Federal Court Limits EEOC Authority on Transgender Workplace Protections

In a client alert, Bowditch reports that on May 15, the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, finding that it exceeded its legal authority by expanding Title VII workplace protections to transgender employees through updated guidance (Texas, et al. v. EEOC).

The Court’s decision, which vacated portions of the EEOC’s 2024 guidance, has introduced uncertainty around the scope of federal protections for gender identity in the workplace and signals a more limited interpretation of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County.

In 2024, the Biden-era EEOC issued guidance interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to include protections against harassment for transgender individuals.

Specifically, it stated that misgendering, denial of access to bathrooms aligned with gender identity, and enforcing gender-specific dress codes inconsistent with an employee’s identity could be considered unlawful sex-based harassment.

The State of Texas, joined by other parties, filed suit to block the enforcement of these guidelines, arguing the EEOC had overstepped its legal authority. The Court sided with Texas, holding that the EEOC improperly broadened the definition of “sex” under Title VII beyond its statutory limits.

The Court further ruled that requiring accommodations for pronouns, bathroom use, and dress codes based on gender identity contradicted the scope of Title VII.

While Bostock prohibits discrimination based on gender identity, the Court emphasized that it did not redefine “sex” to include such characteristics broadly.

For lawyers advising employers, this ruling underscores the evolving and often conflicting legal landscape of workplace protections. While federal guidance may change, many state and local laws still offer robust protections for individuals with a gender identity.