Stick to the Plan!: Anticipated March 2013 SBA Final Rule
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.14.13
On January 8, the SBA disclosed its plan to issue a final rule in March to implement several requirements of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-240) related to "covered contracts" for which a small business subcontracting plan is required (currently, construction contracts in excess of $1.5 million or other contracts exceeding $650,000). The rule, which has undergone two comment periods (76 Fed. Reg. 61626 and 76 Fed. Reg. 74749), is intended to allow the funding agency to monitor a prime's small business subcontracting more closely and to encourage it to meet its subcontracting plan through regulation to include: a requirement that the prime represent that it will make good faith efforts to award subcontracts to small businesses at the same percentage as indicated in its plan and, if the percentage is not met, a written justification and explanation to the CO for the failure; a requirement that the prime notify the CO if it pays a reduced price to a subcontractor; and the ability for the funding agency to establish goals at the individual order level for multi-agency, FSS, MAS, and IDIQ contracts.
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].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
