PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil Rights.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 4, 1993
Disparate Treatment Employment Discrimination Amendment of 1993 - Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to provide that an unlawful employment practice based on disparate treatment is established if the complaining party proves by a preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case that the respondent engaged in unlawful disparate treatment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and either: (1) the respondent fails to rebut such case; or (2) the respondent produces evidence of one or more nondiscriminatory reasons for the conduct alleged to be unlawful and the complaining party demonstrates that each of such reasons is not true, but a pretext for discrimination that is the unlawful disparate practice.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-23] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil Rights.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2867 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2867 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2867 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2867 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.