Explainer-Why Trump is ending enforcement of civil rights laws that ban 'disparate impact'
By Daniel Wiessner
(Reuters) - President Donald Trump recently ordered federal agencies not to enforce laws that prohibit policies and practices with discriminatory impacts that are often unintended. Curbing so-called "disparate impact" liability, which is common in employment-related cases, removes a critical tool the government has used for decades to also police discrimination in housing, education, lending and other areas.
WHAT IS DISPARATE IMPACT LIABILITY?
Numerous federal laws, some dating to the years after the Civil War, prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, religion and other protected traits. Courts long understood discrimination to be an intentional act, but that began to change after the adoption of the landmark Civil Rights Act in 1964.
The U.S. Supreme Court created a new path to hold employers liable for discrimination in the 1971 case Griggs v. Duke Power. The court said that otherwise neutral employment practices can violate the Civil Rights Act when they disproportionately affect a protected group and are not demonstrably related to job performance.
Congress in 1991 amended the Civil Rights Act to explicitly prohibit the practices covered by the Supreme Court decision. Many experts have credited those changes for helping to spur companies to track the impact of their employment policies on protected groups, a now commonplace practice.
WHY DOES TRUMP OPPOSE DISPARATE IMPACT LIABILITY?
Trump in an April 23 executive order said disparate impact litigation is one of the tools used by a "pernicious movement" to replace merit-based decisionmaking with a focus on diversity.
The Republican president has been a vocal critic of workplace diversity, equity and inclusion policies and has launched an aggressive effort to eradicate them from the government and the private sector.
During Trump's first term, some federal agencies considered rolling back disparate impact regulations. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in 2020 eliminated Obama-era rules barring housing practices with disparate impacts on protected groups, but that was paused by a court and later reversed by the Biden administration.
Trump in April's executive order said the threat of disparate impact litigation prevents businesses from making decisions based on merit and skill, and that the legal theory wrongly presumes that unlawful discrimination exists "where there are any differences in outcomes" among different groups.
WHAT DO LEGAL ADVOCATES SAY?
Legal advocates point out that plaintiffs using disparate impact analysis are generally required to show statistically significant differences that cannot be explained by legitimate, non-discriminatory factors in order to win disparate impact lawsuits.
Many legal experts and civil rights advocates say disparate impact liability is a crucial tool for uncovering systemic discrimination that may be unintentional but affects workers and communities. They say it holds employers and others accountable when they fail to change their practices and that the latest order risks exacerbating disparities.
WHAT ARE EXAMPLES OF DISPARATE IMPACT?
Even the most routine policies can have disparate impacts on specific groups. Many companies stopped administering physical fitness tests or changed eligibility requirements for jobs after a surge in lawsuits during the Obama administration claiming such policies discriminated against women and older or disabled workers.
Other employers have been sued for refusing to hire people with criminal records, which can have a disparate impact on Black and Hispanic job applicants. Advocates argue that Black and Hispanic people are disproportionately convicted of crimes due to inequities in the criminal justice system.
A policy with a disparate impact can be legal when it is necessary to operate a business. For example, law firms can require applicants for jobs as lawyers to have law degrees and banks can deny loans to people with low credit scores even if those policies disproportionately exclude members of certain groups.
WHAT DOES TRUMP'S ORDER DO?
Trump declared a government-wide policy "to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible" and directed federal agencies to deprioritize enforcement of disparate impact laws.
Trump told the heads of federal agencies, including the Attorney General, the chairs of the Equal Employment Opportunity and Federal Trade commissions, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not to pursue cases attempting to hold businesses and others liable for disparate impact discrimination.
Trump also told federal agencies to evaluate whether existing cases and settlements that rely on disparate impact claims comport with his order. That means some employers, schools, banks and others could be released from settlements they entered into years ago, including requirements to adopt anti-discrimination policies and submit to outside monitoring.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Trump's order will likely lead the agencies to drop some existing cases and settlements, and deter them from bringing any lawsuits or brokering settlements involving disparate impact claims.
Trump's order may face legal challenges by groups and individuals who have filed discrimination complaints with federal agencies, likely claiming that Trump exceeded his authority by issuing it. Many of the more than 140 executive orders issued by Trump since January have been challenged in court by nonprofits, unions, workers and Democratic state officials, among others.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
16 minutes ago
- New York Times
China Rejects Trump's Accusation That It Violated Trade Truce
China said on Monday that the United States had 'severely undermined' the trade truce the two countries reached last month, striking back against President Trump's accusations that it was violating the terms of their agreement. In a statement, China's Ministry of Commerce called Mr. Trump's attacks on social media last week 'baseless.' He had accused Beijing of failing to live up to its end of their trade deal, a 90-day rollback of tariffs and other trade barriers to give the two countries more time to negotiate and prevent an all-out trade war. China's commerce ministry said it had continued to honor its agreement responsibly and accused the United States of 'erroneous practices' by introducing a series of 'discriminatory restrictive measures.' These included restrictions on the sale of chip design software to China and barring American companies from using or financing artificial intelligence chips from the Chinese technology giant Huawei. It also criticized the Trump administration's announcement that it planned to 'aggressively revoke' the visas of Chinese students and that it would enhance scrutiny of all future applications from China, including Hong Kong. 'The U.S. side has unilaterally escalated new economic and trade frictions, exacerbating the uncertainty and instability of bilateral economic and trade relations,' the ministry wrote in its statement. 'Instead of reflecting on its own actions, it has turned the blame onto China.' China said it would take measures to 'safeguard its legitimate rights and interests' if the United States continued to harm Chinese interests. The growing confrontation over the fragile trade truce between the world's two largest economies has raised questions about whether they can strike a permanent accord within the 90-day deadline. The United States has grown increasingly concerned about access to rare earth magnets, which are crucial for producing cars, semiconductors, aircraft and other vital items. China maintains a near monopoly on the production of rare earth metals. American companies' ability to keep factories running could be in jeopardy without a sufficient supply of those magnets. Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative who negotiated the deal along with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, said during a Friday appearance on CNBC that China was 'slow-rolling their compliance' and that the flow of some critical minerals has not returned to levels that American officials were expecting. The agreement, announced on May 12, offered a temporary reprieve to the escalating trade tensions between the two largest economies. The United States had pushed tariffs on Chinese imports to 145 percent and China responded by raising import duties on American products to 125 percent. Under the truce, the United States agreed to lower its tariffs to 30 percent, while China cut its import tax to 10 percent for 90 days. Amy Chang Chien contributed reporting from Taipei.
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
CNBC Daily Open: It's a dicey matter to play 'chicken' in markets
When threatened, birds puff up their feathers to appear larger than they actually are, and squawk to signal aggression. On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump suggested he would no longer be "Mr. NICE GUY" to China after the country "totally violated" its trade agreement with America. The same day, Trump said he would raise tariffs on steel imports to 50% from 25%. The escalations follow a détente in May, during which Trump reached a trade deal with the U.K., agreed with Beijing to sharply reduce reciprocal import duties and delayed for more than a month a tariff of 50% on the European Union — two days after announcing it. Those glad tidings lifted stocks. For May, the S&P 500 rose 6.2% and the Nasdaq Composite jumped 9.6%, with both indexes enjoying their best month since November 2023. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 3.9% for the month. But the mood among investors might change quickly, depending on communication coming from the White House. The word "chicken" is used as a metaphor for cowardice. In reality, they can be dangerous — there have been reports of humans being killed by Colonel Sanders' favorite bird. Asia markets start June in the redU.S. markets traded mixed Friday. The S&P 500 was flat, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.13% and the Nasdaq Composite fell 0.32%. Futures tied to the three indexes ticked down Sunday evening stateside. Asia-Pacific stocks fell Monday. Hong Kong's Hang Seng index dropped 1.9% and Japan's Nikkei 225 lost 1.32% at 1:30 p.m. Singapore time. Expected Trump-Xi talkTrade tensions between China and the U.S. are escalating. On Monday, Beijing claimed that the White House's "export control measures" breach the two countries' agreement reached in Geneva, Switzerland, refuting Trump's claim on Friday that China has "TOTALLY VIOLATED" it. That said, reconciliation could happen as Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to discuss trade negotiations "this week," U.S. National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett said on Sunday. Trump says he'll double steel tariffsTrump on Friday told steelworkers at U.S. Steel that he will raise import duties on steel to 50% from 25%. The new import duties will start June 4, the president posted on Truth Social. On Saturday, the European Union said it is "prepared to impose countermeasures, including in response to the latest U.S. tariff increase." Even so, "tariffs are not going away," U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on "Fox News Sunday." Musk cuts himself from DOGEElon Musk bid farewell to his role at the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency Friday. Musk said on Sunday that he doesn't want to "take responsibility for everything the administration's doing," expressing disappointment at the White House's "massive spending bill." Tesla shares lost 14% this year amid Musk's involvement in politics, but gained 22% in May following Musk's April statement he would spend less time at DOGE. Australia's Soul Patts and Brickworks to mergeShares of Australian investment firm Washington H. Soul Pattinson, also known as Soul Patts, spiked more than 15%, and its affiliate Brickworks rocketed over 25% after both companies announced a merger of 14 billion Australian dollars ($9 billion). As part of the deal, a new company listed in Sydney will acquire all outstanding shares of Soul Patts and Brickworks. The merged entity will have holdings across real estate, private equity and credit totaling A$13.1 billion. [PRO] May jobs report in focusThe U.S. nonfarm payrolls report for May, out Friday, will provide more information on how the economy is holding up amid Trump's multiple tariffs —and play a big role in determining whether the May rally in stocks still has legs. Economists expect the number of jobs added in May to dip from April. It misses the forecast, markets could take a downturn as the White House appears to ratchet up its tariff rhetoric. Investors are piling into big, short Treasury bets alongside Warren Buffett Investors always pay close attention to bonds, and what the latest movement in prices and yields is saying about the economy. Right now, the action is telling investors to stick to the shorter-end of the fixed-income market with their maturities. Long-term treasuries and long-term corporate bonds have posted negative performance since September, which is very rare, said Todd Sohn, senior ETF and technical strategist at Strategas Securities, on "ETF Edge." The only other time that's happened in modern times was during the Financial Crisis," he added. "It is hard to argue against short-term duration bonds right now." It would seem that Warren Buffett agrees, with Berkshire Hathaway doubling its ownership of T-bills and now owning 5% of all short-term Treasuries, according to a recent JPMorgan report.
Boston Globe
34 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Looking for an edge, Democrats? Just look around you.
Here's a simple, cost-effective, noncontroversial, and human response to the chaos: storytelling. Telling stories about the real-life human consequences of this administration's policies and directives could cut through the noise. Run 15-second spots about real people and their stories nationally across multiple platforms from now to the midterms and beyond. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Hear from a mother returning food when the grocery bill is too high, a student dropping out of college because child care is unavailable or too expensive, a pizza shop owner without a dishwasher, or a contractor who cannot find painters. Watch a parent being arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement with their children watching. Show a grandfather waiting hours to talk to Social Security, or a woman taking her medication every other day because health care costs are too high. All in 15 seconds each. Advertisement By telling people about the results of policy decisions and executive actions in clear, simple ways, the Democratic Party can create a groundswell of informed, engaged citizens ready to advocate for change and hold their leaders accountable. It would be powerful. Advertisement Deborah Heller Boston Democrats shouldn't get lost in words A Washington Post report featured in the Globe ('Debate revives over left-wing buzzwords,' Political Notebook, May 27) suggests that terms like 'Food insecurity' sounds like an anxiety disorder. Children in the depths of poverty are not experiencing food insecurity. They are hungry or starving. The Trump regime is not an oligarchy; rather, it is a dictatorship with one ruler enabled by people like Marco Rubio and Mike Johnson, who are not fellow oligarchs but, rather, bootlickers or, to use the fancy Greek word, sycophants. In 'Politics and the English Language,' George Orwell demonstrates how politicians use vague, sugar-coated, euphemistic terms (like 'food insecurity') to justify behavior, policy, or circumstances that cannot be justified. Such words are lies in disguise. Donald Trump's supporters often say they like him because he speaks his mind. He's upfront. He doesn't talk euphemistically, like other politicians. No disguises. Right. He just lies and lies and lies. The mystery is why so many Trump supporters don't seem to care how often or how blatantly he does so. John R. Nelson Gloucester The writer is a professor emeritus of English at North Shore Community College. The poor get poorer while the Trump family gets richer An article on Page A6 of the May 26 Boston Globe was headlined Advertisement The Democrats certainly have to promote a better path forward, but highlighting Trump's abuses while putting forward a plan for the future would be a foundation on which to build. There's so much at stake for the economy, health, education, the environment, and the rule of law that Democrats can champion in contrast to the utter destruction we're seeing now. John Cotter Melrose If populism thrives on grievance, we need a new brand of populism As Larry Edelman and countless other commentators have pointed out, populism thrives on grievance ( We've seen increasing signs of the human tropism toward divisiveness and an 'us against them' mentality. A 'revenge is sweet' refrain now echoes around the world. It's considered not just sweet but justified. Not just justified but necessary. Populism will always thrive on carefully choosing its targets. And though hurting Harvard or immigrants or health research will improve the lives of no one, that doesn't matter. Revenge is rarely rational or well-reasoned. It's emotionally intoxicating. Therein lies the enduring lure of populism. Until the Democrats figure out how to build their own brand of populism, one that captures the hearts, souls, and imaginations of the populace, we will all be forced to endure life in an 'us against them' society. Advertisement Elaine Mintzer Keene, N.H.
