Trump's Moves to End 'Disparate Impact,' But Just What Is It and How Has It Done So Much Damage to America?
December 22, 2025 at 6:23am
The Trump Department of Justice announced new regulations that ban the use of disparate impact, a leftist theory that says that a racial disparity in outcomes must always be the result of racism and discrimination.
“This Department of Justice is eliminating its regulations that for far too long required recipients of federal funding to make decisions based on race,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement earlier this month.
In a separate statement, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division stressed that the use of disparate impact was a net negative for America, not a positive.
Our rejection of this theory will restore true equality under the law by requiring proof of actual discrimination, rather than enforcing race- or sex-based quotas or assumptions,” Dhillon added.
For example, disparate impact says that if the police in a particular town arrest more black suspects than white/Asian suspects in any given period of time, it must be because of racism and discrimination.
Thanks to disparate impact, last year black female applicants who failed the Maryland State Police’s new officer tests were labeled victims of racism and given $2.75 million in backpay.
In addition, the state police announced plans to make its physical tests even easier by removing time limits for pushups and more.
In a recent op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, law professors Elizabeth Price Foley and Jason Torchinsky argued that disparate impact theory ought to be ruled outright unconstitutional so as to prevent a future Democratic administration from resurrecting it.
“Disparate-impact theory, which recasts neutral standards as discriminatory, was imposed undemocratically and conflicts with the Constitution,” they wrote. “The Supreme Court, which has sent mixed signals over the years, should eventually reject it.”
The central thesis of disparate impact is that society should focus on group outcomes, not individual merit.
It’s why disparate impact goes hand in hand with so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
As noted by critics, disparate impact theory can be used to justify almost any DEI policy, no matter how backwards and harmful.
The late Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, once correctly tweeted that disparate impact “is the legal super weapon that is responsible for gutting merit-based hiring and is why all our companies think they have to have bogus DEI jobs.”
In an April op-ed of their own, the editors of National Review Online also called for an elimination of disparate impact.
Yes, it would.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
Posts
