The New York Times has countersued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), accusing the federal agency of political retaliation and violating the First and Fifth Amendments. The countersuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York, responds to an EEOC lawsuit on behalf of a white male editor who was denied a deputy real estate editor role that went to a multiracial woman.
Retaliation Over Critical Coverage
In its court filing, the Times claims the EEOC acted in retaliation for the newspaper's critical coverage of the Trump administration, particularly a story reporting that EEOC staff faced pressure to pursue cases aligned with government priorities, including discrimination claims by white men. The Times asserts that the EEOC “prematurely and abruptly” ended conciliation efforts and filed its lawsuit just one week after the article was published.
The EEOC’s lawsuit is a high-profile test of Chair Andrea Lucas’s mission to challenge corporate diversity and inclusion policies she argues discriminate against white men. Lucas has also opened an investigation into Nike over similar allegations.
Details of the Discrimination Claim
The EEOC complaint alleges that the Times discriminated against the male applicant based on gender and race when he was passed over for the deputy real estate editor role in 2025. The complainant, an editor at the Times since 2014, had experience on the international desk and with real estate stories. The EEOC claims the selected candidate, a multiracial woman, lacked real estate journalism experience but matched the race and/or sex characteristics the Times sought to increase in leadership.
The Times counters that the EEOC’s case rests on the false premise that selecting a multiracial woman over a white male applicant—combined with an aspirational leadership goal—proves discrimination. The Times states that after an eight-month investigation, the EEOC found no evidence that race or gender influenced the decision. Moreover, several candidates of color with more real estate experience than the complainant were also passed over.
Qualifications and Aspirational Goals
The Times argues that the selected candidate, a deputy editor at Eater, articulated a compelling vision for the future of the Times’ real estate coverage, unlike the complainant. The newspaper emphasizes that its leadership diversity goals, announced in a 2022 Call to Action report, were “aspirational in nature and not established targets or quotas.” The goals were projections of the expected impact of legitimate, nondiscriminatory efforts to improve the Times’ culture, and they did not affect the hiring process for the deputy real estate editor role, which was not among the leadership positions discussed in the report.
According to reports cited in the lawsuit, white employees composed 68% of the Times’ leadership in 2024, compared to 29% people of color. The Times met its stated goals in 2022 but continued its commitment to diversity policies.
Legal and Political Context
Under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, it is generally illegal for employers to consider race or gender in hiring, promotion, or other decisions. Lucas has targeted practices she claims pressure hiring managers to do so, including certain anti-bias training and diverse candidate slates. Civil rights organizations and former Democratic EEOC leaders argue the agency is attacking long-accepted practices designed to prevent discrimination against marginalized workers.
An EEOC spokesperson declined to comment on ongoing litigation. The Times’ countersuit seeks to dismiss the EEOC’s complaint and asserts that the agency’s actions violate constitutional protections.
