Category: Dominique L. Casimir

Changes to Civil Rights Enforcement: New Executive Order Eliminates Disparate-Impact Liability in Federal Regulations

Dominique L. Casimir and Brooke T. Iley ●

On April 23, 2025, the President issued an Executive Order (“EO”) titled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy” that seeks to drastically curtail the use of disparate-impact liability in federal regulations, marking a significant shift in the federal government’s approach to civil rights enforcement. What does this mean for companies going forward?

Background

Let’s start with a review of disparate-impact liability under civil rights laws. This concept refers to practices or policies that, while seemingly neutral, disproportionately affect members of a protected class. This type of liability does not require proof of intentional discrimination; instead, it focuses on the outcomes of the policies or practices.

For example, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, disparate-impact liability occurs when an employment practice adversely affects one group more than another, even if the practice appears neutral. If a plaintiff can show that a policy has a disproportionately negative effect on a protected class, the burden shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that the practice is job-related and consistent with business necessity. Disparate-impact liability is also recognized under several other federal and state civil rights laws.

The EO asserts that the foundational principle of the United States is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes. The EO criticizes disparate-impact liability as a “pernicious movement” that, in the administration’s view, undermines meritocracy and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. Disparate-impact liability, as described in the EO, is a legal doctrine that presumes unlawful discrimination based solely on statistical differences in outcomes among groups, even absent any discriminatory intent or facially discriminatory policy. The EO contends that this doctrine compels employers and businesses to consider race or other protected characteristics in decision-making, thereby encouraging racial balancing and undermining individual merit.

Read the full client alert on our website.

Rescission of Regulations Without Notice and Comment? What’s Next for Regulated Industries in the Deregulation Climate

Dominique L. Casimir and Christina Manfredi McKinley ●

We previously wrote about President Trump’s February Executive Order identifying deregulation as a top administration priority (here and here). That Executive Order, 14219 (the “Deregulation EO”), directed all executive departments and agencies to identify regulations falling within certain enumerated categories of regulations. More recently, on April 9, 2025, the President issued a memorandum providing further direction to executive departments and agencies regarding implementation of the Deregulation EO (available here). This memorandum addresses how the President envisions that Executive Branch agencies will go about rescinding regulations. And—spoiler alert—the vision for rescinding regulations is a departure from the typical notice-and-comment process. 

The Specifics

Emphasizing adherence to recent Supreme Court decisions and the use of the “good cause” exception in the Administrative Procedure Act for expedited rulemaking (that is, rulemaking/rescission without the constraints of notice and comment), the memorandum instructs agencies, first, as part of the review-and-repeal efforts required by the Deregulation EO, to assess each existing regulation’s lawfulness under the following United States Supreme Court decisions:

  1. Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024);
  2. West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. 697 (2022);
  3. SEC v. Jarkesy, 603 U.S. 109 (2024);
  4. Michigan v. EPA, 576 U.S. 743 (2015);
  5. Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651 (2023);
  6. Ohio v. EPA, 603 U.S. 279 (2024);
  7. Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 594 U.S. 139 (2021);
  8. Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023);
  9. Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022); and
  10. Roman Cath. Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U.S. 14 (2020). 

Read the full client alert on our website.

Supreme Court Lifts Restraining Order on Grant Terminations

Dominique L. Casimir and Sara N. Gerber ●

The Supreme Court recently issued a ruling with significant impacts for federal contractors and grantees looking to challenge terminations of their contracts and grants in U.S. district courts. Terminated contractors and grantees may strongly prefer to challenge terminations in the district courts rather than in the Court of Federal Claims, because the Court of Federal Claims does not have authority to grant equitable relief to do things like restore funding or enjoin terminations, and the available grounds for challenging contract and grant terminations in the Court of Federal Claims are significantly limited.

In February 2025, the Department of Education (“DOE”) terminated $600 million in grants for teacher training on the grounds that the training included diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) concepts and thus no longer effectuated DOE priorities. The grantees challenged these terminations in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The District Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) directing DOE to restore the terminated grant funding. DOE asked the First Circuit to stay the TRO pending appeal, which the First Circuit denied. DOE then filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, where a majority of the justices sided with DOE.

Continue reading “Supreme Court Lifts Restraining Order on Grant Terminations”

All-Points Bulletin for Defense Contractors: If You’re 15% Behind Schedule or 15% Over Budget, You Need a Strategy

Dominique L. Casimir ●

On April 9, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order (“EO”) titled Modernizing Defense Acquisitions and Spurring Innovation in the Defense Industrial Base. This EO seeks to overhaul many aspects of defense acquisition in order to enhance the military capabilities and streamline the Department of Defense’s (“DOD”) procurement processes. While every presidential administration seeks to streamline and facilitate defense procurement, this EO contains noteworthy approaches that defense contractors should be aware of. For instance, the EO suggests that the government has an appetite for “risk” when it comes to DOD procurements: “We will also modernize the duties and composition of the defense acquisition workforce, as well as incentivize and reward risk-taking and innovation from these personnel.”

Continue reading “All-Points Bulletin for Defense Contractors: If You’re 15% Behind Schedule or 15% Over Budget, You Need a Strategy”

Dominique L. Casimir and Justin A. Chiarodo Named to Law360’s 2025 Editorial Advisory Boards

Blank Rome LLP is pleased to announce that Government Contracts partners Dominique L. Casimir and Justin A. Chiarodo have been named to Law360’s 2025 Editorial Advisory Boards. As board members, the partners will provide feedback on Law360’s coverage and share insights on how to best shape future coverage.

Dominique, who serves as co-chair of Blank Rome’s General Litigation practice group, has been named to Law360’s 2025 Diversity & Inclusion Editorial Advisory Board. In 2022, she served on Law360’s Aerospace & Defense Editorial Advisory Board.

Justin, who serves as chair of our firm’s Aerospace, Defense & Government Services industry team and co-chair of our firm’s Government Contracts practice group, has been named to Law360’s Aerospace & Defense Editorial Advisory Board for the third time.

Learn more about other Blank Rome partners serving on Law360’s 2025 Editorial Advisory Boards on our website.

Attention Department of Labor Contractors and Grantees: A Federal Court Hits Pause on Executive Orders Related to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Dominique L. Casimir ●

Federal courts continue to grapple with challenges to President Trump’s executive orders (“EOs”) related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”), particularly EO 14151, Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing, and EO 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity. As we’ve noted in our coverage of the litigation first filed in the District Court of Maryland, there has been a sense of whiplash among the courts, with the District Court initially issuing a nationwide injunction that was then stayed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Now a second federal court has weighed in, issuing a new, nationwide temporary restraining order (“TRO”). This new TRO is more limited than the prior preliminary injunction issued by the District Court of Maryland, in that the new TRO only applies to Department of Labor (“DOL”) contractors and grantees. Nevertheless, the Court’s reasoning could be helpful to the contractors and grantees of other agencies facing renewed demands to execute the DEI Certification.

Continue reading “Attention Department of Labor Contractors and Grantees: A Federal Court Hits Pause on Executive Orders Related to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”

DEI Litigation Whiplash: Appellate Court Allows the Government to Move Forward with Challenged DEI-Related Executive Orders

Dominique L. Casimir and Brooke T. Iley ●

Uncertainty for companies when making business decisions is a new norm. Tariffs aren’t going to be the only thing that is on again and off again. The same is happening with directives governing diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives. In the first two days of President Trump’s second term, he signed two DEI-related executive orders (“EOs”), EO 14151 (Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing) and EO 14173 (Ending Illegal Discrimination And Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity). While they were in effect, these EOs caused widespread concern throughout the public and private sector as entities scrambled to understand the implications for their businesses. Approximately a month later, a federal judge in Maryland issued a preliminary injunction that stopped the government from implementing key provisions of the two EOs. However, the tide turned on Friday, March 14, 2025, when a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit granted the government’s motion to stay the injunction pending appeal. This ruling empowers the government to resume the implementation of EO 14151 and EO 14173.

While the preliminary injunction was in effect, the government was precluded from (1) terminating “equity-related” contracts and grants pursuant to EO 14151, (2) requiring that government contractors and grantees sign a DEI certification pursuant to EO 14173, and (3) bringing any False Claims Act (“FCA”) or other enforcement action premised on the DEI certification. (As we have previously explained, the certification requirement in EO 14173 is intended to deter contractor and grantee DEI-programs by invoking the specter of FCA liability.)

Now that the injunction is stayed, an emboldened government will likely move swiftly to terminate contracts and grants that it views as being “equity-related” and to require contractors and grantees to execute the DEI certification. We have previously recommended general steps that contractors and grantees can take as they navigate a rapidly changing environment in which the president signs new EOs almost daily. Below, we offer recommendations specific to the government’s renewed ability to implement the previously enjoined provisions of the DEI-related EOs.

Read the full client alert on our website.

What Is DMSMS and What to Do About It?

David L. Bodner and Dominique L. Casimir ●

What does DMSMS mean?

DMSMS stands for Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages. It is the loss or impending loss of manufacturers or suppliers of items, raw materials, or software. In other words, DMSMS is obsolescence. DMSMS occurs when companies (at any level of the supply chain) that make products, raw materials, or software stop doing so or are about to stop. DMSMS issues can occur for various reasons, such as technological advancements, shifts in market demand, regulatory changes, or a manufacturer’s strategic business decision.

Where can contractors find DMSMS requirements?

DMSMS requirements are typically found in prime contracts. Specifically, a Statement of Work (“SOW”) can describe DMSMS requirements such as: a DMSMS Management Plan, a Bill of Materials, Health Status Reports, End of Life Notices, and various other requirements to mitigate DMSMS risks. The contract may use Contract Data Requirements Lists (“CDRLs”) to specify the content of deliverables, the inspection and acceptance process, and the frequency of delivery (e.g., the Contractor must deliver a Health Status Report “monthly” or an End of Life Notice “as required”).

Continue reading “What Is DMSMS and What to Do About It?”

President Trump Signs New Executive Order: “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Cost Efficiency Initiative”—What Federal Contractors Need to Know

Dominique L. Casimir, Justin A. Chiarodo, and David L. Bodner ●


On February 26, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order (“EO”) that states that it “commences a transformation in Federal spending on contracts, grants, and loans to ensure Government spending is transparent and Government employees are accountable to the American public.” Here’s what government contractors need to know.

Who Does the EO Apply To?

The EO is primarily directed at Agency Heads and contemplates that each Agency Head will work closely with its Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”) Team Lead on a number of activities intended to reduce federal spending and root out fraud, waste, and abuse. (On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed EO 14158 establishing DOGE and requiring each agency to have a DOGE Team Lead to “advise their respective Agency Heads on implementing the President’s DOGE Agenda.”).

Continue reading “President Trump Signs New Executive Order: “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Cost Efficiency Initiative”—What Federal Contractors Need to Know”

Preliminary Injunction Granted Related to DEI-Related Executive Orders—Takeaways for Government Contractors

Dominique L. Casimir ●

In the four weeks since President Trump issued Executive Order (“EO”) 14151 (“Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing”) and EO 14173 (“Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”), virtually all sectors of American society have been scrambling to understand their compliance obligations and seeking to reduce legal risk. Businesses have taken a range of approaches, from preparing to defend their diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) commitments to removing public-facing references to DEI. Some government contractors have received DEI-related certifications required by EO 14173, which implicate enforcement under the False Claims Act (“FCA”).

In a significant new development, on February 21, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against both EO 14151 and EO 14173. Here’s what federal contractors need to know.

Continue reading “Preliminary Injunction Granted Related to DEI-Related Executive Orders—Takeaways for Government Contractors”
Exit mobile version
%%footer%%