1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |NAFI Or Not, Contractors Can Sign Away Their Right To Appeal

NAFI Or Not, Contractors Can Sign Away Their Right To Appeal

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.16.12

In The Minesen Co. v. McHugh (Mar. 2, 2012), a majority panel of the Federal Circuit held that the contractor had waived its right to appeal by agreeing to the contract’s disputes clause, which stated that ASBCA decisions were final “and are not subject to further appeal.” While this decision involved a contract with a NAFI, the majority decided the issue by assuming the Contract Disputes Act applied, and so its reasoning would seem to apply to any contract with similar language.

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].”...

View All Insights