1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |"Rule of Two" For Small Business Set-Asides Extended to Award of Task and Delivery Orders

"Rule of Two" For Small Business Set-Asides Extended to Award of Task and Delivery Orders

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.21.08

In Delex Systems, Inc. (Oct. 8, 2008, http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/400403.pdf), GAO expanded the reach of FAR 19.502-2(b), which requires an agency to limit competition to small businesses when it concludes it has a reasonable expectation of receiving offers from at least two responsible small businesses and award can be made at a fair and reasonable price. GAO held that the so-called "Rule of Two" applies to task and delivery order competitions among multiple-award contract holders, opening up a new class of award decisions to the small business set-aside requirements and potential bid protests.

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].”...