1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Contractors Must Go The Extra Mile For Preaward Review

Contractors Must Go The Extra Mile For Preaward Review

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.04.05

In Billington Contracting, Inc. (Feb. 28, 2005), the ASBCA dismissed a contractor's claim for differing site conditions under a dredging contract, because documents with the relevant detail on site conditions were referenced in a contract specification and had been available to the contractor for review. The board brushed aside the contractor's complaint that the relevant records were only identified as available some 750 miles from the project site, stating that a contractor is "bound to seek" out such information.

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].”...