Texas Court Guts EEOC Guidance on Gender-Identity Harassment

In Texas v. EEOC, the court reviewed enforcement guidance the commission issued in 2024 to reflect Bostock v. Clayton County, the 2020 decision holding that firing a worker for being gay or transgender is sex discrimination under Title VII. The guidance had told employers that repeatedly using a name or pronoun inconsistent with a worker's gender identity, or barring access to a restroom matching that identity, could constitute a hostile work environment.

The court held the commission exceeded its authority, reasoning that Bostock resolved only whether firing someone for being transgender counts as sex discrimination and expressly declined to address bathrooms, locker rooms, dress codes, or pronoun use. Reading the guidance as an unlawful expansion of Bostock, the judge vacated the gender-identity provisions while leaving other portions in place.

The ruling does not overturn Bostock itself, which remains binding precedent barring adverse employment actions against LGBTQ+ workers. But it removes federal enforcement guidance that many employers had used to shape anti-harassment policies, leaving open questions about when day-to-day conduct crosses into unlawful harassment.

Employment lawyers cautioned that businesses still face potential liability under Title VII and under state and local laws, several of which independently protect gender identity, so companies should not read the decision as a green light to abandon inclusive workplace practices.