Federal Government Will Not Enforce the Contractor Vaccine Mandate Absent Further Notice
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.01.22
On August 31, 2022, the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force announced that the Federal Government “will take no action to implement or enforce Executive Order 14042,” the contractor vaccine mandate, “to ensure compliance with an applicable preliminary nationwide injunction, which may be supplemented, modified, or vacated, depending on the course of ongoing litigation.”
This announcement follows the decision issued on August 26, 2022 by the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to limit the scope of the nationwide injunction issued by the District Court in Georgia v. Biden, S.D. Ga., 1:21-cv-163. Specifically, the Eleventh Circuit limited the nationwide injunction to the parties in Georgia, which include seven states and their agencies (Georgia, Alabama, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia), as well as members of the Associated Builders and Contractors.
In light of this announcement, federal contractors should expect that the FAR clause implementing the requirements of the Executive Order will not be included in future solicitations and contracts, and the Federal Government will not take any action to enforce the clause where it has already been included in contracts or contract-like instruments, absent further written notice from the agency.
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
