An injunction of the EEOC's 2012 Guidance on use of criminal background information applies only to the State of Texas . . . but all employers might be able to make use of it.
Back in 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued an Enforcement Guidance on the use of criminal background information in hiring and employment. I wasn't crazy about the Enforcement Guidance, thinking its reasoning was flawed, and that it was too flexible and unrealistic overall.
The Obama-era EEOC aggressively pursued some employers at first, but the agency got slapped down in a few high-profile cases. Since then, for the most part, the agency seems to have left employers alone.
Well, the State of Texas apparently was spoiling for a fight. Don't mess with Texas.
Texas sued in 2013 to enjoin the EEOC and the U.S. Attorney General from applying the Enforcement Guidance in a way that would prevent the State from categorically disqualifying felons from employment in certain positions (law enforcement officers, prison guards, that type of work). The State also tried to block the EEOC from even issuing right-to-sue letters to individuals who were denied employment based on their criminal backgrounds. Finally, the State argued that the Enforcement Guidance changed existing law and therefore that the EEOC was required to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act before issuing it. Which, Texas said, it had failed to do.
(In a nutshell, the APA says that a federal agency can't issue a "substantive" regulation without first providing notice and an opportunity for the public to comment on it. The agency also has to provide a "reasoned analysis" of its position, and comply with a lot of other technical requirements.)
The State of Texas filed its lawsuit before the EEOC had even tried to enforce the Enforcement Guidance against Texas. The suit was originally dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, as well as lack of ripeness and standing, but Texas appealed and won in 2016. As a result, the case was sent back to the district court so that the litigation could proceed.
In a four-page Order issued last week, Judge Sam R. Cummings refused to enjoin the EEOC from prohibiting categorical bans on hiring felons, or from issuing right-to-sue letters to individuals. (As the judge correctly noted, the EEOC's issuance of a right-to-sue letter does not mean that the EEOC has made a finding that the employer did anything unlawful.)
But Judge Cummings found that the EEOC was indeed required to comply with the APA and hadn't. He enjoined the EEOC and the Attorney General from "enforcing the EEOC's interpretation of the Guidance against the State of Texas until the EEOC has complied with the notice and comment requirements under the APA for promulgating an enforceable substantive rule."
You may remember Judge Sam R. Cummings. He is the judge who enjoined the Obama Administration's Persuader Rule.
This is not a nationwide injunction, and it doesn't apply to any state except Texas. But other states and private sector employers will be able to make use of the decision if they ever get a charge or lawsuit based on their criminal background check policies and procedures. If the APA applies (and I don't think there would be any dispute that the EEOC didn't comply with its requirements), then the Enforcement Guidance should be invalid for everybody, not just Texas.
(However, another federal judge might disagree with Judge Cummings that the APA applies. The EEOC's position is that the Enforcement Guidance merely gathers and summarizes pre-existing law, and therefore was not subject to APA requirements.)
After the Order was issued, an EEOC spokesperson said that the agency would be looking at its options. Options could include an appeal, or compliance with APA requirements followed by re-issuance of the Enforcement Guidance, either in its current form or with changes. Another option would be for the EEOC not to mess with Texas but continue to enforce the Guidance with respect to other states and other employers.
Image Credit: From flickr, Creative Commons license, by Mark Gstohl.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010