GSA Makes BAA and TAA Non-Availability Exception Due to COVID-19 National Emergency, Applicable to GSA Schedule Orders
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.10.20
On April 3, 2020, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a class determination of non-availability under both the Buy American Act (BAA) and Trade Agreements Act (TAA) clauses, effective through July 1, 2020 and applicable to GSA Schedule orders, to address the immediate and urgent needs of GSA and other agencies to preserve lives in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. The class determination currently applies to enumerated products (N95 masks, bleach, disinfectants, cleaners, and hand sanitizers), though GSA stated that it may need to update and add items to meet evolving government needs, and encouraged stakeholders to provide updated information on product availability.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
