Nike Inc. appears to be the latest example of how President Trump’s administration has escalated efforts to challenge diversity efforts across corporate America.

As reported, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on Wednesday filed an action for enforcement of an EEOC administrative subpoena against the athletic firm seeking the production of documents in connection to a discrimination probe. More specifically, the EEOC is probing “systemic allegations” involving DEI-related intentional race discrimination against White employees and job applicants. A Nike spokesperson called the move “a surprising and unusual escalation,” given that it has had “extensive, good-faith participation” in the EEOC inquiry.

“Public EEOC investigations involving large, brand‑name employers always draw attention, but the underlying process itself isn’t unusual. The EEOC routinely investigates [unfairness] claims across the spectrum, including so‑called ‘reverse discrimination’ allegations [those against white employees],” said Bryan Sullivan, a partner at the law firm Early Sullivan Write Gizer & McRae LLP. “What’s different here is the visibility of the company and the broader political and cultural context around DEI of the day, which makes the probe feel more significant than the process itself typically is. But reverse discrimination claims have been made in the past.”

In the athletic firm’s annual report for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said its mission to bring inspiration and innovation to all athletes is “aligned with our deep commitment” to maintaining an environment where all Nike employees have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

“We are committed to having an inclusive and diverse team and culture, and accessible workplace,” the report said, noting that the company achieves this through recruitment, development and retention of “qualified talent.”

Among the eight executive officers listed in the annual report, Nike’s executive vice president and chief commercial officer Craig Williams was the only one listed who isn’t white. As part of changes to the Swoosh’s senior leadership team, Williams was one of the employees whose role was eliminated. But in other changes, chief supply officer Venkatesh Alagirisamy took on a new role of executive vice president and chief operating officer. And in other moves, the leaders of Nike’s four geographies joined the senior leadership team: Angela Dong, Greater China; Carl Grebert, EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa); Tom Peddie, North America, and Cathy Sparks, APLA (Asia Pacific Latin America). The changes were part of CEO Elliott Hill’s growth and offense initiatives under its “Win Now” strategy.

And while the EEOC charge is centered on allegations of white worker discrimination claims, Sullivan said that when companies face DEI-related scrutiny, more often it’s less about the racial makeup of top leadership and more about how hiring, promotion, and performance systems operate at the departmental or program level.

“Even organizations with predominantly white executive teams can still face allegations if certain policies or initiatives are perceived as disadvantaging those white employees [at the departmental or program level],” the attorney said.

In the initial EEOC Commissioner’s Charge from May 2024, the focus was on “representative” workforce targets for 2025, which called for 30 percent representation of racial and ethnic minorities at the Director level and above in the U.S., and 35 percent representation of racial and ethnic minorities in Nike U.S. corporate workforce, as well as other DEI-related objectives.

But Sullivan also said that Nike’s profile makes it an easy focal point. “High-visibility companies with well-publicized DEI commitments are more likely to become test cases, regardless of whether their practices are meaningfully different from peers. In that sense, Nike may be less of an outlier and more of a bellwether for how these issues are being examined right now,” he said.

The attorney also emphasized that the EEOC matter centers on “allegations and not findings, and [that] anyone can make allegations to initiate a case.”

One of the claims against Nike was filed with the EEOC was by America First Legal. The company’s website indicated a release that said it filed its federal civil rights complaint with the EEOC on Jan. 11, 2024. America First Legal charged Nike with allegations of racial and sex discrimination against White males. The organization is known for its work against so-called “woke” corporations, and was co-founded by Stephen Miller in 2021. Miller is a former senior advisor to U.S. President Donald Trump during his first administration. Following Trump’s re-election, Miller joined the new administration and serves as Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy as well as Homeland Security Advisor, according the the America First Legal website.

One of Trump’s early moves after taking office on Jan. 20, 2025, was the federal dismantling of its DEI policies. Those efforts run deep across several federal agencies.

On Jan. 30, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson sent warning letters to 42 law firms regarding potentially unfair and anticompetitive employment practices. The recipients had attended a certification program from a for-profit business on common race and gender-based employment practices across the legal industry. The program also included participation in monthly meetings to discuss implementation of certain criteria, a move that apparently kicked up FTC attention and gave it the impetus to threaten “antitrust” violations on the possibility of collusion. The antitrust maneuver is seen as a novel move, one that shows a willingness by the Trump administration to test how far it can go to get everyone to knuckle down on its agenda.

Some firms that received the FTC letter, such as Skadden Arps and Reed Smith, were also the targets of an EEOC inquiry last year. Skadden Arps has since discontinued its affinity group events, while Reed Smith has eliminated DEI branding in its hiring initiatives. Law firms, who routinely advise their clients on how to maintain DEI objectives while mitigating risk, now need to rethink how to best advise clients against the backdrop of new landmines under the Trump administration.

In the case of fashion and footwear, some firms were already shifting course before Trump won re-election in 2024. That’s because the handwriting was already on the wall following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2023 that shot down affirmative action in college admissions. Retailers such as Walmart moved away from DEI toward the concept of belonging. And Walmart competitor Target Corp. in January 2025, after Trump took office a few weeks earlier, said it was rolling back DEI to embrace “belonging.”

But some fashion firms also don’t plan on backing down from their diversity efforts. And retailers such as REI Co-op, have indicated no plans to scale back efforts. Neither does Levi Strauss & Co. At the firm’s 2025 annual shareholders’ meeting, Levi’s board advised voting against a proposal to consider abolishing its DEI program and goals. Shareholders did just that, with less than 1 percent of shares voting in favor of the proposal. The jeans brand has a long commitment to diversity and inclusion.

And while Nike is the latest target, it might not be the only one to face the DEI wrath of the Trump administration.

“Given the [Trump] Administration’s public statements on DEI and sustained shift in how DEI is treated at the federal level, it’s reasonable to expect increased enforcement activity or at least more willingness to pursue claims that challenge DEI‑related programs,” Sullivan said.