On January 22, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) voted to rescind its Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the Guidance), which had been completed in the spring of 2024. The Guidance disappeared from the EEOC website within hours of the announcement.
This document was created to serve as the agency’s principal handbook for identifying, preventing, and responding to harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Guidance addressed emerging workplace issues like online and virtual harassment and protections for harassment based on sex, including medical conditions related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity. The Guidance also explored the interplay between claims of harassment and religion-based rights. For employers and their legal counsel, its value was to serve as a nonbinding interpretive resource that explained the EEOC’s perspective on how existing laws and judicial decisions should be applied in the workplace.
In 2025, some portions of the Guidance were challenged in a Texas federal court. In Texas, et. al. v. the EEOC, the court held that the agency had exceeded its statutory authority by expanding the definition of “sex” under Title VII to include gender identity. These sections of the Guidance were vacated nationwide. According to the EEOC, this decision also established the legal precedent for rescinding the Guidance in its entirety, which occurred in a 2-1 vote by the EEOC on January 22, 2026.
The Underlying Statutory Law Hasn’t Changed
This recission does not alter the federal antidiscrimination statutes. Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act still prohibit workplace harassment based on protected characteristics. Employers remain obliged to comply with these laws, including the 2020 United States Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which held that discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII includes discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and transgender status.
In the press release announcing the recession, EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas reiterated the Commission’s commitment to enforcement.
Rescinding this guidance does not give employers license to engage in unlawful harassment. Federal employment laws against discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, and Supreme Court precedent interpreting those laws, remain firmly in place. The EEOC is committed to evenhanded enforcement of these laws. The agency will continue to be dedicated to preventing and remedying unlawful workplace harassment.
Even in the absence of the Guidance, employers should remain committed to investigating all harassment complaints, emphasize respect in all interactions, consider requests for religious accommodation with care, and remember that state and local laws regarding harassment still apply.
In New Hampshire, where Orr & Reno is located, Chapter 354-A of the state statute defines and prohibits, among other things, unlawful discrimination in employment, and that law is enforced by the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights (NHCHR). The NHCHR is a state agency established for the “purpose of education and enforcement of the law against discrimination in employment, housing, places of public accommodation and K-12 public schools, because of age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, creed/religion, color, marital status, familial status, disability or national origin.”
Questions?
While the EEOC’s recission of the Guidance doesn’t change any of the underlying anti-discrimination laws, it unquestionably substantiates a dramatic shift in how the EEOC is interpreting federal harassment protections. In this environment, employers face the challenge of managing risk and making decisions based on their priorities and risk tolerance. If you are faced with ambiguous and concerning conduct in your workplace, don’t hesitate to contact Orr & Reno for assistance.
