The biggest danger may be misreading the order—and creating new exposure in the process.

On March 26, 2026, President Trump issued an executive order (EO) titled “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors.” Read at the headline level, the order can sound like another broad anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) pronouncement. Read as a procurement directive, however, it is something more concrete and more consequential: a command to federal agencies to begin inserting a mandatory clause into covered contracts and contract-like instruments, including subcontracts and lower-tier subcontracts, within 30 days. That shift, from messaging to mechanics, is the real story.

Continue Reading Beyond the Headlines: The Real Contractor Risks in the New DEI Executive Order

The Administrative False Claims Act of 2023 (AFCA), Pub. L. 118-159, § 5203, enacted December 23, 2024, substantially amended the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (PFCRA). On March 19, 2026, the Small Business Administration (SBA) published a direct final rule conforming its regulations to those statutory changes. 91 Fed. Reg. 13217 (Mar. 19, 2026). Absent significant adverse comment, the rule becomes effective May 4, 2026. Together, the AFCA amendments and the conforming rule materially expand SBA’s enforcement reach, raise the jurisdictional threshold for administrative proceedings, extend the statute of limitations, and introduce reverse false claims liability. Contractors doing business with SBA—or whose programs touch SBA loans, grants, or set-aside contracts—should act now.

Continue Reading SBA Expands Administrative False Claims Act Enforcement: What Federal Contractors Need to Know

As we move into spring—a season for tightening processes, clearing the backlog, and getting every detail right—a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protest decision delivers a timely reminder: in government contracting, a single compliance miss can be outcome determinative.

Last month, in Morrish-Wallace Construction, Inc. d/b/a Ryba Marine Construction Co., the GAO sustained a protest where the agency awarded a contract to a bidder that failed to acknowledge a material solicitation amendment. The decision is an instructive case study in why amendment acknowledgment is not just a box to check—it also is a binding legal act.

Continue Reading Spring Cleaning Your Proposals: GAO’s Latest Reminder That Compliance Is Critical

In every crisis, half the room runs in circles while the other half picks up a clipboard and starts taking stock. The Anthropic-Pentagon dispute is that crisis, and defense contractors are deciding which half they want to be in.

The short version: The government designated a FedRAMP-authorized, facility-cleared American AI company a national security supply chain threat, via social media, after the company refused to remove safety restrictions on autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. Anthropic sued days later, with the Pentagon’s own officials on the record stating the designation was “ideologically driven” with “no evidence of supply chain risk.”

Continue Reading Don’t Panic! How Federal Contractors Should Navigate the Anthropic Designation

In a previous posting, we flagged how the BIOSECURE Act (enacted as Section 851 of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act) reflects a growing focus on biotechnology supply chains within federal procurement. The statute is designed around a simple premise: Biotechnology risks rarely appear at the level of the final product. Instead, the risks tend to emerge through tools, platforms, and service providers embedded in the performance of federally funded work.

Nowhere is that observation more apparent than in industries adjacent to biotechnology that rely heavily on biological data, specialized testing infrastructure, or outsourced research capabilities. Examples include pharmaceutical and biologics developers, medical device and diagnostics manufacturers, contract research organizations (CROs) and specialized laboratory providers, healthcare and academic research institutions participating in federally funded programs, and technology companies supporting biological data analytics or laboratory automation. For these sectors, biotechnology may not define the business model, but it plays a quiet yet significant operational role in how products are discovered, validated, and manufactured. The BIOSECURE Act brings those operational dependencies into sharper focus.

Continue Reading The BIOSECURE Act and the Expanding Life Sciences Supply Chain: Practical Considerations for Research-Driven Industries

“I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.”

When Obi-Wan Kenobi says this in Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope, he senses that something profound just changed in the galaxy. A powerful presence has vanished. The balance of power shifting in ways that will ripple far beyond the immediate moment. As Yoda later describes the Force: “Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us, binds us.” In this way, artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to play a role for the US Defense Industrial Base (DIB) not unlike the Force itself—quietly enhancing the capabilities of engineers, analysts, and compliance professionals across thousands of organizations supporting national defense programs.

So what could happen if a major AI player suddenly disappears from the board?

Continue Reading Orbiting A.I.-deraan? A Disturbance in the Force for the Defense Industrial Base

The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced that False Claims Act (FCA) settlements and judgments exceeded $6.8 billion in fiscal year 2025. This massive haul is the largest annual recovery in the statute’s storied history. Although health care enforcement continues to account for the majority of recoveries, DOJ’s annual statistics confirm that procurement fraud, cybersecurity compliance, pandemic-program enforcement, and trade-related fraud remain core enforcement priorities that government contractors should not ignore. The FY 2025 numbers reinforce a familiar message: FCA enforcement remains one of DOJ’s most powerful tools for policing federal spending, and contractors should expect continued scrutiny of their certifications, representations, and contract compliance systems.

Continue Reading Now That’s a Lot of Money: DOJ’s Record-Setting FCA Year Reflects Intensifying Enforcement Pressure on Government Contractors

California Attorney General (AG) Rob Bonta announced the largest settlement under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) against The Walt Disney Company (Disney) for failing to honor customers’ requests to opt out of the sale or sharing of their data across all devices and streaming services linked to their Disney accounts. Essentially, Disney made it too difficult for consumers.  Businesses should evaluate their internal structure for responding to consumer requests. California has put a hefty price tag to make sure that more than appearances matter. As discussed in prior alerts, this follows the joint investigative sweep announced in September 2025 among California, Connecticut, and Colorado to investigate businesses refusing to honor consumers’ right to opt out of the sale of their personal information.

Continue Reading Opt Me Out! California Lessons on National Privacy Enforcement

For federal grant recipients across diverse sectors ranging from humanitarian assistance to the environment, the disruption of established business practices and the upending of expectations have now become the new normal, as federal agencies announce abrupt shifts in policy and spending. As we have commented previously (here, here, and here), federal agencies now regularly reinterpret terms of contracts and agreements that appeared to have been settled, so that once-stable sources of federal funding change on short notice.

Continue Reading Gateway Project Litigation Latest Salvo in Struggle over Federal Grants

Remember in Coming to America when Eddie Murphy’s Prince Akeem shows up in Queens full of charm, optimism, and big dreams and somehow it all works out? Fast-forward 38 years (yes, it’s been that long) and European companies looking to sell into the US Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Homeland Security supply chains will need much more than charm. Instead, they’ll need real strategy, a focused structure, and readiness for regulatory scrutiny that doesn’t end with an award notification. In the current climate, with a heightened domestic preference policy, new executive directives such as the “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting” executive order, and renewed focus on supply chain security and performance, it is essential for foreign companies and their counsel to clearly understand the terrain before landfall.

Continue Reading Coming to America (the Government Contracting Edition): Ownership, Compliance, and Shifting Policy