Since 1966, the majority of employers have been legally required to provide a confidential breakdown of their workforce by race and gender to the government. The mandate—which applies to any company with at least 100 employees and to federal contractors with 50 or more employees—was introduced not long after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was created, to help the agency enforce antidiscrimination laws.
Now the EEOC has made the unprecedented decision to rescind those reporting requirements. This week, the agency voted 2-1 in favor of a proposal to eliminate this data collection—known as an EEO-1 report—along with similar mandatory disclosures from unions, state and local government, and public schools. The proposed rule is slated to be finalized and adopted after a 30-day comment period, which allows for members of the public to submit feedback.
EEOC chair Andrea Lucas—who was appointed by President Trump—has argued that EEO-1 reporting requirements could be at odds with civil rights law, despite the long-standing precedent. “The EEO Data Reports stand in direct tension with Title VII’s requirement that employment practices be colorblind,” she said in a statement. “Collecting such data about employees’ race and sex—absent any specific allegation of discrimination—not only risks hindering effective enforcement of equal employment laws but also raises constitutional concerns.”
Kalpana Kotagal, the lone Democratic commissioner, voted against the proposal and claimed it would “kneecap the agency’s ability to investigate discrimination and protect workers.” She dismissed concerns that EEO-1 reporting requirements were unconstitutional as “untethered from reality” and urged employers to continue tracking demographic data for a number of reasons, including compliance with antidiscrimination laws.
“These efforts should be seen for what they are: an attempt to weaken equal employment opportunity, and to undermine progress for women and historically marginalized communities,” she said in a statement. “It’s a See No Evil, Hear No Evil, approach. But discrimination doesn’t go away just because you erase the data. It just becomes harder to prove. Enforcement gets weaker. It takes more time. It’s costlier. Accountability suffers. And workers get left behind.”
Advocates and former EEOC officials have also vocally opposed this decision. Katie Sandson at the National Women’s Law Center said it “opens the door for discrimination to be swept under the rug.” In May, when the EEOC submitted a plan to the White House teasing this proposal, the EEO Leaders—a nonpartisan coalition of former EEOC and Department of Labor officials—released a statement explaining why EEO-1 data was critical to the agency’s mission.
“These data, along with other investigative tools, help the EEOC to identify patterns that may warrant further inquiry early in its investigation of discrimination charges, thus helping the agency to deploy its limited investigatory resources efficiently,” the statement read. “Historically, the EEOC has analyzed EEO-1 data to focus the agency’s outreach and guidance on industries where empirical evidence suggests that barriers may exist. The loss of this data will make it more difficult for the EEOC to conduct targeted, evidence-based educational outreach in the future.”
This is just the latest in a series of maneuvers by the EEOC to undermine efforts to foster diversity in the workplace. Since Lucas stepped in as chair in early 2025, she has explicitly aligned the agency’s priorities with the Trump administration’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace.
As part of this directive, the agency has pursued a high-profile investigation into Nike’s DEI practices, along with a number of other cases that have resulted in significant settlements with employers. Columbia University, for example, agreed to fork over $21 million in the largest public settlement with the EEOC in nearly two decades. The EEOC’s approach to the Nike investigation suggests that the agency wants the case to reach the Supreme Court, which could have far-reaching consequences for DEI in the workplace. Former and current EEOC officials have also alleged that the EEOC has been aggressively pursuing discrimination claims brought by white men.
In recent years, plenty of employers have stopped publishing diversity reports and sharing demographic data publicly as the political climate has shifted and public pressure on companies has lifted. Trump’s executive orders have already revoked affirmative action requirements for federal contractors, which had long helped mitigate employment discrimination and promote racial equity. If the EEOC’s proposed rule remains intact after the comment period, employers will have little reason to continue tracking demographic data or offer visibility into their hiring practices.
