A Bridge Too Far: Court Vacates FHWA's 2012 Expansion of Its Buy America Waiver
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.15.16
On December 22, 2015, the U.S. district court for D.C. vacated the Federal Highway Administration's position, set forth in a December 2012 policy memorandum, that exempted manufactured steel products from the FHWA's Buy America restriction if (a) they had less than 90% steel or iron content or (b) they were "miscellaneous steel or iron products" (i.e., off-the-shelf products necessary to "encase, assemble and construct manufactured products"), causing FHWA on January 6 to rescind the policy memorandum, pending further update. The court held that both of FHWA's "clarifications" related to a 1983 public interest waiver exemption for manufactured products other than steel products; were substantive rules requiring notice and comment; and that, in any event, the 90% content rule was arbitrary and capricious under the current record.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
