Washington. The US government has asked a federal judge to allow the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to withhold a significant amount of information related to its investigation into employment and diversity practices at some of the country’s largest law firms.
In a court filing submitted Monday in Washington, government lawyers said the EEOC could neither confirm nor deny whether any law firm that received information requests from the agency last year had been the subject of a formal employment discrimination charge. The agency argued that federal law protects the confidentiality of whether an employer has been the subject of such a charge.
FCRF Launches CP-FRM to Build India’s Next Generation of Fraud Risk Professionals
The filing came in response to lawsuits seeking records related to the EEOC’s requests for information from 20 of the largest law firms in the United States. The cases were brought by advocacy group Public Citizen and law professors Elise Bernlohr Maizel and Christopher Hampson, who are seeking documents concerning the agency’s examination of diversity, equity and inclusion policies at the firms.
The EEOC and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Public Citizen, Maizel and Hampson also did not immediately respond.
The dispute represents another legal flashpoint in the Trump administration’s efforts to scrutinize law firm hiring practices and roll back diversity, equity and inclusion programmes. The administration has made changes to DEI policies a major focus during President Donald Trump’s second term.
In March 2025, acting EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas requested information from 20 major law firms about diversity-related employment programmes and practices. Lucas said at the time that some of the practices could potentially violate federal anti-discrimination laws.
Four firms — Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher and A&O Shearman — subsequently entered into agreements with the EEOC, according to the agency. The government filing did not disclose the terms of those agreements, and the firms did not immediately comment.
The four firms are among nine law firms that pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services to causes supported by the White House in an effort to avoid executive orders targeting major law firms issued by Trump last year.
The EEOC broadly argued that records of its communications with the law firms should be exempt from public disclosure. This includes communications concerning confidential settlement discussions. The agency also said it could not release workforce information submitted by the firms because the companies provided the information with an expectation that it would remain confidential.
The government also invoked presidential communications privilege to withhold certain emails involving senior White House advisers. The privilege generally protects certain communications involving the president and senior advisers from disclosure.
In addition, the EEOC said it was withholding emails submitted through a tip line established last year to collect information about DEI practices at law firms. The agency argued that releasing those emails could reveal the identities of people who provided information.
According to the court filing, the facts contained in some of the submissions would be known to only a small number of individuals, meaning disclosure could potentially identify the person who submitted the information.
The lawsuits are pending in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. One case was brought by Public Citizen against the EEOC, while the second was filed by Maizel and others against the agency.
The dispute over the records comes as the administration continues its broader legal and policy efforts concerning DEI programmes and the employment practices of major law firms. The court will ultimately determine whether the EEOC can withhold the requested records under the confidentiality protections and legal privileges it has invoked.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
