GAO Protest Jurisdiction Covers Concession Contracts
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.22.04
In Shields & Dean Concessions, Inc. (Feb. 23, 2004), GAO took jurisdiction over the protest of a concessions contract awarded by the National Parks Service ("NPS"), stating that, because the concession contract at issue involved the delivery of goods and services to the government, as well as certain groundskeeping and construction services, the contract was a "procurement" within the meaning of CICA, and, therefore, was within GAO's bid protest jurisdiction. Notwithstanding its reliance on CICA to assume jurisdiction, GAO noted that, pursuant to statute, for concession contracts NPS is not bound by the provisions of CICA and the FAR that govern the conduct of procurements, and GAO therefore reviewed the award decision to determine whether it was consistent with the specific statute and regulation governing NPS concession contract and the terms of the solicitation and otherwise reasonable, and sustained the protest.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.20.26
SCOTUS Holds IEEPA Tariffs Unlawful
On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, negating the President’s ability to impose tariffs under IEEPA. The case stemmed from President Trump’s invocation of IEEPA to levy tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries, citing national emergencies. Challengers argued—and the Court agreed—that IEEPA does not delegate tariff authority to the President. The power to tariff is vested in Congress by the Constitution and cannot be delegated to the President absent express authority from Congress.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 02.20.26
Section 5949 Proposed Rule Puts the FAR Council's Chips on the Table
Client Alert | 5 min read | 02.20.26
Trump Administration Pursues MFN Pricing for Prescription Drugs
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.19.26
Proposed NY Legislation May Mean Potential Criminal Charges for Unlicensed Crypto Firms
