1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |SBA Cannot Replace Agency Responsibility Findings with Its Own

SBA Cannot Replace Agency Responsibility Findings with Its Own

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.30.11

In Spiral Solutions & Techs., Inc., the Small Business Administration’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (“OHA”) reversed a size decision finding a violation of the ostensible subcontractor rule because the SBA Area Office improperly made findings on matters of responsibility--matters reserved for the contracting officer.  Additionally, OHA explained that Spiral’s hiring of its subcontractor’s incumbent, non-management personnel is no longer indicative of “undue reliance” in light of Executive Order 13,495, which encourages companies to offer a right of first refusal of employment to qualified employees performing under a predecessor contract for similar services at a particular location.

Contacts

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].”...

View All Insights