1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Gov't Scrutiny of Higher Education Institutions Continues

Gov't Scrutiny of Higher Education Institutions Continues

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.12.12

On September 5, following a string of recent cases involving government scrutiny of academic institutions, the Second Circuit affirmed that Cornell University and a professor at the school had violated the FCA by submitting false claims in applications for federal grants. In a decision that should raise eyebrows in the higher education community, the court held that, because the research grant at issue "did not produce a tangible benefit" to the government and because "the government has entirely lost its opportunity to award the grant money to a recipient who would have used the money as the government intended," the proper measure of damages is the full amount of the grant.


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].”...

View All Insights