Crowell’s DEI and Civil Fraud Initiative
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.18.25
Underscoring the Administration’s intention to eradicate DEI preferences and mandates, the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched a new Civil Rights Fraud Initiative (Initiative) to be co-led by DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and Fraud Section. In response, Crowell launched its own DEI and Civil Fraud Initiative to support clients in managing the heightened risks associated with this new enforcement landscape.
The DOJ Initiative is committed to vigorous enforcement of the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq., “against those who defraud the United States by taking its money while knowingly violating civil rights laws.” Its targets include federal contractors and recipients of federal funds – whether universities or other entities – that falsely and knowingly certify compliance with federal civil rights laws, including Title IV, Title VI, Title VII or Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. To augment its enforcement resources, DOJ likewise “strongly encourages” private parties to report and litigate whistleblower claims under the FCA.
DOJ’s launch of the new initiative coincides closely with the date by which Executive Order 14173 requires the Attorney General, in consultation with federal agency heads, to issue a report to the Assistant Director for Domestic Policy identifying: (1) key sectors of concern within each agency’s jurisdiction; and (2) the “most egregious and discriminatory DEI practitioners within each sector of concern.” The report is to include each agency’s identification of “up to nine potential civil compliance investigations” of “corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with assets of 500 million dollars or more, State and local bar and medical associations, and institutions of higher education with endowments over 1 billion dollars.”
To help our clients effectively identify and manage their risks, our DEI and Civil Fraud Initiative includes leaders of our nationally recognized Government Contracts, Employment, FCA, Higher Education and Investigation practices, many of whom have deep experience in government as well as private practice. Our experience and services include:
- Conducting comprehensive reviews of our clients’ DEI programs, policies and communications to mitigate risk under federal law without compromising compliance with often conflicting state law mandates;
- Counseling clients about evolving federal acquisition regulations and newly modified certification requirements to align compliance practices to enable companies to make certifications and comply with other emerging requirements and expectations;
- Responding to the broad range of subpoenas, CIDs, EEOC requests for information or Commissioner’s Charges, and other DOJ or agency-initiated queries;
- Advising universities and other higher education institutions on how to respond to recent Executive Orders, OCR guidance and agency investigations and enforcement actions, threatened and actual withdrawals of funding, and other actions alleging anti-Semitism, sex and other forms of discrimination;
- Designing and deploying strategies, including government communications, to mitigate FCA exposure;
- Litigating FCA, whistleblower, and the wave of reverse discrimination claims that we anticipate will be filed in the weeks and months ahead; and
- Litigating claims and disputes arising from terminations of federal contracts, subcontracts, and grants.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
