Executive Report on Policy Adjustments to Civil Rights Enforcement and Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Strategic Policy Shift Towards Individual Opportunity

A new executive policy has been enacted to realign United States civil rights enforcement with the principle of individual equality of opportunity. The policy directive focuses on eliminating the legal framework of “disparate-impact liability,” which presumes discrimination based on unequal outcomes among demographic groups, regardless of intent. This strategic shift is positioned to advance key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by fostering a merit-based society, thereby strengthening economic and social institutions.

The core objective is to ensure that legal frameworks support individual achievement and prevent group-based considerations, which is argued to be a more effective path toward achieving the following SDGs:

• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)
• SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth)
• SDG 5 (Gender Equality)
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)
• SDG 4 (Quality Education)

Policy Directives and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Advancing Equal Opportunity and Meritocracy (SDG 10, SDG 5, SDG 8)

The policy asserts that true equality is achieved by guaranteeing equal opportunity, not by engineering equal outcomes. By dismantling disparate-impact liability, the administration aims to create a system where individual merit is the primary driver of success.

• Alignment with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): The policy directly addresses SDG Target 10.3, which calls for ensuring equal opportunity and reducing inequalities of outcome. The directive interprets this by prioritizing the “equal opportunity” component, arguing that treating citizens as individuals, rather than as members of a group, is the most just method to reduce inequality.
• Alignment with SDG 5 (Gender Equality): By rejecting policies that lead to sex-based considerations, the directive supports SDG Target 5.1 to end all forms of discrimination. The focus on individual merit is intended to ensure that opportunities are based on qualifications, not gender.
• Alignment with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The policy contends that disparate-impact liability has hindered businesses from implementing merit-based hiring. Its removal is expected to boost economic productivity (SDG Target 8.2) and promote full and productive employment based on skill, thereby achieving decent work for all (SDG Target 8.5).

Reforming Institutional and Legal Frameworks (SDG 16)

A central component of the directive is the reform of the legal and administrative institutions that enforce civil rights law. The policy views disparate-impact liability as inconsistent with constitutional principles and aims to strengthen institutions by ensuring their actions are lawful and transparent.

• Alignment with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The directive seeks to develop more effective and accountable institutions (SDG Target 16.6) by aligning their enforcement activities with the Constitution. Key actions include:
  1. Revoking specific presidential approvals from 1966 and 1973 that authorized regulations allowing for disparate-impact claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
  2. Directing all executive agencies to deprioritize enforcement of any statutes and regulations that rely on disparate-impact liability.

Promoting Skills-Based Employment Pathways (SDG 4, SDG 8)

The policy includes a forward-looking measure to broaden access to employment by de-emphasizing traditional educational credentials where appropriate.

• Alignment with SDG 4 (Quality Education): In support of SDG Target 4.4 (increase the number of adults with relevant skills for employment), the directive mandates the creation of guidance for employers on promoting equal access to jobs regardless of whether an applicant holds a college degree.
• Alignment with SDG 8 (Decent Work): This initiative encourages a focus on practical skills and competencies, diversifying the pathways to decent jobs and contributing to a more inclusive and productive workforce.

Mandated Actions for System-Wide Alignment

Regulatory and Legal Review Timeline

To ensure swift and comprehensive implementation, the directive establishes a clear timeline for review and action across the federal government. These steps are designed to reinforce institutional accountability in line with SDG 16.

1. Within 30 days: The Attorney General must report on all existing regulations that impose disparate-impact liability and detail agency plans for their amendment or repeal.
2. Within 45 days: The Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) must assess all pending investigations and lawsuits reliant on disparate-impact theories and take action consistent with the new policy. A similar review is required for agencies enforcing fair housing and fair credit laws.
3. Within 90 days: All agencies must evaluate existing consent decrees and injunctions that are based on disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action.

Future Guidance and Enforcement

The directive outlines future actions to solidify the policy shift and promote its objectives.

• The Attorney General will assess whether federal authority can preempt state-level laws that impose disparate-impact liability, ensuring a consistent national approach to promoting equal opportunity (SDG 10, SDG 16).
• The Attorney General and the EEOC Chair will jointly issue guidance to employers on methods to promote equal employment access, with a focus on skills over formal education, directly supporting inclusive economic growth (SDG 4, SDG 8).

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The article directly addresses the concept of inequality by arguing against a specific legal framework, “disparate-impact liability,” used to address it. It advocates for a principle of “equality of opportunity, not equal outcomes” and aims to eliminate policies it considers discriminatory. The text focuses on ensuring individuals are not treated as “components of a particular race or group,” which is central to the goal of reducing inequality.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article is an executive order, a formal action by a governmental institution. It deals with the interpretation and enforcement of laws, such as the Civil Rights Act, and the functioning of agencies like the Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The order’s purpose is to change how these institutions operate by revoking regulations and deprioritizing certain types of legal enforcement, aiming for what it defines as a more just and lawful governance consistent with the Constitution.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

• The core of the article revolves around employment practices. It argues that disparate-impact liability has “hindered businesses from making hiring and other employment decisions based on merit and skill.” It discusses the impact on employers’ ability to use “bona fide job-oriented evaluations” and the effect on job seekers, aiming to create a system that pairs them with jobs based on their skills, thus promoting productive employment.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

• The article explicitly mentions “sex-based favoritism” and the consideration of “sexes” in disparate-impact analysis. By advocating for a system where people are “treated as individuals” regardless of immutable characteristics, including sex, the article connects to the goal of ensuring equal opportunity in employment for all genders.

Specific Targets Identified

1. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard.

   The article directly engages this target by defining disparate-impact liability as a “pernicious” policy that “imperils the effectiveness of civil rights laws by mandating, rather than proscribing, discrimination.” The entire executive order is an action aimed at eliminating this specific policy framework (e.g., Section 2: “It is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability…”).

2. Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.

   The article is fundamentally about the enforcement of non-discrimination laws. It argues that the current enforcement approach (disparate-impact) is flawed and unconstitutional. Section 4 explicitly directs agencies to “deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate-impact liability,” thereby promoting a different method of enforcing non-discriminatory policy.

3. Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men… and equal pay for work of equal value.

   The article supports this target by advocating for hiring based on “merit and skill” and “bona fide job-oriented evaluations.” It claims this will allow job seekers to be “paired with jobs to which their skills are most suited,” which aligns with the goal of productive employment. The principle of treating people as individuals regardless of race or sex is presented as the foundation for true equality of opportunity in the workplace.

4. Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.

   The article’s policy to “stop discriminating on the basis of race” is equally applied to sex. It opposes “sex-based favoritism” and seeks to ensure individuals are judged on merit, not as “components of a particular… group,” which includes gender groups. This aligns with the principle of ending discrimination based on sex in the economic sphere.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Number of regulations repealed or amended.

   This is a direct, measurable indicator implied by the article. Section 5(b)(i) requires the Attorney General to report on “all existing regulations, guidance, rules, or orders that impose disparate-impact liability, and detail agency steps for their amendment or repeal.” Progress, according to the article’s goals, would be a reduction in this number.

2. Number of legal cases and investigations altered or dismissed.

   This is another measurable indicator. Section 6 mandates a review of “all pending investigations, civil suits, or positions taken in ongoing matters” that rely on disparate-impact liability. The instruction to “take appropriate action… consistent with the policy of this order” implies that progress would be measured by the number of such cases that are altered or dropped.

3. Issuance of new guidance for employers.

   The article implies that a measure of success is the creation of new tools for employers. Section 7(b) directs the Attorney General and EEOC Chair to “formulate and issue guidance or technical assistance to employers regarding appropriate methods to promote equal access to employment.” The publication and adoption of this guidance would serve as an indicator of progress.

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: whitehouse.gov