or no scrutiny, while others will receive heightened scrutiny. Employers ignore the NEP at their peril.

Key Enforcement Priorities

Disparate Treatment / Disparate Impact Claims

The EEOC has indicated it will focus enforcement efforts on disparate treatment claims involving intentional discrimination rather than disparate impact claims based primarily on statistical disparities. Disparate treatment occurs when an employee or applicant is treated differently because of a protected characteristic such as race, sex, religion, national origin, age, or disability. Disparate impact occurs where a facially neutral policy discriminates in fact against a protected group.

Increased Scrutiny of DEI Programs

Under the NEP, DEI initiatives will receive close scrutiny, particularly those involving:

• Race and sex-based quotas, including aspirational goals that function as quotas in practice;
• Diverse slate policies that prioritize demographic characteristics over qualifications;
• Hiring panel composition requirements based on race or sex;
• Candidate diversity statement requirements, including requirements that applicants describe their personal experiences, values, or commitment regarding DEI; and
• Compensation or incentive programs tied to demographic outcomes.

Employers should review existing DEI programs to ensure they comply with applicable anti-discrimination laws and that employment decisions continue to be based on legitimate, non-discriminatory business considerations.

Single-Sex Facilities and Sex-Based Policies

The EEOC has identified issues involving single-sex spaces and binary sex distinctions as areas of interest, including an employer’s ability to maintain single-sex bathrooms and changing facilities. Employers should ensure that workplace policies comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements.

Religious Accommodations

Religious accommodation requests are now a significant enforcement priority. Consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, employers evaluating accommodation requests must apply the heightened “substantial cost” standard rather than the former de minimis burden analysis. Requests for schedule modifications, religious observances, dress, grooming, and other accommodations should be reviewed carefully and on an individualized basis.

National Origin Discrimination

The EEOC also has indicated an interest in national origin discrimination against U.S. citizens, including circumstances in which employers favor guest workers or other non-citizen labor sources over qualified U.S. workers.

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Enforcement

The EEOC will prioritize enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). Employers should ensure they have policies and procedures in place to evaluate and respond appropriately to accommodation requests related to pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions. Importantly, where the ADA requires a “disability,” the PWFA covers conditions that would not qualify as a disability, such as lactation, contraception, menstruation, fertility, and conditions exacerbated by pregnancy.

Key Takeaways

The NEP is an important indicator of where the EEOC will devote its investigative and litigation resources. Employers should review hiring, promotion, compensation, accommodation, training, and DEI-related policies to identify potential areas of risk and ensure compliance with evolving enforcement priorities.

Employers should:

• Review existing DEI initiatives, hiring practices, and compensation programs to ensure they comply with applicable anti-discrimination laws.
• Reevaluate policies and procedures for responding to religious accommodation requests in light of the Supreme Court’s heightened standard for denying accommodations.
• Confirm that policies addressing pregnancy-related accommodations comply with the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
• Ensure managers and supervisors understand their obligations to prevent discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in the workplace.
• Carefully evaluate any proposed changes to workplace policies, training programs, or DEI-related initiatives before implementation.

Employers should not assume that changes in EEOC enforcement priorities alter their underlying legal obligations. Federal and state anti-discrimination laws remain in effect, and employers continue to have a duty to prevent discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Civil litigants are not limited in discrimination claims by the EEOC’s priorities or federal employment statutes which might be less favorable than applicable state laws.

Changes to employment policies and practices should be guided by legal compliance obligations, workforce needs, and business objectives. Maintaining legally compliant workplace policies, documenting training efforts, and appropriately responding to employee complaints remain the most prudent course for employers navigating this evolving environment.

If you have questions regarding the EEOC’s enforcement priorities or your organization’s employment policies and practices, please contact a member of the RRD Employment Practice Group.

Robert W. Small – rsmall@regerlaw.com or 215-495-6541
Michael J. Needleman – mneedleman@regerlaw.com or 215-495-6513
David L. Black – dblack@regerlaw.com or 610-429-4686