Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC, LLCScarinci Hollenbeck, LLC, LLC

Firm Insights

EEOC Conciliation Efforts Subject to Narrow Judicial Review

Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC

Date: June 10, 2015

Key Contacts

Back

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that courts do not have to take the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) at its word with regard to whether the agency fulfilled its conciliation obligation in discrimination cases.

However, it found that the scope of judicial review is limited to whether the EEOC gave the employer notice of the charge and provided an opportunity to achieve voluntary compliance

The Legal Background

Prior to filing an employment discrimination suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC must first “endeavor to eliminate [the] alleged unlawful employment practice by informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion.” Once the EEOC determines that conciliation has failed, it may file an employment discrimination suit in federal court. However, “[n]othing said or done during” conciliation may be “used as evidence in a subsequent proceeding without written consent of the persons concerned.”

The Facts of the Case

Mach Mining LLC v. EEOC involved a sex discrimination charge against Mach Mining, LLC. Upon determining that reasonable cause existed to believe that the company had engaged in unlawful hiring practices, the EEOC sent a letter inviting Mach Mining and the complainant to participate in informal conciliation proceedings and notifying them that a representative would be contacting them to begin the process. About a year later, the EEOC sent Mach Mining another letter stating that it had determined that conciliation efforts had been unsuccessful. The agency subsequently filed a discrimination suit.

In responding to the suit, Mach Mining alleged that the EEOC had failed to conciliate in good faith. The EEOC maintained that its conciliation efforts were not subject to judicial review and that, regardless, the two letters it sent to Mach Mining provided adequate proof that it had fulfilled its statutory duty. While the district court disagreed with the EEOC, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals overturned its decision, finding that the EEOC’s statutory conciliation obligation was unreviewable.

The Supreme Court’s Decision on Conciliation Efforts

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the EEOC’s conciliation efforts were open to judiciary scrutiny, although the scope is narrow.

In reaching its decision, the Court noted that it has recognized a “strong presumption” that Congress means to allow judicial review of administrative action. In addition, it found that although Congress gave the EEOC wide latitude to choose which informal methods to use during the conciliation process, it did not deprive courts of judicially manageable criteria by which to whether it fulfilled it statutory obligation.

With regard to the appropriate standard of review, the Court rejected the positions adopted by both the EEOC and Mach Mining. According to the Court:

The appropriate scope of judicial review of the EEOC’s conciliation activities is narrow, enforcing only the EEOC’s statutory obligation to give the employer notice and an opportunity to achieve voluntary compliance. This limited review respects the expansive discretion that Title VII gives the EEOC while still ensuring that it follows the law.

Under the Court’s standard, the EEOC must notify the employer about the specific discrimination allegation, including what the employer has done and which employees (or class of employees) have suffered. In addition, the EEOC must also attempt to engage the employer in a discussion in order to give the employer a chance to remedy the allegedly discriminatory practice.

With regard to the proof required, the Court stated that a sworn affidavit from the EEOC stating that it has performed these obligations should be sufficient. If the employer provides concrete evidence that the EEOC did not provide the requisite information about the charge or attempt to engage in a discussion about conciliating the claim, a court may then conduct the fact-finding required to resolve that specific issue.

For more information on the The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) see our related posts:

EEOC Enforcement Report Reveals Significant Drop in Charges
-EEOC by the Numbers: Latest Statistics Reveal Enforcement Trends
-EEOC Files First Transgender Discrimination Suit

No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC, LLC

Related Posts

See all
The SEC’s Latest Guidance on Applying Federal Securities Laws to Tokenized Securities post image

The SEC’s Latest Guidance on Applying Federal Securities Laws to Tokenized Securities

On January 28, 2026, staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management, and Trading and Markets issued a joint statement clarifying how existing federal securities laws apply to tokenized securities. The SEC’s “Statement on Tokenized Securities” does not establish new law, but it does provide greater clarity on the […]

Author: Dan Brecher

Link to post with title - "The SEC’s Latest Guidance on Applying Federal Securities Laws to Tokenized Securities"
Common Legal Mistakes NYC and New Jersey Business Owners Make post image

Common Legal Mistakes NYC and New Jersey Business Owners Make

Operating a business in the New Jersey and New York City metropolitan region offers incredible opportunities, but it also requires navigating a dense and highly regulated legal environment. From entity formation to regulatory compliance, seemingly minor legal oversights can expose business owners to significant risk. In our work with businesses throughout the region, our attorneys […]

Author: Dan Brecher

Link to post with title - "Common Legal Mistakes NYC and New Jersey Business Owners Make"
What Founders Can Learn From Start-up Suits post image

What Founders Can Learn From Start-up Suits

High-profile founder litigation is more than just a media spectacle. For startup founders, these cases underscore the legal and structural risks that can arise when rapid growth outpaces formal oversight. While launching a new company can be both an exciting and deeply rewarding endeavor, founders must be mindful that it also comes with significant risks. […]

Author: Dan Brecher

Link to post with title - "What Founders Can Learn From Start-up Suits"
Corporate Governance Reviews: A Practical Guide for New Jersey Companies post image

Corporate Governance Reviews: A Practical Guide for New Jersey Companies

Every New Jersey company should periodically evaluate its governance framework. Strong corporate governance protects directors and officers, builds investor confidence, reduces litigation exposure, and positions a company for sustainable growth. The first quarter of the year is a great time to evaluate your corporate governance practices and perform any routine maintenance needed to keep that […]

Author: Ken Hollenbeck

Link to post with title - "Corporate Governance Reviews: A Practical Guide for New Jersey Companies"
What to Do After Being Served with a Lawsuit: Steps to Protect Your Legal Rights post image

What to Do After Being Served with a Lawsuit: Steps to Protect Your Legal Rights

Being served with a lawsuit is one of the most stressful legal events a business or individual can face. Whether the claim involves a contract dispute, an employment matter, an intellectual property issue, or another legal challenge, the actions you take in the first few days can significantly shape the outcome of your case. Acting […]

Author: Robert E. Levy

Link to post with title - "What to Do After Being Served with a Lawsuit: Steps to Protect Your Legal Rights"
Will 2026 Be a Banner Year for SPACs? Understanding the Risks and Opportunities post image

Will 2026 Be a Banner Year for SPACs? Understanding the Risks and Opportunities

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) continue to gain momentum as we move through 2026. After enduring a significant contraction following the 2021 boom and the regulatory scrutiny that followed, SPAC activity rebounded sharply in 2025 and now carries forward into 2026 with real momentum. The SPAC resurgence reflects broader improvements in both market conditions and the […]

Author: Dan Brecher

Link to post with title - "Will 2026 Be a Banner Year for SPACs? Understanding the Risks and Opportunities"

No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!

Explore What Matters Most to You.

Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.

Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.

Let`s get in touch!

* The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form. By providing a telephone number and submitting this form you are consenting to be contacted by SMS text message. Message & data rates may apply. Message frequency may vary. You can reply STOP to opt-out of further messaging.

Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!