In this series, we will explore some of the ways states vary from one another in their employment laws.

Disparate impact discrimination claims relate to facially neutral policies or actions that cause disproportionate harm to a certain protected class. While federal law prohibits disparate impact discrimination, recent developments create doubt about whether such laws will continue to be enforced. In June 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published an enforcement plan stating that it would prioritize disparate treatment discrimination claims over disparate impact claims. The EEOC’s enforcement plan is consistent with the U.S. Department of Justice’s 2025 efforts to narrow enforcement of Title VII disparate impact claims.

In the wake of this federal shift to limit disparate impact enforcement, some states are creating their own disparate impact laws. On July 31, 2026, Illinois added disparate impact protections to the Illinois Human Rights Act. Starting on Jan. 1, 2027, it will be a violation of Illinois law for an employer to use criteria or methods that have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination on the basis of a protected class, even if the employer had no discriminatory intent. New Jersey and New York enacted their own disparate impact bans in late 2025, with New Jersey’s attorney general specifically citing the federal government’s efforts to narrow disparate impact enforcement as the motivation for New Jersey’s new rule.

Illinois, New Jersey, and New York are not the first states to prohibit disparate impact. California, Colorado, and Minnesota, for example, already had such laws on their books.