The plan identifies several focus areas, including remedying DEI-related race and sex discrimination, protecting American workers from anti-American national origin discrimination, defending women’s rights to single-sex workplace spaces and employees’ rights to express the binary nature of sex, and protecting workers’ religious liberty rights, including the right to reasonable accommodations and freedom from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.

The announcement of the 2025-2029 National Enforcement Plan is the latest development in the EEOC’s stated mission “to ensure equal opportunity, merit, and colorblind equality for all of America’s workers.” Under the leadership of EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, the EEOC has previously flagged its intent to prioritize enforcement against “illegal DEI” and to protect religious liberties.

1. Litigation Trends

The EEOC’s recent litigation trajectory mirrors the priorities outlined in the National Enforcement Plan. In February 2026, the EEOC filed a complaint against Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast, Inc., alleging that a company-sponsored networking event limited to female employees constituted sex discrimination. The case reflects the EEOC’s position that employment opportunities and benefits tied to protected characteristics may violate federal anti-discrimination laws.

The agency has also significantly increased its focus on religious accommodation claims. As of May 2026, the EEOC’s website stated that it has recovered more than $63 million on behalf of religious workers through settlements, voluntary resolutions, and litigation. In one recent example, the EEOC sued a Chick-fil-A franchisee in Texas, alleging the employer failed to reasonably accommodate an employee’s request not to work during the employee’s Sabbath observance.

2. Affirmative Action Plans

In May 2026, the EEOC proposed rescinding a 1979 regulation that has long provided guidance for employers implementing voluntary affirmative action plans (AAPs). Historically, the regulation was a roadmap for employers who, acting in good faith, attempted to remedy past workplace discrimination using AAPs. If finalized, the rescission could increase legal uncertainty for employers maintaining programs that consider demographic factors.

Notably, a workplace program does not need to be formally called an “affirmative action plan” to receive similar scrutiny. Targeted recruiting efforts, leadership development initiatives, mentorship programs, affinity groups, and demographic-focused training opportunities may raise concerns if they are examined under the agency’s evolving enforcement approach.

3. EEO - 1 Reporting

The EEOC has also proposed eliminating EEO-1 reporting requirements, which have required larger employers to submit workforce demographic data since 1966. While the proposal has not yet been adopted, employers should continue complying with current reporting obligations.

As the EEOC continues to reshape its enforcement priorities, employers should regularly review workplace policies, training programs, hiring practices, and accommodation procedures to ensure compliance with evolving federal guidance. The EEOC’s evolving guidance may create compliance challenges. Counsel can help employers review policies and training practices to keep employers aligned with current anti-discrimination requirements.

Janelle L. Ariota is an attorney in the Brooks Pierce Raleigh office. She counsels clients of all sizes on employment-related matters, including discrimination and harassment allegations, workplace handbooks, and hiring and termination procedures.

Jessi Thaller-Moran is a partner at Brooks Pierce in Raleigh, NC. She focuses her practice on employment law and litigation, which includes counseling employers on legal compliance and helping them proactively identify, prepare for and respond to issues involving personnel management.

member firms

LIN LLC

contacts

David H. Yang

Jeffrey L. R. Kenens

publications

Welcome to LIN LLC from Seoul

South Korean firms LIN LLC and D&A LLC to merge

How to regulate AI – broadly or narrowly?