Tennessee’s Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti believes that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) “Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace” is “arbitrary and capricious,” and “unconstitutional.”
On November 1st, Skrmetti, on behalf of the state of Tennessee along with 19 other state attorneys general, released comments regarding the EEOC’s new guidance, as he and others believe it would “unleash unconstitutional chaos in the nation’s workplace.”
“The EEOC has once again proposed enforcement guidance that extends beyond its statutory authority and threatens the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans,” Skrmetti said. “Tennessee has successfully challenged EEOC’s unlawful guidance in the past and stands ready to do so again.”
Skrmetti specifically called out how the new guidelines have broadened “sex-based harassment” to include “intentional and repeated use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with the individual’s gender identity.” The new guidelines also include bathroom bans and discrimination.
“Examples include epithets regarding sexual orientation or gender identity … or the denial of access to a bathroom or other sex-segregated facility consistent with the individual’s gender identity,” the guidelines said.
In the letter, Skrmetti reminded the EEOC that the state of Tennessee was joined by other Republican state attorneys general in 2021 to bring a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education along with the commission, which “advanced a vastly expanded view of Title VII liability for the nation’s employers.”
“[EEOC] Chair [Charlotte] Burrows unilaterally issued that guidance in 2021 without opportunity for comment, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee enjoined it,” the letter said.
The letter lists a number of reasons as to why Skrmetti and others oppose the new guidelines. The text asserts that these new proposals “exceed the agency’s Title VII authority,” and that they violate the United States Constitution.
“Free-speech limits do not allow EEOC to compel employers to ‘speak its preferred message’ against their will,” the letter said. It also mentioned that employees and employers who do comply to the EEOC’s “chosen gender ideology orthodoxy” are potentially compromising their religious freedoms.
Skrmetti and others have urged the EEOC to “make appropriate changes.” They have also stated that they are prepared to pursue legal action.