Implications of EEOC’s ‘National Enforcement Plan’ for Employers

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published on June 4, 2026 a National Enforcement Plan for fiscal years 2025–2029. The new plan rescinds the EEOC’s previously adopted Strategic Enforcement Plan for fiscal years 2024–2028 and formally implements enforcement priorities previously announced by Chair Andrea Lucas, particularly those related to employer diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. While the core principles and priorities listed in the plan are not new to employers, it offers valuable guidance to employers on the practices EEOC intends to target.

PRIOR EEOC ENFORCEMENT PLANS

EEOC has released Strategic Enforcement Plans (SEPs) since 2012 as part of the strategic planning process required by the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act. The SEPs guide the agency’s work over a four-year fiscal period and communicate its strategic priorities to the regulated community. The SEPs are typically developed using a formal review process that involves multiple public hearings and the solicitation of public comments on a draft proposal.

EEOC’s most recent strategic enforcement plan was released in September 2023 under the leadership of then-Chair Charlotte Burrows. The priorities in that plan included eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring, protecting vulnerable workers and persons from underserved communities, advancing equal pay, preserving access to the legal system, preventing and remedying systemic harassment, and addressing emerging legal issues related to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, the long-term effects of COVID-19, and technology-related discrimination.

THE 2026 NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT PLAN

The National Enforcement Plan (NEP) rescinds and replaces the prior SEP for fiscal years 2024-2028. It identifies several “substantive categories of priorities” that will guide EEOC investigations, conciliations, litigations, amicus curiae, and intervention representation decisions moving forward:

• Matters involving potential violations that raise issues under the NEP and present a substantial likelihood of broader enforcement significance beyond the parties to the dispute.
• Matters involving intentional discrimination arising from broad-based employment policies, including, but not limited to, policies, programs, or practices that preference guest worker visa holders and related to DEI initiatives.
• Cases related to developing legal issues, such as the coverage of DEI policies under Title VII, the scope of undue hardship in relation to religious accommodations, the obligation to provide single-sex restrooms or other “intimate spaces,” the legality of voluntary employer affirmative action programs, and scope of liability under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

It further identifies a set of “Chair Priorities” that “complement, and are applications of, the substantive categories of priorities.” These mirror enforcement priorities previously announced by Chair Andrea Lucas upon her appointment, which include

• remedying DEI-related race and sex discrimination;
• protecting American workers from anti-American national origin discrimination;
• defending women’s rights to single-sex spaces at work and worker’s rights to express the binary nature of sex; and
• protecting workers’ rights to religious accommodation and preventing religious discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.

Finally, the NEP also identifies a series of “global principles” that will guide EEOC’s implementation of the plan, including the following:

• An enforcement strategy focused on prevention, voluntary resolution, and an “even-handed” litigation program
• Maximizing limited resources by focusing on strategic impact
• Coordinated nationwide enforcement, including staffing and the assignment of matters
• Alignment with the policy priorities of the administration
• Prioritization of disparate treatment over disparate impact
• Collaboration and coordination with other federal agencies, including the US Departments of Justice and Education, and state and local fair employment practices agencies

KEY TAKEAWAYS FOR EMPLOYERS

The core principles and priorities announced in the NEP are not new to employers who monitor EEOC activities. Chair Lucas has been vocal about her intentions since her appointment, and EEOC enforcement actions have reflected them, particularly after Lucas secured a majority on the Commission in October 2025. These include high-profile subpoena enforcement actions related to DEI investigations, litigation alleging discrimination tied to DEI programs, and a public settlement in a DEI-related investigation.

However, the NEP offers valuable insights into the programs and practices EEOC intends to target. For example, the NEP identifies several specific practices related to DEI that it believes are legally suspect, including the below:

• “Job advertisements that. . . exclude or discourage certain individuals from applying, or encourage certain individuals to apply, including but not limited to, based on race (e.g., . . .’diverse candidates’ or other terms that are, or functionally operate, as race-based) or national origin . . .” “Staffing agencies, including fellowship or other similar programs that act as a staffing agency, that exclude individuals from employment on account of a protected characteristic.”
• “Covered entities utilizing race- or sex-based quotas, including practices labeled “aspirational goals” that are proxies for quotas or otherwise encourage or incentivize race- and sex-based decision making, in any employment action.”
• “Limiting access to on-the-job training; internships; fellowships; mentorship; sponsorship; pre-apprenticeship or apprenticeship programs; temp-to-hire positions; other job training or advancement opportunities; employer-sponsored groups or events; bonuses; fringe benefits; perks; and other terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.”
• “Requiring, permitting, or incentivizing the use of race and/or sex in employment decisions and actions . . . include[ing] . . . diverse slate policies; diverse hiring panel policies; policies that require candidates to submit diversity statements; employee race or sex data shared with managers, the public, or other non-HR personnel or legal representatives; rubrics or other candidate evaluation methods that consider protected characteristics; and executive and other employee compensation or bonuses tied to employee race- or sex based demographic goals or other diversity goals.”

The NEP also previews EEOC’s intent to (1) seek to limit the scope of Bostock v. Clayton County as applied to single-sex intimate spaces, the “right to express the binary nature of sex,” and religious accommodations for sincerely held religious beliefs, and (2) challenge the Supreme Court’s analysis of voluntary affirmative action in United Steelworkers v. Weber and Johnson v. Santa Clara County Transportation Agency.

Finally, the NEP reinforces Chair Lucas’ vision of EEOC as a centralized agency working in partnership with the executive branch to further the administration’s policy priorities. The guiding principle related to a “Nationwide Enforcement Model,” for example, stresses the need for “collaboration, coordination, and communication” among agency headquarters, EEOC field offices, and program offices, such as the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Field Programs.

The NEP also notes that EEOC is an “executive branch agency” and “will use its discretion in its deployment of its enforcement authority to advance the Administration’s policy objectives and comply with relevant Executive Orders.”

NEXT STEPS

The NEP reflects EEOC’s continued commitment to advancing the US administration’s priorities, particularly regarding DEI initiatives and contentious issues around religious accommodation and gender identity. Employers should continue to monitor developments and closely assess their programs for compliance with legal obligations.  

STAY INFORMED

Visit our Government Policy and Regulatory Resource Center and subscribe to our mailing list for the latest on programming, guidance, and current legal and business developments involving the US administration.