New Bill Ends Forced Arbitration for Race Discrimination Claims, Giving Workers the Choice to Sue

This bill, officially called the Ending Forced Arbitration of Race Discrimination Act of 2025, is straightforward: it cancels mandatory, pre-dispute arbitration agreements for any claims involving race, color, or national origin discrimination or retaliation. Essentially, if you sign an employment contract that says you must go to arbitration for any workplace dispute, this law makes that clause invalid if the dispute is about race discrimination. The individual alleging the discrimination gets the final say on whether the case goes to arbitration or public court, even if they signed a contract agreeing to arbitration beforehand (SEC. 2).

The Fine Print: What Changes for Lawsuits

Forced arbitration has been a hot topic because it often moves legal disputes out of the public eye and into a private, less regulated system. This bill specifically targets civil rights cases related to race. If passed, it creates a new federal rule (Chapter 5, Title 9 of the U.S. Code) that says any contract clause forcing arbitration for a “race discrimination dispute” is unenforceable. This covers disputes under Federal, Tribal, State, or local law (SEC. 2).

Think of it this way: Right now, if your employer requires arbitration and you believe you were passed over for a promotion due to your race, you might be legally forced into a private arbitration hearing. If this bill passes, you could choose to file a lawsuit in public court instead. This is a massive shift, especially for employees in industries where arbitration clauses are standard, like tech, finance, or retail management.

Who Decides Where the Case Goes?

One of the trickiest parts of arbitration law is figuring out who—the judge or the arbitrator—gets to decide if a case must be arbitrated in the first place. The bill cuts through that ambiguity, stating clearly that a court, not an arbitrator, must decide whether this new rule applies to a specific agreement and whether the agreement is valid. This holds true even if the contract explicitly tries to give that power to the arbitrator (SEC. 2).

This provision is key because it prevents companies from using the arbitration clause itself to keep the initial decision about the clause’s validity out of the courts. For everyday people, this means that if they want to go to court, they won’t have to fight a preliminary battle in arbitration just to get permission to go to court.

Real-World Impact and Implementation

This change applies to any race discrimination dispute that “arises or accrues” on or after the date the Act is signed into law (SEC. 3). It’s not retroactive for existing claims, but it immediately changes the landscape for future claims.

For workers, the benefit is access to the public court system, which often provides greater transparency, the potential for class-action lawsuits (which the bill also invalidates predispute waivers for), and a jury trial. For employers who rely on arbitration to manage litigation costs and keep disputes private, this bill means that race-related claims will now carry the risk of public court proceedings and potentially higher legal exposure. This bill is a clear win for civil rights advocates and anyone who prefers legal disputes involving discrimination to be handled in the public eye.