Career Resources

The Trump administration wants a federal judge to keep law firm DEI probe records private.

The records come from an investigation by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The probe covers 20 major law firms.

Meanwhile, Public Citizen and two law professors want access to the records.

However, the government says federal law protects much of the information.

The case could reveal more about the EEOC’s review of law firm DEI programs.

It could also affect how firms handle hiring and workplace programs.

Key Takeaways

• The EEOC investigated DEI practices at 20 major law firms.
• The probe began in March 2025.
• Andrea Lucas was then the acting EEOC chair.
• Four firms later reached agreements with the EEOC.
• Public Citizen and two law professors want the records.
• The government wants some records kept private.
• The EEOC also cited presidential communications privilege.
• The case is pending in federal court in Washington, D.C.
• The ruling could affect future EEOC records requests.

EEOC Started Law Firm DEI Probe

The dispute began in March 2025.

At the time, then-Acting EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas sent requests to 20 law firms.

The agency wanted information about their DEI programs.

In particular, the EEOC looked at practices that could raise issues under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The requests covered hiring, pay, promotions, mentoring, and career development.

In addition, the EEOC created an email address for reports about possible violations.

However, the agency said a report would not automatically become a discrimination charge.

Which Law Firms Received EEOC Requests?

The 20 firms included many leading U.S. law firms.

They were:

• A&O Shearman
• Debevoise & Plimpton
• Cooley
• Freshfields
• Goodwin Procter
• Hogan Lovells
• Kirkland & Ellis
• Latham & Watkins
• McDermott Will & Emery
• Milbank
• Morgan Lewis
• Morrison Foerster
• Perkins Coie
• Reed Smith
• Ropes & Gray
• Sidley Austin
• Simpson Thacher
• Skadden
• White & Case
• WilmerHale

The EEOC focused on practices involving race and sex.

The agency wanted to know whether those practices could violate Title VII.

Four BigLaw Firms Reach EEOC Deals

Four firms later reached agreements with the EEOC.

They were Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, and A&O Shearman.

The EEOC announced the agreements in April 2025.

Importantly, the firms did not admit liability.

Instead, they agreed to follow lawful, merit-based employment practices.

The agreements covered hiring, promotions, and retention.

They also addressed discrimination based on race, sex, and other protected traits.

Furthermore, the firms agreed to compliance monitoring.

The agreements are public.

However, other records from the probe remain part of the court dispute.

EEOC Records Face Secrecy Push

The current dispute focuses on the EEOC’s investigation records.

The Trump administration says federal law protects some information about discrimination charges.

Therefore, the government says the EEOC may not confirm or deny whether a firm faced a formal charge.

This rule can protect information about a firm’s dealings with the agency.

The EEOC also says some discrimination records are confidential.

Workforce Data Is Also at Issue

The dispute also involves workforce data from the law firms.

The EEOC says some firms provided the data confidentially.

As a result, the agency says the information should remain protected.

This issue could matter to firms that provide employee data during federal investigations.

For example, law firm leaders may review how they handle sensitive workforce information.

Meanwhile, recruiters may also watch the case closely.

EEOC Cites Presidential Privilege

The EEOC has also raised presidential communications privilege.

The agency says the privilege covers some emails involving senior White House advisers.

In addition, the EEOC is withholding information from its law firm DEI tip line.

The agency says those records could identify people who submitted reports.

Some submissions contain details known by only a few people.

Therefore, releasing those details could reveal the source.

Public Citizen Challenges EEOC

Public Citizen and law professors Elise Bernlohr Maizel and Christopher Hampson want access to the records.

Their lawsuits are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The cases raise an important question about government transparency.

How much information should the public receive about a federal probe of major law firms?

The government says confidentiality rules protect sensitive information.

On the other hand, the groups seeking the records want more details about the EEOC’s actions.

As a result, the court may need to weigh public access against privacy rules.

Why the Case Matters

The dispute could affect the wider legal industry.

Law firms face more scrutiny of DEI-related employment practices.

At the same time, federal agencies have warned about unlawful discrimination in DEI programs.

However, not every DEI program violates federal law.

Instead, the facts of each program matter.

The legal issue can depend on how a program operates.

It can also depend on whether an employer makes decisions based on protected traits.

Therefore, firms may review recruiting, mentoring, promotion, and leadership programs.

Impact on Legal Careers

The case could also affect legal careers.

For example, recruiters may review the rules for diversity programs.

Law firms could also review mentoring and leadership programs.

They may examine fellowships, scholarships, and other career programs.

Meanwhile, law students and attorneys may watch the case for new guidance.

Any federal policy change could affect future recruiting programs.

It could also change how firms approach career development.

As a result, legal recruiters may face more questions about firm DEI policies.

What Happens Next?

The federal court will decide whether the EEOC can keep the records private.

First, the court may review the government’s confidentiality claims.

It could also consider the claim involving presidential communications privilege.

In addition, the court may review arguments about workforce data.

The ruling could clarify when the public can access EEOC investigation records.

It could also affect future records requests involving law firms.

For now, the administration wants to keep much of the law firm DEI probe records private.

Therefore, the case remains important for law firms, regulators, recruiters, and attorneys.

FAQs

What is the law firm DEI probe?

The EEOC launched the probe in March 2025.

It covers DEI-related employment practices at 20 major law firms.

The agency sought information about hiring, pay, promotions, mentoring, and career development.

Which law firms reached agreements with the EEOC?

Four firms reached agreements with the EEOC in April 2025.

They were Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, and A&O Shearman.

The firms agreed to follow lawful, merit-based employment practices.

Why does the government want the records withheld?

The government says federal law protects some information about discrimination charges.

It also says some workforce data was provided confidentially.

Therefore, the administration argues that the EEOC should not release those records.

What is presidential communications privilege?

Presidential communications privilege can protect certain White House communications.

In this case, the EEOC has cited the privilege for some emails involving senior advisers.

Who is seeking the EEOC records?

Public Citizen and law professors Elise Bernlohr Maizel and Christopher Hampson are seeking the records.

They are challenging the EEOC’s decision to withhold the information.

Where is the case being heard?

The lawsuits are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The cases challenge the EEOC’s decision to withhold records from its law firm DEI investigation.

Does the EEOC keep all discrimination records confidential?

No. Different EEOC records have different rules.

However, some charge files and investigation records may receive protection.

Personal information may also receive protection.

In addition, confidential-source information may be protected.

Therefore, the agency reviews records under federal disclosure rules.

Looking for your next legal opportunity? Explore the latest law jobs, attorney positions, and legal careers on LawCrossing.

See Also:

The Best In-House Moves for Former Litigators

The post Law Firm DEI Probe Records Targeted for Secrecy first appeared on JDJournal Blog.