EEOC Drops Decades-Old Requirements for Federal Agencies to Report Race, Sex, and Ethnicity Workforce Data
In a major shift that aligns federal personnel policy with the Trump administration's anti-DEIA executive orders, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued new "additional instructions" on June 3, 2026, making decades-old demographic reporting requirements for federal agencies entirely optional.1
Dismantling Management Directive 715 (MD-715)
The new instructions apply to EEOC’s Management Directive 715 (MD-715), a mandate established in 2003 requiring federal agencies to submit annual reports detailing the demographic makeup of their workforces. Under the new guidelines, agencies can choose to omit any data or details they believe "raise legal or policy concerns" or conflict with President Donald Trump's executive orders:
"EEOC is no longer requiring agencies to report breakdowns of race, sex and ethnicity in the federal workforce. Agencies also do not have to address 'diversity and inclusion' principles, 'triggers' or 'gender identity' in their annual demographic data reports, EEOC said in June 3 instructions."
Furthermore, the new instructions make "barrier analysis"—assessments designed to identify if specific demographic groups face hiring or promotion obstacles—completely optional. The "trigger" mechanism that previously forced agencies to investigate the cause of identified demographic disparities has also been eliminated.
EEOC Chairwoman Andrea Lucas justified the changes by stating that MD-715 in its current form "no longer meets the needs of the modern federal government" and that the action ensures agencies can meet their obligations "without creating legal or policy conflicts."
Bypassing Public Input and Bipartisan Rulemaking
The decision has sparked intense backlash from civil rights advocates, former EEO officials, and the Commission's Democratic minority, who accuse the Republican majority of bypassing standard regulatory procedures to avoid public scrutiny. The instructions were approved after a five-day voting period among commissioners, and a scheduled public meeting to discuss the changes was abruptly canceled.
Because the changes were issued as "additional instructions" rather than formal amendments, the EEOC bypassed the rigorous notice-and-comment rulemaking process2 typically required for "significant" policy changes. Democratic Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal issued a sharp dissent, warning that the policy represents a head-in-the-sand approach to systemic inequality:
"Turning a blind eye to discrimination does not mean that it has gone away — it simply means that it goes uncorrected," Kotagal said in a June 3 dissenting statement. "For decades, this data has served as an important tool for agencies to affirmatively identify barriers to EEO in their workforces, and employment policies and practices. The additional instructions only serve to weaken agencies’ ability to have effective, affirmative programs to prevent discrimination."
Former EEOC officials and advocacy groups like EEO Leaders have warned that making demographic reporting optional will lead to a "patchwork" of inconsistent reporting across executive branch agencies, effectively destroying the federal government's primary mechanism for detecting and preventing systemic employment discrimination.
-
An instance of Excepted service schedules replace career civil service protections with at-will political obedience. — It shows how agencies are restructuring internal policies to strip career standards in favor of partisan alignment under executive direction. ↩︎
-
An instance of Internal bureaucratic reshuffling bypasses the legislative hurdles of formal policy changes. — The agency achieved a massive policy shift dismantling demographic tracking by issuing internal guidelines that evaded public notice and comment. ↩︎