SBA Issues Final Rule On WOSB Contracting Program But Has Yet To Identify Eligible Industries
Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.07.08
On October 1, 2008, the Small Business Administration issued both a proposed (http://www.crowell.com/PDF/Fed-Register_Vol73-No191_Proposed.pdf) and a final rule (http://www.crowell.com/PDF/Fed-Register_Vol73-No191_Rules-Regs.pdf) regarding the Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) contracting program. While the long-awaited final rule makes a few changes to the December 27, 2007, proposed rule, including clarifying that a contracting officer may award a contract or begin performance after receipt of a protest after determining that an award is necessary to protect the public interest, the final rule dodges the key issue and fails to identify those industries where set-aside acquisitions are authorized based on WOSB underrepresentation, and, instead, in the proposed rule, the SBA seeks comments on or before October 31, 2008, on the underlying data used to determine WOSB underrepresentation, including data identifying 31 NAICS codes in which WOSBs were either underrepresented or substantially underrepresented.
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
