World
India
President Donald Trump has issued an executive order to eliminate the use of “disparate impact” liability across federal agencies, a move that civil rights advocates say could undermine decades of anti-discrimination efforts in employment, housing, education and lending, Reuters reported on Sunday.
What Is ‘Disparate Impact’ Liability?
“Disparate impact” refers to policies or practices that appear neutral but disproportionately harm people from protected groups — such as racial minorities, women or the disabled — even if there is no intent to discriminate.
This legal concept was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1971 case Griggs v. Duke Power, and later codified by Congress in 1991 through amendments to the Civil Rights Act, according to Reuters. It has since been a key tool used by plaintiffs and federal agencies to challenge systemic discrimination.
Why Is Trump Opposed to It?
In an April 23 executive order, Trump called disparate impact claims part of a “pernicious movement” to replace merit-based decisions with diversity efforts, the report said. “The threat of disparate impact litigation prevents businesses from making decisions based on merit and skill,” the order states, claiming such lawsuits wrongly assume discrimination “where there are any differences in outcomes” between groups, per Reuters.
Trump has long criticised workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, with his administration seeking to roll back similar protections, including Obama-era housing rules, though those efforts were often blocked or reversed.
What Does the Executive Order Do?
Trump’s order directs all federal agencies to:
- Stop enforcing disparate impact laws to the extent legally possible
- Review existing settlements and cases based on disparate impact to determine compliance
- Avoid bringing new cases based on this theory
This could allow businesses, schools and housing providers to reverse prior commitments to anti-discrimination policies or monitoring.
What Do Advocates and Legal Experts Say?
According to Reuters, civil rights advocates have warned that this move undermines protections for marginalised groups. Disparate impact claims, they argue, are essential for identifying systemic bias that may not be intentional but still causes harm. Examples of disparate impact include physical job tests that disproportionately exclude women or refusal to hire applicants with criminal records, which often affect Black and Hispanic individuals due to systemic biases in the justice system, the report said.
What Happens Next?
Trump’s order is expected to result in agencies dropping active cases and avoiding new enforcement actions tied to disparate impact. However, it may also face legal challenges from civil rights organisations, unions or Democratic-led states.
ALSO READ: Explained: What Albanese’s ‘Warm’ Call With Trump Means for Australia–US Ties Amid Tariff Tensions
