USA 
United Kingdom
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dismissed a challenge brought by an Amazon delivery driver who claimed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission improperly halted discrimination investigations after direction from Donald Trump.
The driver, Leah Cross, argued that the agency illegally stopped reviewing her complaint alleging a sex-based disparate impact created by Amazon’s bathroom break policies.
Judge Trevor McFadden wrote that federal courts are not the place to resolve disputes about how the Executive branch prioritizes investigations. According to his decision, “Federal courts are not the proper forum for resolving claims that the Executive branch should ‘bring more’ investigations and enforcement actions.”
Cross had filed a charge claiming Amazon’s limit on driver bathroom breaks disproportionately affected women. Her complaint was one of many closed after the EEOC issued a September memo instructing field offices to end all disparate impact reviews brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Trump order triggered policy shift
The memo followed an April executive order from Trump that told agencies not to enforce legal protections involving practices with an unintended disparate impact. The order criticized disparate impact litigation as part of a “pernicious movement” that replaces merit-based decision making with diversity-focused assumptions.
Cross said in her lawsuit that the Supreme Court recognized disparate impact as a valid legal theory decades ago and that federal law requires the EEOC to investigate worker complaints that rely on it. She added that Amazon’s policies were a clear example, arguing that the commission could not lawfully shut down the process.
Amazon has said that drivers receive at least an hour of break time during each shift and that delivery routes are designed to offer access to restrooms.
Delivering Consistent HR Services for Deskless Workers
Can HR truly reach every employee — whether office-based, hybrid or deskless?
Deskless workers represent ~80% of the global workforce, yet most HR systems were designed for desk-based employees.
This ebook explores how to build a multichannel HR service delivery strategy — combining portals, mobile apps, email and conversational interfaces — to deliver consistent HR services, improve accessibility, and create a seamless employee experience across the entire workforce.
Based on research conducted by Neocase with clients and stakeholders in the industrial sector, it highlights practical insights on:
Why deskless environments reveal structural gaps in HR service delivery
Why multichannel HR requires governance, not just more channels
How mobile-first access can transform frontline HR interactions
What you will learn from this eBook:
How to reach employees without desk access
How to structure HR service delivery across sites
How to reduce HR workload from employee requests
Real examples from large organizations
Challenge to EEOC memo left unanswered
Cross also claimed the September memo violated the Administrative Procedure Act because it was arbitrary, contrary to federal law and enacted without the required rulemaking steps. She further argued the memo was invalid because the commission lacked a quorum when it was issued. The judge declined to rule on those assertions.
McFadden wrote that Cross “is not the object of a Commission enforcement action, so she lacks standing to challenge the agency’s enforcement decisions, including what claims it investigates.”
