An advocacy organization opposing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives has filed an antitrust complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), alleging that Sponsors for Educational Opportunity (SEO) engaged in anticompetitive practices through its law fellowship program. The complaint accuses SEO of colluding on DEI metrics and misrepresenting its program.
SEO’s Law Fellowship Program partners with numerous major law firms to provide paid internships to incoming law students. While the program’s website states that “all are invited to apply,” it emphasizes encouragement for applicants from underserved backgrounds, including specific racial and ethnic groups. This focus has led to allegations that the program effectively prioritizes certain demographics, potentially excluding others.
In May 2025, Americans for Equal Opportunity (AEO) submitted a charge to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of members who claimed racial discrimination during the application process for SEO’s 2025 Law Fellowship. The charge alleged that SEO and its 44 partner law firms operated the fellowship as a racially discriminatory hiring pipeline, favoring Black, Hispanic, and Native American candidates. AEO contended that the program’s practices violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating against applicants not from these preferred racial or ethnic backgrounds.
The EEOC responded by sending letters to the involved law firms, inquiring about their participation in the SEO Fellowship and the demographics of the interns placed at their firms. The commission sought information on the years SEO Fellows were placed, compensation details, and the locations where the interns worked. This inquiry aimed to assess whether the firms’ involvement in the fellowship aligned with federal anti-discrimination laws.
These developments occur amid a broader national debate over DEI initiatives in educational and professional settings. Legal challenges to DEI programs have increased, with some organizations arguing that such initiatives may inadvertently lead to reverse discrimination. For instance, in 2025, the Department of Education withdrew its defense of guidance that sought to ban DEI programs at colleges and universities, following legal challenges that argued the guidance made sweeping policy changes without following required rulemaking procedures.
The FTC has yet to publicly comment on the antitrust complaint filed against SEO. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the structure and implementation of DEI programs within the legal industry and beyond.