What Do Recent DEI Training-Focused Federal Agency Guidance And Court Decisions Mean For Employers?

Published: 2025-06-12 08:11:12 ET HON

Published on 06/12/2025 at 08:11

Takeaways

Related links

Article

Two new technical-assistance documents jointly released by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) warn that common diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)-training practices — stereotyping statements, compelled self-disclosure, and mandatory confessions of bias — can trigger employer liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Combined with five federal court decisions over the past year, the message to employers is clear: Design programming with precision to avoid potential claims of hostile work environment, retaliation, and religious accommodation.

This article reviews the recent agency enforcement guidance and significant cases on DEI training.

Agency Guidance: EEOC and DOJ Directives on DEI

In March 2025, the EEOC and the DOJ issued joint technical assistance documents: What To Do If You Experience Discrimination Related to DEI at Work and What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination at Work. These directives advise employers:

Although not new law, the technical assistance documents outline parameters for evaluating complaints and enforcement priorities, signaling increased agency scrutiny of DEI training content.

Court Decisions: DEI Training

Recent legal challenges to employer diversity-related training programs reveal a pattern. While employers have successfully defended against training-based race discrimination claims, they often face costly motion practice, at least through summary judgment. The outcomes of these cases depend on specific factual circumstances, including the content, context, and impact of the training.

Courts thus far have affirmed that mere participation in training programs, isolated from other factors, does not violate federal anti-discrimination statutes. Importantly, recent cases show that for DEI-based training to constitute an unlawful hostile work environment, the training must meet a high "severe or pervasive" standard. Moreover, for objections to such training to constitute protected activity, the plaintiff must have a subjective and objective reasonable basis to believe the training is discriminatory.

Key cases are illustrative and include the following:

Practical Steps for Employers

The technical assistance documents and cases discussed above underscore that appropriately designed training remains permissible. However, legal challenge outcomes depend on specific factual circumstances. Employers must ensure programs strictly adhere to Title VII's anti-discrimination prohibitions, particularly concerning harassment, retaliation, and religious accommodation, and recognize the inherent legal risks associated with poorly conceived or executed training.

Several important employer considerations emerge from these developments, offering actionable insights:

* * *

The EEOC and DOJ intend to aggressively enforce Title VII to root out "illegal DEI." EEO and anti-harassment programs may assist employers in providing equal employment opportunities for all employees and applicants. Employers, however, must navigate this legal environment with care. Prioritize genuine inclusivity for all employees, avoid preferential treatment, and meticulously review training content to preempt harassment, compelled speech, or religious accommodation issues.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Ms Samia M. Kirmani Jackson Lewis P.C. 725 South Figueroa Street Suite 2500 Los Angeles 90017 UNITED STATES Tel: 212545 4000 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.jacksonlewis.com