Amazon, the e-commerce giant, is facing serious allegations of discriminatory practices in Washington, D.C. The District of Columbia’s Attorney General, Brian Schwalb, has filed a lawsuit against the company, accusing it of secretly excluding two predominantly Black and low-income ZIP codes from its fastest Prime delivery service137.
The lawsuit, filed on December 4, 2024, in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, claims that Amazon implemented a delivery “exclusion” for two specific ZIP codes—20019 and 20020—in June 202212. These areas, located east of the Anacostia River, are primarily comprised of Black residents and low-income communities3.
According to the complaint:
- Amazon stopped using its own delivery network for these areas, instead relying on third-party carriers like UPS and the U.S. Postal Service14.
- This change resulted in significantly longer delivery times for residents in these ZIP codes5.
- Amazon allegedly failed to inform Prime members in the affected areas about this change5.
- The company continued to charge the full Prime membership fee ($139 annually or $14.99 monthly) despite the reduced service13.
The lawsuit states that nearly 50,000 Prime members reside in the affected ZIP codes, constituting almost half of the area’s population1. Over the past four years, these Prime members have ordered more than 4.5 million Prime-eligible packages, relying heavily on Amazon due to the scarcity of nearby services and retail outlets12.
The impact of Amazon’s alleged actions has been significant:
- Before the “exclusion,” more than 70% of packages in the affected areas were delivered within two days1.
- After the change, that figure plummeted to just 24% in 202317.
- In contrast, Prime members in other parts of the city received two-day deliveries 75% of the time17.
Amazon has defended its actions, citing driver safety concerns as the reason for halting direct deliveries in these neighborhoods46. The company stated:
“In the ZIP codes in question, there have been specific and targeted acts against drivers delivering Amazon packages. We made the deliberate choice to adjust our operations, including delivery routes and times, for the sole reason of protecting the safety of drivers.”6
However, the lawsuit contends that Amazon did not communicate this justification to the affected Prime members and misled customers who raised concerns about the slower delivery times4.
This case raises important questions about corporate responsibility and equitable service provision. Attorney General Schwalb emphasized:
“While Amazon has every right to make operational changes, it cannot covertly decide that a dollar in one ZIP code is worth less than a dollar in another.”5
The lawsuit seeks:
- Court orders to prevent Amazon from engaging in “unfair or deceptive practices”4.
- Restitution or damages for the affected residents4.
- Penalties against the corporation4.
This is not the first time Amazon has faced accusations of discriminatory service:
- In 2016, a Bloomberg analysis found that Amazon excluded predominantly Black ZIP codes from same-day delivery in six major cities8.
- In 2018, the now-discontinued Amazon Restaurants delivery service excluded the same D.C. neighborhoods that are the focus of this lawsuit8.
The current case adds to the growing regulatory scrutiny of Amazon’s business practices. It follows an antitrust lawsuit filed by the District of Columbia and a separate suit by the Federal Trade Commission accusing Amazon of monopolistic practices7.
As this legal battle unfolds, it will likely have significant implications for Amazon’s operations in Washington, D.C., and potentially influence the company’s policies in other urban areas across the United States. The outcome could set an important precedent for how large corporations balance operational decisions with the principles of equitable service provision in diverse communities.
