Shortly after 10:30 p.m. on the evening of January 27, Jocelyn Samuels received an email from an official in the White House’s Office of Presidential Personnel, informing her that, “as of this date,” she’d been removed from her position as Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The official, Trent Morse, said President Donald Trump was exercising his Article II authority to remove Samuels, citing her efforts to “impose an expansive and improper DEI agenda on America’s workplaces” by “enacting or enforcing the Biden Administration’s radical Title VII guidance” — something the White House alleged constituted “a series of race-based initiatives that are themselves mired in racism.”
In the following days, Samuels and another Democratic EEOC commissioner, Charlotte Burrows, had their email and office privileges revoked and their staff terminated.
“I was shocked,” Samuels told Scripps News on Wednesday in a wide-ranging interview. “I believe that the president's removal of me was contrary to long-standing principles of law, undermines the work of the agency and the rule of law.”
In early April, Samuels sued the Trump administration seeking reinstatement of her position, claiming the president did not have the authority to unilaterally remove her. Originally appointed to the Commission by Trump in 2020, Samuels was confirmed by a bipartisan vote of the Senate and set to fulfil her term through 2026.
By suing the government, Samuels joined a growing list of ousted Trump administration officials seeking reinstatement, among them Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board, Cathy Haris of the Merit Systems Protection Bureau, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter of the Federal Trade Commission and Hampton Dellinger of the Office of Special Counsel – who earlier this year dropped his lawsuit sensing the higher courts might rule against him.
Those officials who are still pursuing their claims have thus far experienced what Samuels dubbed a "yo-yo effect,” whereby different courts have reinstated them, only to have such judgments reversed on appeal and then reinstated once again. An ultimate decision from the U.S. Supreme Court could have lasting implications – not just for Samuels, but for the dozens of leaders of independent and quasi-independent boards and commissions the president has sought to remake.
RELATED STORY | Veterans Affairs asks employees to report 'anti-Christian bias'
Despite the possibility of such a back-and-forth, Samuels says she has no intentions of backing down from her case.
“Never in the 60 years of the EEOC existence has a commissioner been terminated before the expiration of their term,” she said. “I want my job back, however short my term might be.”
New EEOC leadership embraces anti-DEI push
In firing two Democratic commissioners, the Trump administration has brought the work of the EEOC to a halt. By law, the commission requires at least a three-member quorum to conduct any business that requires a vote, meaning officials are currently unable to issue or amend regulations or policy guidance, opt to litigate cases on behalf of workers or adjudicate appeals of discrimination claims brought by federal employees.
But it’s not just the abrupt firings that concern Samuels. In her view, the Trump administration and acting EEOC chair Andrea Lucas have taken steps that further undermine the EEOC’s work to protect employees from discrimination in the workplace – actions she says could have particularly negative consequences for people of color, women and minorities.
“The President's attacks on DEI initiatives are heartbreaking and particularly a disservice to vulnerable communities,” Samuels told Scripps News. “Properly understood, DEI work is simply a proactive set of efforts by employers to identify and address barriers that are limiting people's employment opportunities before they result in some legally justiciable discrimination.”
In response to President Trump’s executive orders seeking to end “radical and wasteful” DEI programs in the government and federally recognize only two, unchangeable sexes, EEOC issued “technical assistance” documents concerning “DEI-Related Discrimination at Work” providing guidance to workers interested in filing complaints.
The EEOC also sent letters to 20 top law firms requesting data about their diversity fellowship programs and other DEI initiatives, suggesting they might amount to discriminatory practices.
Such a move went far beyond the EEOC’s mandate, Samuels argued.
“You don't have the authority to do this, and you cannot penalize these firms if they decline to respond fundamentally,” she said. “These were both unauthorized and onerous, and they were being used as part of this administration's campaign to eliminate DEI initiatives, even when those initiatives are being conducted entirely lawfully, and are important mechanisms to ensure compliance with Title VII and other statutes that the EEOC enforces.”
Samuels is not alone in her critiques. She was joined by several other Democratic EEOC commissioners and civil rights groups in signing an open letter decrying the anti-DEI guidance, as well a letter sent to acting chair Lucas suggesting the requests for data from law firms “imply a duty to respond without any basis in the laws that the EEOC enforces.”
“The public statements and actions that [Lucas] has undertaken since the President's inauguration have been really deeply disappointing to me, because I think they reflect a politicized ideology that is dogmatic and does not encourage a discussion of differing views and an openness to considering viewpoints that don't accord with her,” Samuels told Scripps News.
Of the actions the new administration’s EEOC has taken, perhaps most troubling to Samuels was top officials’ decisions to cease representing transgender and nonbinary individuals in seven cases alleging gender identity discrimination in the workplace.
“I think it is heartbreaking for the individuals involved, who had been relying on the EEOC to move their cases forward,” Samuels said.
Though the ACLU and other public interest groups have stepped up to represent the litigants in the EEOC’s stead, “they may have to pay for that representation, and those lawyers do not have the force of the United States government behind them in trying to vindicate the rights of these people.”
An EEOC spokesperson did not immediately respond to inquiries about the new administration’s actions or former commissioners’ critiques.
Watch Scripps News' full interview with Jocelyn Samuels
