A federal civil rights agency moved Tuesday to challenge The New York Times’ hiring and promotion process, filing a discrimination lawsuit in New York that argues the newspaper selected candidates in a way that improperly took race and sex into account. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said it brought the case on behalf of a New York Times editor who complained after being passed over for the deputy real estate editor role in 2025, and who alleged the decision violated Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination tied to sex and race.
According to the EEOC, the promotion decision involved a final round of interviews, with the agency saying the news organization advanced three women and a Black man while excluding the white male applicant. The EEOC also argued that the newsroom’s publicly stated goals aimed at increasing the number of women and people of color in leadership ranks influenced the decision, the lawsuit language said.
EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, described by the AP as a Republican and a critic of corporate diversity policies that she argues can veer into discrimination against white men and others, framed the action as a test of enforcement. In a statement quoted by AP, Lucas said: “No one is above the law — including ‘elite’ institutions. There is no such thing as ‘reverse discrimination;’ all race or sex discrimination is equally unlawful, according to long-established civil rights principles.” She added that “the EEOC under my leadership will not pull punches in ensuring evenhanded, colorblind enforcement of Title VII to protect America’s workers, including white males.”
The lawsuit focuses on a single personnel decision among many deputy roles, the New York Times said in response. The newspaper’s spokeswoman Danielle Rhoades Ha said the EEOC “deviated from standard practices in highly unusual ways,” and she said the allegation centers on one deputy position decision among more than 100 deputy roles across the newsroom. Rhoades Ha said the EEOC’s filing “makes sweeping claims that ignore the facts to fit a predetermined narrative,” and she said the paper would defend itself “vigorously.”
Rhoades Ha also said the promotion process did not involve race or gender. “Neither race nor gender played a role in this decision — we hired the most qualified candidate, and she is an excellent editor,” she said. The EEOC’s filing, AP reported, pointed to the New York Times’ internal diversity and inclusion policies as support for its claims, including a “Call to Action” plan published in February 2021 that set a goal of increasing the number of Black and Latino employees in leadership by 50% by 2025.
The EEOC said that goal was met in 2022, but that the news organization continued efforts to pursue diversity commitments afterward. AP reported that, based on reports cited in the lawsuit, white employees made up 68% of its leadership in 2024, while people of color accounted for 29%. The EEOC said those figures and the newspaper’s ongoing diversity goals were part of the agency’s argument about how the promotion decision was made.
In the complaint, the EEOC said the unnamed complainant has worked as an editor at The New York Times since 2014, including time as a senior staff editor on the international desk, with previous experience in real estate stories. The EEOC said the woman ultimately selected as deputy real estate editor “did not have experience with real estate journalism” but that the candidate nevertheless matched the race and/or sex characteristics the EEOC said the Times sought to increase in leadership, according to the AP report. The lawsuit also cited a final panel interviewer’s description of the woman as “a bit green overall,” AP reported.
The case is also part of a broader legal and political debate over diversity goals in workplaces. AP reported that it is generally illegal under Title VII for employers to take race or gender into account in hiring and promotion decisions, and the agency’s approach has drawn criticism from some observers who argue the EEOC is attacking long-held practices meant to address discrimination.
Lucas has pursued similar scrutiny elsewhere, according to AP. The EEOC chair previously revealed the agency was investigating Nike for racial discrimination claims involving white employees, AP reported, and said that investigation stemmed from Lucas’s own “commissioner’s charge” rather than a worker complaint.
Both sides now face the next procedural steps in federal court, with the EEOC seeking to challenge the Times’ explanation for the role and the newspaper saying the agency’s account mischaracterizes the facts and ignores its stated rationale for selecting the most qualified candidate.