On July 8, 2026, in a case of first impression, the Ninth Circuit (which includes California) interpreted the effective date of the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA). As previously discussed on PERKS, the EFAA enables employees asserting sexual harassment or sexual assault claims to proceed in court to litigate certain claims despite the existence of a pre-dispute arbitration agreement with their employer.
In this case, the plaintiff alleged that she was subjected to sexual harassment beginning in 2017 and that she was terminated in retaliation for complaining about the alleged harassment in 2021. She subsequently filed suit and the employer sought to compel arbitration. She argued that the dispute arose in 2023 when she first filed her complaint against the employer in California’s administrative agency, and not when the alleged harassment occurred.
The Ninth Circuit disagreed, holding that the EFAA does not apply where “the dispute arose and claims accrued” before the EFAA’s effective date of March 3, 2022. Practically, this ruling means that where alleged sexual harassment or assault occurred only prior to March 3, 2022, a plaintiff must arbitrate claims based thereon.
This ruling aligns with how other Courts of Appeals, including the Third and Sixth Circuits, have interpreted the effective date provisions in the EFAA. EFAA interpretation disputes continue to make their way through the federal courts, including in the Second Circuit, which covers New York.
