Blogs

A five-year plan that lasted two years: Lessons for employers from the EEOC’s enforcement reset

6/24/26

By: Sunshine Fellows

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently took the unusual step of rescinding its Strategic Enforcement Plan for Fiscal Years 2024-2028 and replacing it with a new National Enforcement Plan (NEP) for Fiscal Years 2025-2029. While changes in enforcement priorities often accompany changes in presidential administrations, agencies rarely abandon a recently adopted multi-year enforcement framework before its scheduled expiration.

For employers, that procedural decision may be as significant as the substance of the new plan itself. The EEOC’s action signals not merely a change in priorities, but a broader shift in enforcement philosophy that is likely to influence how the agency allocates resources, evaluates charges, and selects litigation targets during the coming years.

A significant shift in enforcement emphasis

The EEOC’s prior Strategic Enforcement Plan devoted considerable attention to systemic discrimination, barriers to equal employment opportunity, and disparate-impact theories. The newly adopted National Enforcement Plan places greater emphasis on allegations of intentional discrimination and employment decisions that expressly consider protected characteristics.

The plan also identifies several areas of particular interest, including religious-liberty protections, anti-American national-origin discrimination, single-sex workplace issues, and protections for vulnerable workers. Although the agency continues to recognize its responsibility to combat workplace discrimination broadly, the new framework reflects a noticeable reordering of enforcement priorities.

What the rescission really signals

The most important takeaway from the EEOC’s action may not be any individual priority listed in the new plan. Rather, the Commission’s willingness to replace a five-year enforcement framework before its expiration underscores how quickly federal enforcement priorities can change.

Strategic plans are often viewed as long-term roadmaps. By rescinding a plan adopted only recently, the Commission has demonstrated that enforcement agendas can be recalibrated substantially when agency leadership changes.

For employers, that reality reinforces the importance of building compliance programs that are grounded in statutory requirements and sound employment practices rather than assumptions about any particular administration’s priorities.

What has not changed

Despite the change in enforcement focus, the underlying legal framework remains the same. Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, and other federal employment laws continue to impose the same statutory obligations on employers. Moreover, courts, not the EEOC, ultimately determine the scope and meaning of those laws.

Employers must therefore continue to navigate judicial precedent, state and local anti-discrimination laws, and private litigation risks regardless of the agency’s current enforcement priorities. The new plan changes where the EEOC is likely to direct its attention, but it does not rewrite the governing legal standards.

Practical implications for employers

The distinction between enforcement priorities and legal obligations is particularly important in the context of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. The EEOC’s recent statements and the language of the new plan suggest that programs involving race-, sex-, or other protected-characteristic-based preferences may receive heightened scrutiny. Employers should consider reviewing hiring, promotion, internship, mentoring, scholarship, leadership-development, and similar programs to ensure they are structured in a manner consistent with applicable law.

Likewise, accommodation processes, religious-discrimination policies, and workplace practices involving competing employee rights should remain areas of active compliance attention. The goal should not be to dismantle lawful workplace initiatives, but rather to ensure that they are carefully designed, consistently administered, and legally defensible.

The bottom line

Many of the early discussions surrounding the EEOC’s new National Enforcement Plan have focused on the agency’s revised list of priorities. While those priorities certainly matter, the broader lesson for employers is that enforcement priorities can shift dramatically, even within the lifespan of a supposedly long-term strategic plan.

Employers that build compliance programs around enduring legal principles rather than temporary political priorities will be best positioned to withstand future changes in agency leadership and enforcement philosophy. In that sense, the EEOC’s latest enforcement reset is not simply a story about the next five years. It is a reminder that effective compliance strategies must be durable enough to survive whatever comes after them.

For more information on this topic contact Sunshine Fellows at sunshine.fellows@fmglaw.com.

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.