ARTICLE
11 August 2026

FTC Abandons "Disparate Impact" As A Basis For Section 5 Claims

GA
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)

Contributor

With firms representing more than 90 countries, each GALA member has the local expertise and experience in advertising, marketing and promotion law that will help your campaign achieve its objectives, and navigate the legal minefield successfully. GALA is a uniquely sensitive global resource whose members maintain frequent contact with each other to maximize the effectiveness of their collaborative efforts for their shared clients. GALA provides the premier worldwide resource to advertisers and agencies seeking solutions to problems involving the complex legal issues affecting today's marketplace.
The Federal Trade Commission has announced a major policy shift, declaring it will no longer pursue disparate-impact claims under Section 5 of the FTC Act. This reversal affects previous enforcement actions against businesses accused of discrimination based on statistical outcomes rather than intent. The new policy statement modifies compliance obligations in previously-settled cases and signals a fundamental change in how the agency approaches discrimination claims.
United States Consumer Protection
Jeffrey A Greenbaum (Frankfurt Kurnit Klein Selz)’s articles from Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA) are most popular:
  • within Consumer Protection topic(s)
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA) are most popular:
  • within Government and Public Sector topic(s)

The Federal Trade Commission just issued a Policy Statement Regarding Disparate-Impact Claims and “Unfair Discrimination” Claims, saying that the Commission is adopting a policy “against pursuing disparate-impact claims in any context.” 

During the prior Administration, the Commission had taken the position that Section 5 of the FTC Act empowered the FTC to pursue consumer protection claims based on disparate impact and unfair discrimination. For example, in the Passport Automotive case, which was settled in 2022, the FTC charged an auto dealer with engaging in unfair practices by discriminating against Black and Latino consumers by charging them higher financing costs and fees. The FTC asserted similar claims in the Napleton Auto case, which was also settled in 2022. 

The FTC said that it is adopting this new policy because it believes that the agency lacks the statutory authority to pursue disparate-impact claims and that such claims are “inconsistent with the Constitution and with equality of opportunity, they impose unnecessary burdens on businesses and the public, and they are contrary to President Trump's executive order.” 

In announcing the release of the policy statement, FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson said, “Disparate-impact claims are nearly impossible to square with our colorblind Constitution. They impose liability for discrimination without any evidence that anyone intended to discriminate, which pushes businesses to make race-based decisions in order to avoid liability. The Commission never had authority to impose disparate-impact liability. Today, we announce that the Commission will never do so again.”

In connection with announcing the new policy, the FTC entered into agreements to modify some of the compliance obligations in previously-settled cases. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More