Rebecca L. Springer

Partner | She/Her/Hers

Overview

Companies rely on Rebecca for expert guidance on complex employment issues that pose significant risks. Whether navigating the ever-changing landscape of diversity, equity and inclusion practices, developing comprehensive pay equity programs, conducting sensitive and high-profile investigations, or providing strategic counsel on federal and state employment laws, Rebecca delivers tailored solutions to her clients’ most pressing concerns.

Rebecca has spent significant time advising clients on how to assess and evolve their DEI practices to ensure they can certify compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws and minimize risk in the current climate. Rebecca also works collaboratively with in-house counsel, human resources teams, and labor economists to analyze compensation and personnel practices, and provides strategic advice on proactive measures to address discrepancies and mitigate risk. With the ever-increasing focus on pay equity and pay transparency, clients turn to Rebecca to navigate the intricacies of these complex issues and develop practical solutions.

Clients also value Rebecca’s significant experience in conducting nuanced and strategic investigations of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation complaints. With extensive experience developing an investigation approach, conducting interviews and drafting both privileged and public investigation reports, clients trust her to provide strategic advice throughout an investigation. As a member of the firm’s Education Practice, Rebecca also has significant experience investigating and providing advice on both current and historical or systemic sexual assault, harassment, and discrimination claims in the education context, as well as on Title IX compliance issues.

Rebecca also regularly counsels clients on how to navigate the panoply of state and federal employment-related laws, including employee leave, performance management, discrimination and harassment, and workforce reductions and restructuring. She regularly conducts training on these topics and works collaboratively with her clients to find effective, practical solutions to employment-related challenges.

Career & Education

    • The White House
      Assistant to the Counselor to the President
    • The White House
      Assistant to the Counselor to the President
    • Duke University School of Law, J.D.
    • Washington University in St. Louis, B.A.
    • Duke University School of Law, J.D.
    • Washington University in St. Louis, B.A.
    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia
    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia

Rebecca's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...

Rebecca's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...