Case: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Nike

4:26-mc-00128 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

Filed Date: Feb. 4, 2026

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

 On May 24, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a charge alleging that Respondent NIKE may have violated Title VII “by engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment against White employees, applicants, and training program participants in hiring, promotion, demotion, or separation decisions (including selection for layoffs); internship programs; and mentoring, leadership development, and other career development programs.” The Charge further alleged that N…

 On May 24, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a charge alleging that Respondent NIKE may have violated Title VII “by engaging in a pattern or practice of disparate treatment against White employees, applicants, and training program participants in hiring, promotion, demotion, or separation decisions (including selection for layoffs); internship programs; and mentoring, leadership development, and other career development programs.” The Charge further alleged that NIKE violated Title VII by establishing race-based workforce representation quotas. Between December 2024 and June 2025, the EEOC issued three requests to Respondent NIKE for information relevant to the agency’s investigation. NIKE failed to fully provide the information sought by the EEOC.

In response, on September 30, 2035, the EEOC served NIKE with a subpoena to produce information relevant to the EEOC’s investigation of potential unlawful employment practices, namely, “engaging in discrimination against White employees, applicants, and training program participants based on race, made unlawful by Title VII.” In response to complaints by NIKE, the EEOC partially modified the subpoena. However, NIKE still failed to provide all information and documents required by the modified subpoena.

For the foregoing reasons, the EEOC brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The EEOC requested that the court order NIKE to show cause as to why its administrative subpoena should not be enforced. U.S. District Judge Christian M. Stevens is presiding over this case.

On February 11, 2026, Judge Stevens issued the requested show cause order to NIKE.

This case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Jinan Abufarha (2/16/2026)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72230090/parties/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-nike/


Attorney for Plaintiff

Baran, Andrea G. (Missouri)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

4:26-mc-00128

Application for an Order to Show Cause Why Administrative Subpoena Should Not be Enforced

Feb. 4, 2026

Feb. 4, 2026

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72230090/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-nike/

Last updated Feb. 16, 2026, 12:37 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

MOTION to Enforce Subpoena, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1 - Director Declaration with Attachments, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Ex 2 - Proposed Order, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Baran, Andrea) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

1 Exhibit Ex 1 - Director Declaration with Attachments

View on RECAP

2 Text of Proposed Order Ex 2 - Proposed Order

View on RECAP

3 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet

View on RECAP

Feb. 4, 2026

Feb. 4, 2026

Clearinghouse
2

MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 1 MOTION to Enforce Subpoena filed by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex A - Charge of Discrimination, # 2 Exhibit Ex B - Requests for Information, # 3 Exhibit Ex C - Subpoena, # 4 Exhibit Ex D - NIKE Petion to Revoke or Modify Subpoena, # 5 Exhibit Ex E - Determination, # 6 Exhibit Ex F - NIKE Response to Subpoena)(Baran, Andrea) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

1 Exhibit Ex A - Charge of Discrimination

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit Ex B - Requests for Information

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit Ex C - Subpoena

View on RECAP

4 Exhibit Ex D - NIKE Petion to Revoke or Modify Subpoena

View on RECAP

5 Exhibit Ex E - Determination

View on RECAP

6 Exhibit Ex F - NIKE Response to Subpoena

View on RECAP

Feb. 4, 2026

Feb. 4, 2026

RECAP

Case Opening Notification

Feb. 4, 2026

Feb. 4, 2026

Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: U.S. District Judge Cristian M. Stevens. (DMM)

Feb. 4, 2026

Feb. 4, 2026

3

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal serve Respondent with a copy of this Order to Show Cause, the Application on which the Order is based (Doc. 1 ), and the Memorandum in Support (Doc. 2 ) on or before the 23rd day of February, 2026; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must file and serve its answer to the Application no later than the 16th day of March, 2026; and IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the EEOC and Respondent shall appear on the 2nd day of April, 2026, at 9 a.m. in Courtroom 10 South of the Thomas F. Eagleton United States Courthouse, 111 S. Tenth Street, St. Louis, Missouri, 63102, for Respondent to show cause why Respondent should not be compelled to comply with the Subpoena issued to it. Failure to comply with this Order may result, without further notice, in the Court's granting of the Application and enforcement of the Subpoena. (Show Cause Response due by 3/16/2026. Show Cause Hearing set for 4/2/2026 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10S - St. Louis before District Judge Cristian M. Stevens.) Signed by District Judge Cristian M. Stevens on 2/11/26. (KJS) (Entered: 02/11/2026)

Feb. 11, 2026

Feb. 11, 2026

RECAP

Remark

Feb. 11, 2026

Feb. 11, 2026

***REMARK - Delivered a copy of 1 Motion to Enforce Subpoena, 2 Memorandum in Support, and 3 Order to Show Cause to the US Marshals Service for service this day. (KJS)

Feb. 11, 2026

Feb. 11, 2026

4

AMENDED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal serve Respondent with a copy of this Order to Show Cause, the Application on which the Order is based (Doc. 1 ), and the Memorandum in Support (Doc. 2 ) on or before the 23rd day of February, 2026; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must file and serve its answer to the Application no later than the 16th day of March, 2026; and IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the EEOC and Respondent shall appear on the 27th day of April, 2026, at 10 a.m. in Courtroom 10 South of the Thomas F. Eagleton United States Courthouse, 111 S. Tenth Street, St. Louis, Missouri, 63102, for Respondent to show cause why Respondent should not be compelled to comply with the Subpoena issued to it. Failure to comply with this Order may result, without further notice, in the Court's granting of the Application and enforcement of the Subpoena. (Show Cause Response due by 3/16/2026. Show Cause Hearing set for 4/27/2026 10:00 AM in Courtroom 10S - St. Louis before District Judge Cristian M. Stevens.) Signed by District Judge Cristian M. Stevens on 2/12/26. (KJS) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

Feb. 12, 2026

Feb. 12, 2026

Remark

Feb. 12, 2026

Feb. 12, 2026

***REMARK - Delivered a copy of 1 Motion to Enforce Subpoena, 2 Memorandum in Support, and 4 Amended Order to Show Cause to the US Marshals Service for service this day. (KJS)

Feb. 12, 2026

Feb. 12, 2026

Case Details

State / Territory:

Missouri

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations By the Government

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 4, 2026

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The plaintiff in this case is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Nike, Inc., Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Civil Rights Act of 1957/1960, 52 U.S.C. § 10101 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 1971)

Other Dockets:

Eastern District of Missouri 4:26-mc-00128

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Relief Sought:

Injunction

Relief Granted:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits