EEOC Under Trump 2.0: A Shift From Immigrant Protection to Combating "Anti-American Bias"

By Caroline Colvin, HR Dive
Published October 14, 2026

The landscape of national origin discrimination enforcement within the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has undergone a significant transformation under President Donald Trump’s second administration. While federal law has long prohibited employment discrimination based on national origin, akin to discrimination based on race, sex, color, and religion, the agency’s strategic priorities and enforcement focus have demonstrably shifted. In contrast to its emphasis on immigrant rights in the late 2010s, the EEOC is now dedicating substantial resources and attention to combating what it terms "anti-American bias" in the workplace.

This pivot marks a notable departure from the agency’s approach during the latter half of the Obama administration and the initial years of Trump’s first term. The current agenda, spearheaded by EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, signals a reorientation of the agency’s mission, prioritizing the protection of American workers against perceived discriminatory practices that disadvantage them in favor of foreign nationals. This shift has been articulated through public statements, legal actions, and the dissemination of technical assistance documents, all aimed at reshaping the understanding and application of national origin discrimination laws.

A Shifting Tide: From Immigrant Rights to "American Worker" Focus

The evolution of the EEOC’s national origin discrimination enforcement can be traced through its strategic priorities over the past decade. In late 2016, the agency identified immigrant rights as a key strategic priority. This focus involved heightened awareness of the potential for certain workplace policies to have a disparate impact on immigrant workers. At the time, legal experts anticipated that a potential change in administration could significantly alter the trajectory of national origin nondiscrimination enforcement.

During President Trump’s first administration, the EEOC pursued lawsuits that reflected this evolving approach. These cases included allegations of companies favoring less qualified Hispanic job applicants over other demographic groups, as well as securing monetary relief for workers who faced discrimination for not being fluent in English. These actions underscored a commitment to addressing national origin discrimination in a broad sense, encompassing protections for both immigrant and native-born workers.

However, the narrative has demonstrably changed under Trump’s second term. The EEOC’s national origin enforcement has increasingly concentrated on identifying and rectifying "anti-American bias." This new focus is evident in the types of cases the agency is prioritizing and the public statements from its leadership. The agency’s current agenda appears to be driven by a belief that unlawful bias against American workers constitutes a widespread issue across various industries nationwide, necessitating a dedicated enforcement effort.

Chronological Evolution of EEOC’s National Origin Enforcement

Late 2016: A Strategic Pivot Towards Immigrant Rights

As President Trump’s first term loomed, the EEOC made a significant strategic shift, designating immigrant rights as a core priority. This move signaled an increased focus on protecting workers who might be particularly vulnerable due to their immigration status. The agency aimed to address policies and practices that could disproportionately disadvantage immigrant workers, even if not explicitly discriminatory on their face. This period saw the EEOC actively highlighting the potential for disparate impact claims in the context of immigration.

Early Trump Administration (2017-2020): Mixed Enforcement and Early Indicators

During President Trump’s initial term, the EEOC continued to litigate national origin discrimination cases. These included instances where employers were accused of favoring specific ethnic groups, even if those groups were not exclusively immigrants. Furthermore, the agency addressed issues related to English proficiency requirements, recognizing that an inability to speak English fluently should not be a barrier to employment if it wasn’t essential to the job’s core functions. These cases, while addressing national origin bias, did not yet exhibit the pronounced focus on "anti-American bias" that would emerge later.

February 2025: The "Anti-American Bias" Doctrine Takes Hold

A pivotal moment in this evolving enforcement strategy occurred in February 2025. A Guam hotel resort agreed to settle an EEOC lawsuit that alleged preferential treatment for Japanese workers at the expense of American employees. This case served as a clear indicator of the agency’s emerging priority: combating bias directed against American workers.

In the same month, under the leadership of then-Acting Chair Andrea Lucas, the EEOC articulated a strong commitment to ensuring that both workers and employers possessed a clear understanding of the "even-handed protections" afforded by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Acting Chair Lucas issued a stern warning to employers, stating, "if you are part of the pipeline contributing to our immigration crisis or abusing our legal immigration system via illegal preferences against American workers, you must stop." This statement unequivocally signaled a redirection of the EEOC’s national origin enforcement efforts.

Fall 2025: Formalizing the "Anti-American Bias" Priority

The EEOC further solidified its commitment to this new enforcement priority in the fall of 2025. EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas asserted in a November statement that "Unlawful bias against American workers, in violation of Title VII, is a large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide." This declaration was accompanied by the release of an EEOC technical assistance document specifically addressing "anti-American bias at work." This document aimed to provide guidance to employers and employees on the scope and application of Title VII in the context of this newly emphasized enforcement area. The dissemination of this document signaled the agency’s intention to make this a central theme of its enforcement activities throughout 2026 and beyond.

October 14, 2026: The Current Landscape

As of October 2026, the EEOC’s focus on "anti-American bias" in national origin discrimination cases appears to be firmly established. Chair Andrea Lucas has actively utilized social media platforms, including LinkedIn, to solicit claims related to this specific type of bias, further underscoring the agency’s current agenda. This proactive approach aims to encourage individuals who believe they have experienced such discrimination to come forward, thereby feeding the agency’s enforcement pipeline.

Supporting Data and Case Examples

The EEOC’s shift in focus is not merely rhetorical; it is increasingly reflected in its legal actions and public pronouncements. The case of the Guam hotel resort, which settled in February 2025 for allegedly giving preferential treatment to Japanese workers over American employees, serves as a concrete example of this new enforcement priority. This settlement highlights the agency’s willingness to pursue cases where national origin bias is perceived to disadvantage native-born workers.

Furthermore, Chair Andrea Lucas’s public statements provide crucial insight into the underlying rationale for this shift. Her warning to employers about contributing to the "immigration crisis" or "abusing our legal immigration system via illegal preferences against American workers" suggests a belief that certain immigration-related practices are inherently discriminatory against the domestic workforce. This framing positions the EEOC as a protector of American jobs and opportunities.

The release of the technical assistance document on "anti-American bias at work" in November 2025 is another significant piece of supporting evidence. Such documents are typically developed to clarify and guide the application of anti-discrimination laws. The existence of a document dedicated to "anti-American bias" indicates that this is not a peripheral concern but a central pillar of the EEOC’s current national origin enforcement strategy. This document likely outlines what constitutes "anti-American bias" in the eyes of the EEOC, providing examples and best practices for employers to avoid such violations.

Official Responses and Leadership Statements

The strategic direction of the EEOC under President Trump’s second administration is largely shaped by the pronouncements of its leadership, particularly Chair Andrea Lucas. Her public statements offer a clear window into the agency’s current priorities and the rationale behind them.

In February 2025, as Acting Chair, Lucas stated her determination to ensure that workers and employers "better understand the even-handed protections" of Title VII. She emphasized that these protections should apply without favoring any particular group over another. Crucially, her warning to employers about contributing to the immigration crisis or abusing the system through "illegal preferences against American workers" directly links national origin discrimination enforcement to broader concerns about immigration and the domestic labor market. This statement suggests a perception that certain immigration-related employment practices are inherently unfair to American citizens and legal residents.

In November 2025, as Chair, Lucas reiterated this stance, characterizing "unlawful bias against American workers, in violation of Title VII, as a large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide." This framing positions the issue as a systemic one that requires significant attention from the EEOC. By emphasizing the "large-scale" nature of the problem, Lucas signals that the agency is prepared to undertake robust enforcement actions across various sectors.

Chair Lucas’s recent utilization of social media platforms to solicit claims of "anti-American bias" further exemplifies her proactive approach. This direct engagement with the public aims to encourage individuals who believe they have been victims of such discrimination to report their experiences to the EEOC. This strategy is designed to generate more cases and, consequently, to amplify the agency’s focus on this particular area of national origin discrimination.

Implications and Future Outlook

The pronounced shift in the EEOC’s national origin discrimination enforcement strategy carries significant implications for employers, employees, and the broader discourse on immigration and labor.

For employers, this evolving focus necessitates a careful review of hiring, promotion, and compensation practices. Companies must be acutely aware of the EEOC’s current priorities and ensure that their policies do not inadvertently create or perpetuate "anti-American bias." This may involve scrutinizing any practices that could be perceived as favoring foreign national employees over American workers, even if such favoritism is unintentional. The technical assistance document released by the EEOC will be a crucial resource for employers seeking to navigate these new enforcement priorities.

For employees, the shift means that the EEOC is actively seeking to address instances where they believe they have been discriminated against due to their national origin in favor of foreign nationals. The agency’s outreach efforts on social media suggest a commitment to making it easier for individuals to report such concerns. However, the precise definition and application of "anti-American bias" may still be subject to interpretation, and the success of such claims will depend on the specific facts and evidence presented.

On a broader societal level, this emphasis on "anti-American bias" reflects a growing sentiment that the nation’s immigration and labor policies should prioritize the interests of its own citizens. The EEOC’s enforcement agenda, under this new direction, appears to align with this perspective, framing national origin discrimination not just as a protection for all individuals, but specifically as a means to safeguard American workers. This approach could potentially influence public perception and policy debates surrounding immigration and the domestic workforce.

The long-term impact of this shift will depend on several factors, including the sustained commitment of EEOC leadership to this enforcement priority, the success of the agency’s legal actions, and the broader political and economic climate. However, it is clear that the EEOC’s approach to national origin discrimination has entered a new phase, marked by a distinct focus on combating "anti-American bias" in the workplace.