1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |GAO Finds "Classic Example" Of Impaired Objectivity OCI

GAO Finds "Classic Example" Of Impaired Objectivity OCI

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.10.04

In PURVIS Systems, Inc. (Aug. 16, 2004), GAO held that the Navy failed reasonably to consider or evaluate potential organizational conflicts of interest ("OCI") created by the awardee's role in evaluating performance of undersea warfare systems that have been manufactured either by the awardee or its competitors. GAO rejected the awardee's contention that no OCI issues could be created by the awardee's evaluation of the systems because such work was not "part of the procurement process" and explained that the situation presented a "classic example" of an "impaired objectivity" OCI.

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].”...