1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |The Wait Is Over for Women-Owned Small Businesses

The Wait Is Over for Women-Owned Small Businesses

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.11.11

Women-owned small businesses (WOSBs) should now have greater access to federal contracts as a result of a long-awaited interim rule, published April 1, 2011, which provides guidelines for the WOSB program and allows COs to set aside contracts for certified WOSBs and economically-disadvantaged WOSBs. However, despite the momentum from these new regulations and the SBA's intent to provide WOSBs "with the oxygen they need to take their business to the next level," until the SBA approves third-party certifiers, access to government contracts for non-8(a) WOSBs will be limited to a self-certifying entities and contingent upon the submission of a laundry list of corporate and other documentation for each procurement, thus imposing burdens on WOSBs and COs.

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].”...