SDB Preference Constitutional
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.02.04
In Rothe Dev. Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Def. (W.D. Tex. July 2, 2004), the district court found that, although the initial enactments of a small disadvantaged business preference in DOD procurements were unconstitutional, in the 2003 version Congress sufficiently heeded the Supreme Court's affirmative action decisions in the past few years and supplied a "strong basis in the evidence" of racial discrimination to support the reenactment of the preference and withstand a facial challenge. The court brushed aside the evidence that the Asian-Americans benefited by the preference in the particular procurement were financially well off, noting that such evidence is only relevant to an administrative challenge to the SDB designation, not a constitutional challenge.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.24.26
DOL Issues Proposed Rule On “Joint Employment”
On April 21, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) outlining a new standard for “joint employment” — under which separate entities will be found jointly liable for the other’s violations — under the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MPSA). The Proposed Rule purports to standardize the definition of “joint employment” across all three laws to create “clarity” and “uniformity” for employers and employees alike.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.24.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.23.26
Bipartisan Coalition of State AGs Backs Federal PBM Transparency Rule
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.23.26
