On April 23, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order entitled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” directing federal agencies to effectively end the use of “disparate impact” liability in enforcing anti-discrimination laws. This order marks a significant shift in how employers must assess their employment policies and practices, as well as how those policies and practices impact employees.
What is Disparate Impact Liability? Disparate impact liability is a long-standing legal theory under federal anti-discrimination law, most notably codified in Title VII. Unlike disparate treatment, which involves intentional or clear discrimination, disparate impact focuses on otherwise neutral employment practices that disproportionately affect members of a protected class.
Under this theory, an employer may be liable for discrimination if a policy or employment practice causes a significant difference in outcomes or adverse effects on a protected group and is not shown to be job-related and consistent with a business necessity, even if there is no facially discriminatory policy, practice, or intent. This theory has been upheld in several landmark court cases, but now faces scrutiny from the Trump Administration.
Impact of the Executive Order: President Trump’s Executive Order asserts that the application of disparate impact liability is inconsistent with the principle of equal protection under the law and is, therefore, unconstitutional. Thus, the Executive Order instructs federal agencies to “deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate-impact liability.” This instruction will effectively halt federal investigations, lawsuits, and regulatory actions that involve or rely upon this theory of discrimination.
The Order further directs the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Attorney General to review all pending investigations, civil suits, and enforcement actions that involve the disparate-impact theory and to issue joint guidance for employers regarding the appropriate methods to promote equal access to employment opportunities. Ultimately, this Executive Order posits the Trump Administration’s position that disparate impact theory promotes discriminatory practices and undermines meritocracy in hiring and advancement. Indeed, the Executive Order specifically provides that disparate impact liability “imperils the effectiveness of civil rights laws by mandating, rather than proscribing, discrimination” and “threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.”
Key Takeaways for Employers: Although President Trump’s Executive Orders and policies have faced legal challenges, this Executive Order is likely to stall pending claims involving disparate impact liability. The Executive Order is also likely to reduce the number of new claims raised by employees based on the disparate impact theory – at least for now. The KMK Labor and Employment team will continue to monitor forthcoming guidance from the EEOC and Department of Justice and is available to advise employers on their employment practices.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2026 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Partner
Alison practices in the firm’s Labor & Employment Group, where she assists clients in all stages of workplace disputes. Alison has extensive experience counseling clients regarding hiring and firing issues, disciplinary ...
- Associate
Kelzé Riley is an associate in the firm's Labor & Employment Group. Her practice includes a wide range of labor and employment matters.
Kelzé earned her J.D. from the Donald P. Klekamp College of Law at the University of Cincinnati in ...
Topics/Tags
Select- EEOC
- Employment Law
- Immigration
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor
- Diversity
- Wage & Hour
- NLRB
- Arbitration
- National Labor Relations Board
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Discrimination
- FLSA
- Coronavirus
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Social Media
- Sexual Harassment
- National Enforcement Plan
- Sixth Circuit
- Employer Policies
- Title VII
- Employment Litigation
- Transgender Issues
- Religion Discrimination
- Employer Rules
- Holiday Policies
- Overtime Pay
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- OSHA
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Artificial Intelligence
- Privacy
- Department of Justice
- Independent Contractor
- Joint Employer
- Telework
- NLRA
- Compliance
- Paid Leave Laws
- Supreme Court
- Tax Credit
- Workplace Accommodations
- Federal Trade Commission
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Litigation
- IRS
- Worker Classification
- Harassment
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Disability Discrimination
- Department of Homeland Security
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Medical Marijuana
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- ADAAA
- ERISA
- Race Discrimination
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Disability
- Whistleblower
- United States Supreme Court
- 401(k)
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Benefits
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Privacy Laws
- Securities Law
- Health Savings Account
- Preventive Care Benefits
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- Telecommuting
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Misclassification
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- State Minimum Wage
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- Wage Increase
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- FMLA
- Labor & Employment Law
Recent Posts
- Asking Is Protected: Sixth Circuit Expands FMLA Retaliation Protections
- New DHS Rule Will Restrict Student Periods of Admission from Duration of Status to Fixed End Date
- TPS Haiti Termination: How Employers Can Ensure I-9 Records Remain Compliant
- A New Enforcement Era: What Employers Should Know About the EEOC’s 2025–2029 National Enforcement Plan
- Beyond Paid Time Off: The Legal Side of Holiday Policies
- EEO-1 Reporting on the Chopping Block: What Employers Need to Know
- DOL Proposes New Joint Employer Rule: What Employers Need to Know
- Arbitration Agreements Take a Hit: What the Sixth Circuit's EFAA Decision Means for Your Workplace Agreements
- Bourbon, Ballots, and Bargaining Orders: Sixth Circuit Rejects NLRB’s Cemex Framework
- Independent Contractor and Joint Employer Rules: Looking to the Past for Future Compliance

