- with Senior Company Executives and HR
- with readers working within the Banking & Credit industries
On November 18, 2025, President Trump nominated M. Carter Crow, the Global Head of Labor and Employment at Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, to be General Counsel of the EEOC. Carter Crow focuses his practice on wage and hour litigation, contracts, and restrictive covenants. As of this writing, Carter Crow has yet to be voted out of the U.S. Senate's Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions or confirmed by the full Senate.
The last Senate-confirmed General Counsel of the EEOC was Karla Gilbride, a Biden Administration appointee and former (and current) Deputy Director of Litigation for Public Citizen. President Trump fired Ms. Gilbride, along with Commissioners Samuels and Chair Burrows, in January 2025.
Currently, Catherine Eschbach, as Principal Deputy General Counsel, is serving as Acting General Counsel of the EEOC. Catherine Eschbach previously served as Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), the agency within the Department of Labor charged with enforcing civil rights protections for federal contractors. Following law school, Ms. Eschbach served as a law clerk to Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, a prominent conservative jurist.
This update builds on our recent Client Alert examining how the EEOC's restored quorum and new Commission leadership are driving broader enforcement and policy changes in 2026. Together, these developments signal a significant shift in how the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission approaches regulation, litigation, and employer compliance.
Role of EEOC's Office of General Counsel
EEOC's Office of General Counsel (OGC) acts as the chief legal advisor for the Commission and conducts litigation on behalf of EEOC to obtain relief for victims of employment discrimination and ensure compliance with statutes EEOC is charged with enforcing. Unlike the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)'s General Counsel, EEOC's OGC is not required to be independent of the Commission.
OGC Moving Forward
With a new Acting General Counsel and soon-to-be-confirmed General Counsel, EEOC's litigation enforcement priorities will shift. Chair Lucas has given stakeholders a preview of what is to come, and it is fair to predict that EEOC's litigation enforcement will emphasize religious liberty and reverse discrimination.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Reverse Discrimination
Since her appointment by President Trump, Chair Lucas has emphasized a more conservative approach to civil rights and warned against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. In a December 19, 2025, Reuters article, Chair Lucas announced federal inquiries into corporate diversity programs were underway, warning that employers with "a DEI program or any employee program that involves taking an action in whole or in part motivated by race or sex or any other protected characteristic" are unlawful.
Chair Lucas emphasized her tenure will be focused on "race-restricted programs or sex-restricted programs or other actions that involve overt distinctions between people based on race. It doesn't matter if you call that DEI or belonging to 'EO' or anything: If it functions like that, it's illegal." Chair Lucas's position on DEI was later reinforced by the Supreme Court's decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services1 vitiating heightened pleading standards for majority groups claiming reverse discrimination.
Any employer programs that demonstrably favor minority groups over so-called "traditional majority" groups are to be closely scrutinized and amended to accord with equal opportunity principles. Employers should be cautious not to tailor any practices governing the essential terms of employment to favor one race or gender over another.
Religious Accommodation
Under Chair Lucas's leadership, the EEOC will be elevating religious discrimination in the workplace, and employers should accordingly be on alert. Previously, employers were permitted to deny a request for religious accommodation if it would impose an equal to or greater than a de minimis (minimal) burden.
However, in Groff v. DeJoy,2 the Supreme Court held that the de minimis standard no longer applies. Instead, employers are now required to provide religious accommodation unless they can demonstrate that the accommodation would result in substantially increased costs. Said costs must be "substantially increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business."3 The inquiry is fact-specific, with courts required to take "into account all relevant factors in the case at hand, including the particular accommodations at issue and their practical impact in light of the nature, size, and operating cost of the employer."4
The Supreme Court's holding in Groff imposes a higher, fact-specific standard that, in practice, will require covered employers to grant nearly all religious accommodations requested by employees. An August 2025 press release highlights EEOC's actions to protect religious freedom at work under the first six months of the Trump Administration.
Implications for Employers
With key officials in place, EEOC's OGC is prioritizing changes to litigation enforcement. Employers should scrutinize their DEI policies to ensure neutrality and grant religious accommodations.
Footnotes
1. 605 U.S. 303, 311-12 (2025) ↩︎
2. 600 U.S. 447, 468-70 (2023). ↩︎
3. Id. at 470. ↩︎
4. Id. at 470-71 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). ↩︎
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.
