New York Times accuses agency of political retaliation in countersuit over discrimination case

NEW YORK (AP) — The New York Times accused a federal civil rights agency Friday of political retaliation and free speech infringement in a countersuit filed in response to a discrimination lawsuit the news organization faces on behalf of a white male employee who was rejected for a role awarded to a multiracial woman.

In a court filing, the news organization said the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed the lawsuit in retaliation for its critical coverage of President Donald Trump’s administration, in particular a story reporting that EEOC staff are under pressure to bring in cases that fit with the government’s priorities, including discrimination claims by white men.

In the countersuit filed in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York, the Times said the EEOC “prematurely and abruptly” ended conciliation efforts and filed the lawsuit a week after the newspaper published its story. The Times said the lawsuit is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s first and fifth amendments.

The lawsuit against the New York Times is a high-profile test of EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas’ mission to pursue corporate diversity and inclusion policies that she argues discriminate against white men and others. She has also opened an investigation into Nike for allegedly discriminating against white employees with policies aimed at diversifying its workforce.

The EEOC is suing the Times on behalf of an editor who didn’t get the role of deputy real estate editor in 2025, alleging gender and racial discrimination.

The EEOC complaint said the male applicant had worked as an editor for the New York Times since 2014, mostly as a senior staff editor on the international desk with previous experience working on real estate stories. The lawsuit claims that the woman ultimately appointed deputy real estate editor “did not have experience with real estate journalism” but “as a multiracial female, this candidate matched the race and/or sex characteristics NYT sought to increase in its leadership.”

The New York Times said its filing that “the EEOC’s case rests entirely on the false premise that, because The Times selected a multiracial woman for a position over a white male applicant, and because The Times had an aspirational leadership goal, then the multiracial woman must not have been qualified for the position, and the selection must have been motivated by race and/or sex.”

The Times said that after an eight-month investigation, the EEOC found no evidence that the organization considered the selected candidate’s race or gender. The Times noted that several candidates of color with more real estate experience than the complainant were passed over for the job.

The Times said the woman selected for the role had been a deputy editor at the online publication Eater and, unlike the complainant, “articulated a compelling vision for the future of The Times’ real estate coverage.”

Lucas has been particularly critical of representation goals that many companies have publicly announced, particularly in the wake of the 2020 racial protests following the police killing of unarmed Black man George Floyd.

The EEOC said the New York Times met its stated goals in 2022 but continued its commitment to diversity policies. According to reports cited in the lawsuit, white employees composed 68% of its leadership in 2024, compared to 29% people of color.

In almost all cases, it is illegal under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for employers to take race or gender into account when making hiring, promotion and other decisions. Lucas has taken aim at practices she claims pressure hiring managers to do just that, from certain forms of anti-bias training to ensuring a diverse slate of candidates for roles. Civil rights organizations and former Democratic EEOC leaders have said the agency is attacking long accepted practices designed to prevent discrimination against workers who have traditionally been marginalized.

The New York Times said its goals “were aspirational in nature and were not established targets or quotas.”

Instead, the newspaper said the goals “were a projection of the expected impact of various legitimate, nondiscriminatory efforts to improve The Times’s culture.”

The organization also said the goals stated in the Call to Action report didn’t affect the hiring process for the real estate deputy editor role, which the New York Times said was not among the leadership positions discussed in the report.

An EEOC spokesperson said the agency doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.