A New Enforcement Focus: When "Preference" Becomes Discrimination Against U.S. Workers

When employers think about discrimination risk, they usually focus on familiar protected categories such as race, sex, ethnicity, age, disability, or religion. But a recent settlement announced by the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) underscores a growing and less understood enforcement area: discrimination against U.S. workers based on citizenship and immigration status.

On December 18, 2025, the Civil Rights Division announced a settlement with Tekshapers Inc., a Michigan-based IT recruitment and staffing company, for violating the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). According to the DOJ, Tekshapers unlawfully advertised job opportunities in a way that favored temporary employment-based visa holders over qualified U.S. workers, effectively denying U.S. citizens equal access to employment opportunities.

This case marks the fourth settlement since the DOJ re-launched its Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative, signaling a clear enforcement priority.

What Makes This Case Different

Unlike traditional discrimination cases involving race or gender, this matter centers on citizenship-based discrimination, a practice many employers mistakenly believe is permissible or low risk.

The DOJ was clear:

"Recruitment companies cannot place unlawful restrictions based on citizenship status. U.S. workers are highly skilled and deserve equal access to all jobs."

In other words, favoring visa holders over U.S. workers, absent a lawful reason, is itself unlawful discrimination.

The Consequences

Under the settlement, Tekshapers agreed to:

• Pay civil penalties to the United States
• Compensate a U.S. citizen applicant who was not fairly considered
• Revise recruiting and hiring policies
• Undergo mandatory training
• Commit to not limiting positions based on citizenship status unless legally required

Beyond the financial penalties, the reputational and operational impacts are significant—particularly for firms involved in recruiting, staffing, or talent placement.

Why This Matters to Employers and Federal Contractors

This case reflects a broader enforcement reality:

• DOJ and EEOC scrutiny is expanding beyond traditional discrimination categories
• Recruitment language, sourcing practices, and job advertisements are under the microscope
• "Preferences" in hiring, especially those tied to immigration status, can quickly cross into illegality

For employers in technology, engineering, healthcare, analytics, and other sectors reliant on global talent, this enforcement trend requires a careful reassessment of:

• Job postings and recruiting language
• Candidate screening criteria
• Relationships with staffing and recruiting vendors
• Internal policies governing work authorization and sponsorship

Key Takeaways for Employers

1. Citizenship-based discrimination is unlawful unless a specific legal exception applies.
2. Job ads and recruiter instructions matter, even subtle preferences can trigger enforcement.
3. Staffing firms' actions can create liability for themselves and potentially their clients.
4. Proactive audits of hiring and recruitment practices are now essential risk-management tools.

The Bigger Picture

The Tekshapers settlement reinforces a central message from the DOJ: Equal employment opportunity applies to U.S. workers as much as to any other protected group.

As enforcement expands, employers that fail to review and update their hiring practices risk becoming the next test case.

Proactive compliance, rooted in clear policies, lawful recruiting practices, and regular workforce analytics, is no longer optional. It is a critical safeguard against emerging discrimination risks in today's evolving enforcement landscape.

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.