A Texas federal court has vacated nationwide portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s harassment guidance that expanded the definition of sex-based discrimination to include gender identity protections, forcing the agency to update its website to reflect the ruling.
The court ruled May 15 that the EEOC’s interpretation in its Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace was contrary to law. The decision specifically targeted provisions stating that harassment includes denying access to bathrooms consistent with an individual’s gender identity and repeatedly using names or pronouns inconsistent with someone’s known gender identity.
The EEOC issued the controversial guidance in 2024 by a narrow 3-2 vote, with Acting Chair Andrea Lucas voting against it and issuing a dissent. Lucas has consistently opposed the portions of the guidance that the court has now struck down.
Trump executive order sought guidance changes
President Trump directed the EEOC on January 20 to rescind portions of the guidance that conflicted with his Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” However, the agency cannot modify or rescind the guidance without a majority vote of the commission, and the EEOC has lacked a quorum since January 27.
Lucas has made clear she remains opposed to the vacated portions of the guidance, but cannot act unilaterally to change them.
EEOC updates website to comply with court order
Because the commission cannot currently rescind or modify the harassment guidance, the EEOC has labeled and shaded the vacated portions on its website to help employers and the public understand which sections are no longer enforceable. The agency said it continues reviewing its documents to ensure full compliance with the court order.
The ruling creates immediate practical implications for employers who have been navigating workplace harassment policies involving gender identity issues. Companies that relied on the EEOC’s expanded interpretation may need to reassess their current policies and procedures.
Background on the guidance controversy
The 2024 harassment guidance represented a significant expansion of how the EEOC interpreted sex-based discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The guidance applied the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that discrimination against transgender employees constitutes sex discrimination, to workplace harassment scenarios.
The Texas lawsuit challenged whether the EEOC had authority to make such broad interpretations without clear congressional direction or proper rulemaking procedures.
Impact on employers
The court decision adds to the uncertainty employers face when developing policies around gender identity and bathroom access. While some jurisdictions have state laws providing broader protections, the federal enforcement landscape has become more complex following this ruling.
Employers should consult with legal counsel to ensure their harassment and anti-discrimination policies comply with applicable federal, state and local requirements in light of the court’s decision.
