Why The EEOC Needs To Be Challenged

Imagine if your job included making gigantic decisions with far-reaching implications with almost zero oversight.

Welcome to the life of the EEOC. Or at least this is what Mach Mines argued in a suit brought against the EEOC that recently reached the steps of The Supreme Court.

As is usually the case with cases taken on by The Supremes, this is less about the specifics of this one case and more about a bigger principle—namely the EEOC’s position that its conciliation efforts are not subject to judicial review. The solicitor general has acknowledged that this case “presents a recurring question of substantial importance” on which federal appeals courts disagree.

If The Court sides with Mach, this will have a two-fold impact.
No. 1: It will rein in the EEOC and, more importantly;
No. 2: It is going to change how such cases are litigated and how the conciliation process will be going forward.

The reason why is simple… The EEOC will have to follow itsguidelines. Shocking, I know. The EEOC regulations and guidelines require that the EEOC participate in conciliatory efforts in GOOD FAITH prior to bringing a lawsuit against an employer.
One big problem, however, is that if the EEOC does not follow its own guideline, there is no one to complain to thus making it virtually impossible to hold the EEOC accountable. The mandatory conciliation policy is one without teeth.

During oral argument, Chief Justice John Roberts said, “I am very troubled by the idea that the government can do something and we can’t even look at whether they’ve complied with the law.”

For once, it looks like Roberts and I agree on something,