Review of settlement efforts

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. The Government’s suggestion that review be limited to checking the facial validity of its two letters to Mach Mining falls short of Title VII’s demands. That standard would merely accept the EEOC’s word that it followed the law, whereas the aim of judicial review is to verify that the EEOC actually tried to conciliate a discrimination charge. 738 F. 3d 171, vacated and remanded.

Result

Vacated

The Court said Title VII gives the EEOC broad discretion, but courts must still check whether it actually tried to resolve the charge. Simply checking whether two letters looked valid would take the agency’s word for it, rather than verify that it followed the law.

The case returns to the Seventh Circuit for further proceedings under the Supreme Court’s narrow review rule. The Court did not decide whether the EEOC met its duty in Mach Mining’s case.