1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |SDB Preference Constitutional

SDB Preference Constitutional

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.02.04

In Rothe Dev. Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Def. (W.D. Tex. July 2, 2004), the district court found that, although the initial enactments of a small disadvantaged business preference in DOD procurements were unconstitutional, in the 2003 version Congress sufficiently heeded the Supreme Court's affirmative action decisions in the past few years and supplied a "strong basis in the evidence" of racial discrimination to support the reenactment of the preference and withstand a facial challenge. The court brushed aside the evidence that the Asian-Americans benefited by the preference in the particular procurement were financially well off, noting that such evidence is only relevant to an administrative challenge to the SDB designation, not a constitutional challenge.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.25.26

NAIC Intensifies AI Regulatory Focus: What Health Insurance Payors Need to Know

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) is intensifying its oversight of how insurers use AI — and the pace of regulatory activity shows no signs of slowing. Over the past several months, the NAIC has published a formal Issue Brief staking out its position on federal AI legislation, launched a multistate AI Evaluation Tool pilot aimed at examining insurers’ AI governance programs, and continued to expand adoption of its AI Model Bulletin across state lines. These developments continue a trend towards enhancing regulation; the NAIC adopted AI Principles in 2020 and a Model Bulletin in 2023 clarifying that existing insurance laws apply to AI systems and establishing expectations for governance, documentation, testing, and third-party oversight. That Model Bulletin has now been adopted in approximately 24 states....

View All Insights