Davis-Bacon Violation Leads to FCA Liability
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.16.12
On October 1, the Sixth Circuit in United States ex rel. Wall v. Circle C Constr., LLC, affirmed a decision imposing FCA liability when a prime had submitted inaccurate or false payroll certifications that did not properly describe work done by its subcontractors and that also contained hourly wages for subcontractor employees that did not meet federal guidelines for prevailing wages under the Davis-Bacon Act. This opinion serves as an important reminder to primes and subcontractors that failure to comply with minimum wage rate requirements may have significant adverse consequences and also suggests that companies that learn of such violations must carefully consider whether mandatory disclosure pursuant to FAR Subpart 9.4 or 52.203-13 is required.
Contacts
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].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
