# 119-hr-3522: Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act of 2025

119-hr-3522, Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act of 2025, is a 119th Congress bill sponsored by Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3] (D-VA); status introduced; PRIA reads it as touching household money (as of 2026-06-25).

- Canonical: https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-3522
- As of: 2026-06-25
- Plain-text twin of the page above; the HTML and this file carry the same facts.

## Facts
- Bill: 119-hr-3522
- Congress: 119
- Title: Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act of 2025
- Status: introduced
- Introduced: 2025-05-20
- Sponsor: Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3] (D-VA)
- Cosponsors: 8
- Policy area: Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues
- Touches household money: yes
- Last recorded action: 2026-06-25

## Summary

**Creates a uniform 'motivating-factor' causation standard across the ADEA, Title VII, the ADA, and the Rehabilitation Act.** It lets a complainant show that a protected characteristic or protected activity was a motivating factor even if other reasons also motivated the decision, and it recalibrates remedies to emphasize declaratory and injunctive relief and attorney fees while limiting some monetary awards in mixed‑motive cases. - Workers, including older jobseekers and employees: Plaintiffs can prevail by showing that age or another protected trait was a motivating factor, making mixed‑motive claims easier to prove. - People with disabilities and other protected classes: The ADA and Title VII get matching "demonstrates" definitions and proof rules so those claims follow the same motivating‑factor test. - Federal employees: The bill explicitly applies the new standard to federal employee claims under ADEA, Title VII, and the Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Act provisions that mirror the ADA. - Employers and agencies: Courts may award declaratory relief, injunctions, and attorney fees for mixed‑motive violations but in many mixed‑motive cases the law limits damages and some corrective orders such as reinstatement, hiring, promotion, or payment.

## Cosponsors (8)

- Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] (R-WI), 2025-05-20T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1] (D-OR), 2025-05-20T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12] (D-NC), 2025-05-20T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2] (R-NJ), 2025-05-20T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1] (R-PA), 2025-05-20T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2] (D-RI), 2025-11-07T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5] (D-CT), 2026-02-25T00:00:00.000Z
- Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6] (D-GA), 2026-06-23T00:00:00.000Z

## Provisions PRIA read

- Easier proof for race and sex bias: benefit, medium. If enacted, workers could prove discrimination if race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or protected activity was a motivating factor, even when other reasons also mattered. When an employer proves it would have taken the same action anyway, Title VII’s mixed‑motive remedy limits would apply…
- Easier proof in federal disability cases: benefit, medium. If enacted, federal employees, applicants, and covered contractors could use the ADA’s motivating‑factor proof method in disability cases. This would align Rehabilitation Act claims with ADA Title I on causation and proof. The section 501 change would apply to all employees covered by that section.…
- Easier proof of age bias at work: mixed, medium. If enacted, older workers could prove age discrimination if age or protected activity was a motivating factor, even when other reasons also played a role. “Demonstrates” would mean meeting both the production and persuasion burdens. If the employer shows it would have taken the same action anyway,…
- Easier proof, limited remedies in disability cases: mixed, medium. If enacted, workers with disabilities could prove bias if disability or protected activity was a motivating factor, even if other reasons also mattered. The bill would define “demonstrates” as meeting both the production and persuasion burdens. If the employer proves it would have made the same dec…
- New rules would cover pending cases: mixed, low. If enacted, the new proof and remedy rules would apply to any claims pending on or after enactment. That could change how ongoing ADEA, Title VII, ADA, and Rehabilitation Act cases are decided. It would not add rights beyond the bill’s amendments, but it would change which rules apply now.

## Related bills

- 119-hr-9877: Health Equity and Accountability Act of 2026
- 119-hr-2253: Puppy Protection Act of 2025
- 119-hr-2086: Rights for the TSA Workforce Act
- 119-hr-2102: Major Richard Star Act
- 119-hr-2048: Metastatic Breast Cancer Access to Care Act
- 119-hr-1661: SAFE Act of 2025

## Sources
- [119-hr-3522 on Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3522)

## Related
- [119-hr-9877: Health Equity and Accountability Act of 2026](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-9877)
- [119-hr-2253: Puppy Protection Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-2253)
- [119-hr-2086: Rights for the TSA Workforce Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-2086)
- [119-hr-2102: Major Richard Star Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-2102)
- [119-hr-2048: Metastatic Breast Cancer Access to Care Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-2048)
- [119-hr-1661: SAFE Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-1661)
- [All bills in Congress](https://policyrisk.com/legislation)

Source: PRIA, https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-3522 (as of 2026-06-25).