; or (ii) the aggrieved person demonstrates (consistent with the demonstration required under title VII with respect to an alternative employment practice ) that a less discriminatory alternative program, policy, practice, or activity exists, and the covered agency refuses to adopt such alternative program, policy, practice, or activity. (B) (i) With respect to demonstrating that a particular program, policy, practice, or activity causes a disparate impact, the aggrieved personal shall demonstrate that each particular challenged program, policy, practice, or activity causes a disparate impact, except that if the aggrieved person demonstrates to the courts that the elements of the covered agency’s decision-making process are not capable of separation for analysis, the decision-making process may be analyzed as 1 program, policy, practice, or activity. (ii) If the covered agency demonstrates that a specific program, policy, practice, or activity does not cause the disparate impact, the covered agency shall not be required to demonstrate that such program, policy, practice, or activity is necessary to achieve the goals of its program, policy, practice, or activity. (2) A demonstration that a program, policy, practice, or activity is necessary to achieve the goals of a program, policy, practice, or activity may not be used as a defense against a claim of intentional discrimination under this title. (c) No person in the United States shall be subjected to discrimination, including relation, because such person opposed any program, policy, practice, or activity prohibited by this title, or because such person made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this title. . 5. Right of action Section 602 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ( 42 U.S.C. 2000d–1 ) is amended— (1) by inserting (a) before Each Federal department and agency which is empowered