Photo of Peter J. EyrePhoto of Kris D. MeadePhoto of Trina Fairley BarlowPhoto of Anuj VohraPhoto of Warrington ParkerPhoto of Rebecca SpringerPhoto of Brian Tully McLaughlinPhoto of Katie ErnoPhoto of Alexandra Barbee-GarrettPhoto of Jared EngelkingPhoto of Jillian AmbrosePhoto of Corey Hirsch-Lestienne

On March 26, 2026, President Trump issued an executive order (EO) titled Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors. The EO declares diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) “activities” “unethical and often illegal,” and imposes new obligations on federal contractors and subcontractors related to DEI programming. Contractors that do business with the federal government — or that work as subcontractors for companies that do — should review the EO closely to determine the extent to which they are compliant with the new requirements.

What the EO Does

The EO prohibits federal contractors from engaging in “racially discriminatory DEI activities,” defined as “disparate treatment based on race or ethnicity in the recruitment, employment (e.g., hiring, promotions), contracting (e.g., vendor agreements), program participation, or allocation or deployment of an entity’s resources.”

The EO requires a new mandatory contract clause that all federal agencies must, within 30 days, include in their contracts and contract-like instruments. Under this clause, contractors must agree to:

  • Not engage in any “racially discriminatory DEI activities.”
  • Provide full access to books, records, accounts, and other information required by the contracting agency “for purposes of ascertaining compliance with this clause.”
  • Acknowledge that noncompliance may result in cancellation, termination, or suspension of a contract, or result in a contractor being “declared ineligible for further Government contracts.”
  • Report “known or reasonably knowable” subcontractor violations and take remedial actions as directed by the contracting agency.
  • Notify the agency if a subcontractor files a lawsuit that “puts at issue, in any way, the validity of the clause.”
  • Recognize that compliance is material to government payment decisions, with direct implications under the False Claims Act (FCA).

The EO directs agencies to report on their implementation of the EO within 120 days, i.e., by July 24, 2026.

The EO directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue guidance to agencies to ensure compliance with this order. Consistent with any such guidance, agencies are directed to “cancel, terminate, [or] suspend” contracts, or cause those actions to be taken, where contractors or subcontractors fail to comply with the clause, and to suspend or debar contractors or subcontractors for their failure to comply. In the same vein, the EO directs the attorney general to consider bringing FCA actions against noncompliant contractors and to prioritize review of qui tam lawsuits alleging such noncompliance in federal contracts and subcontracts.

The EO further requires OMB to identify economic sectors “that pose a particular risk of entities engaging in racially discriminatory DEI activities based on current or past conduct” and issue targeted guidance for those industries.

Contractors should expect Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) deviations to implement the EO, followed by formal rulemaking. The EO directs the FAR Council to, within 60 days, “issue deviation and interim guidance under subpart 1.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, regarding agency implementation of the clause[.]” This suggests that agencies will modify solicitations and may seek to modify contracts to incorporate any class deviations within the next few months. (We note, however, that contractors may see modifications sooner because the EO also directs agencies to add the EO’s required clause within 30 days.) The FAR Council is also directed to amend the FAR to add the EO’s clause and remove any inconsistent clauses.

Comparison to 2025 EOs

The EO is best understood as a “Phase 2” contracting implementation of the administration’s earlier January 2025 executive orders (EO 14151 and EO 14173) by adding a more operational, procurement-ready compliance mechanism that agencies must embed in covered contracts and subcontracts.

EO 14151 directed broad termination of DEI and “environmental justice” offices and activities within the federal government and called for termination of “equity-related grants or contracts,” as well as identification of contractors providing DEI training and materials. EO 14151 primarily targeted internal government DEI architecture and “equity-related” spending, setting the policy predicate for the March 2026 EO.

EO 14173 revoked EO 11246, which established the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) and provided OFCCP its operational authority to ensure federal contractor compliance with anti-discrimination laws, including through mandated affirmative action. That order directed the OFCCP to cease promoting “diversity” and holding contractors responsible for “affirmative action” or workforce balancing on specified bases. It also required agencies to include in every contract or grant award an FCA materiality term and a certification that the party “does not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable federal anti-discrimination laws.” Significantly, EO 14173 did not include a definition of what constitutes an unlawful DEI program, though subsequent guidance from the administration throughout 2025, including from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the attorney general, provided contractors some insight.

The March 2026 EO doubles down on the January 2025 framework by specifying the government’s concern with “racially discriminatory DEI activities;” imposing a mandatory clause with an apparent flow-down and subcontractor reporting obligation; reiterating and operationalizing the FCA materiality concept inside the clause itself; giving agencies broad access to contractors’ documents and information; and requiring FAR Council action to integrate the approach into the FAR.

Key Questions for Consideration

This EO raises a number of questions for contractors about the scope and applicability of the clause, how it will be implemented, and whether the clause is subject to challenge. As these questions play out, contractors should be on the lookout for proposed contract modifications to implement the EO.

Immediate questions for consideration include:

  • The extent to which the term “racially discriminatory DEI activities,” as defined in the EO, squares with prior administration guidance on “unlawful DEI,” and, more importantly, how both terms are to be interpreted in light of federal anti-discrimination law. 
  • Whether the term “contract-like instrument[s]” referred to in the EO includes grants, other transactions agreements, or contractors’ supplier agreements.
  • The impact of this EO on state laws requiring participation in supplier diversity programs, including whether the EO’s prohibition of “racially discriminatory DEI activities” impacts Small Business Administration (SBA) set-aside programs or small business subcontracting goals.
  • Whether the EO or its statutory authority (Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (FPASA) (40 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.)) authorizes the president to direct a FAR class deviation and amendment.
  • Whether the EO will require contractors to both certify and affirmatively demonstrate or document compliance with the certification, and what such demonstration or documentation would entail.
  • Whether the EO’s requirement for contractors to provide their books and records to demonstrate compliance conflicts with contractual audit provisions, especially for commercial contracts.
  • What types of subcontractor conduct are “reasonably knowable.” What types of contract assurances or compliance programs that standard might require, and whether the standard is enforceable.
  • The extent to which the proposed clauses may serve as a predicate for an FCA claim and whether a blanket requirement for all contractors to certify to materiality may serve as evidence of the same.
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Peter J. Eyre Peter J. Eyre

Peter J. Eyre is a partner and co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board. Peter was named to BTI Consulting Group’s list of “Client Service All-Stars” in 2016, 2017, and 2019 and…

Peter J. Eyre is a partner and co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board. Peter was named to BTI Consulting Group’s list of “Client Service All-Stars” in 2016, 2017, and 2019 and has been named an Acritas Star, Acritas Stars Independently Rated Lawyers (2016, 2017, 2019). He is nationally ranked by Chambers USA in Government Contracts since 2014, and by Super Lawyers since 2017.

Photo of Kris D. Meade Kris D. Meade

Kris D. Meade is co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Labor & Employment Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board and Executive Committee. He counsels and represents employers in the full range of employment and traditional labor law matters, including…

Kris D. Meade is co-chair of Crowell & Moring’s Labor & Employment Group. He is also a member of the firm’s Management Board and Executive Committee. He counsels and represents employers in the full range of employment and traditional labor law matters, including individual and class action lawsuits filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, ERISA, and companion state statutes. Kris represents employers in connection with union organizing campaigns, collective bargaining, labor arbitrations, and unfair labor practice litigation. In 2020, Chambers USA recognized Kris as a leading labor and employment lawyer.

Photo of Trina Fairley Barlow Trina Fairley Barlow

Trina Fairley Barlow is co-chair of the firm’s Labor and Employment Group and a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group. She devotes a substantial portion of her practice to helping government contractors navigate and comply with the myriad laws, regulations, and Executive…

Trina Fairley Barlow is co-chair of the firm’s Labor and Employment Group and a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group. She devotes a substantial portion of her practice to helping government contractors navigate and comply with the myriad laws, regulations, and Executive Orders which impact employers who are also government contractors. Trina’s experience includes advising federal contractors on the requirements of the Service Contract Act, as well as the Davis Bacon Act, and assisting clients with developing compliance strategies that reduce legal risks. In addition, Trina has defended and advised clients in False Claim Act (FCA) whistleblower retaliation cases and has led large internal investigations that frequently encompass a complex combination of labor and employment, government contracts, and ethics and compliance issues. In connection with such investigations and in other contexts, clients also frequently call upon Trina to assist them with developing compliant policies and internal practices that achieve business objectives while simultaneously reducing potential legal risks and exposure.

Photo of Anuj Vohra Anuj Vohra

Anuj Vohra litigates high-stakes disputes on behalf of government contractors in federal and state court, and maintains an active bid protest practice before the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. He also assists clients with an array of…

Anuj Vohra litigates high-stakes disputes on behalf of government contractors in federal and state court, and maintains an active bid protest practice before the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. He also assists clients with an array of issues related to contract formation (including subcontracts and teaming agreements), regulatory compliance, internal and government-facing investigations, suspension and debarment, organizational conflicts of interest (“OCIs”), intellectual property and data rights, and the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).

Prior to entering private practice, Anuj spent six years as a Trial Attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Commercial Litigation Branch. At DOJ, he was a member of the Bid Protest Team—which handles the department’s largest and most complex protests—and served as lead counsel in dozens of matters representing the United States in commercial disputes before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. Court of International Trade.

Photo of Rebecca Springer Rebecca Springer

Rebecca Springer joined Crowell & Moring in 1999 and currently serves as partner in the Labor & Employment Group. Her practice focuses on labor and employment litigation and counseling, particularly in the area of Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) compliance. Rebecca…

Rebecca Springer joined Crowell & Moring in 1999 and currently serves as partner in the Labor & Employment Group. Her practice focuses on labor and employment litigation and counseling, particularly in the area of Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) compliance. Rebecca has extensive experience conducting audits of personnel practices, preparing Affirmative Action Plans, and counseling clients on affirmative action issues. She also has experience conducting statistical analyses of compensation and other personnel practices for purposes of class action litigation, OFCCP compliance audits, and employer self-audits, and frequently teams with labor economists to analyze compensation and advise clients on potential risks and proactive measures to address compensation disparities.

Photo of Brian Tully McLaughlin Brian Tully McLaughlin

Brian Tully McLaughlin is a partner in the Government Contracts Group in Washington, D.C. and co-chair of the False Claims Act Practice. Tully’s practice focuses on False Claims Act investigations and litigation, particularly trial and appellate work, as well as litigation of a…

Brian Tully McLaughlin is a partner in the Government Contracts Group in Washington, D.C. and co-chair of the False Claims Act Practice. Tully’s practice focuses on False Claims Act investigations and litigation, particularly trial and appellate work, as well as litigation of a variety of complex claims, disputes, and recovery matters. Tully’s False Claims Act experience spans procurement fraud, healthcare fraud, defense industry fraud, and more. He conducts internal investigations and represents clients in government investigations who are facing fraud or False Claims Act allegations. Tully has successfully litigated False Claims Act cases through trial and appeal, both those brought by whistleblowers / qui tam relators and the Department of Justice alike. He also focuses on affirmative claims recovery matters, analyzing potential claims and changes, counseling clients, and representing government contractors, including subcontractors, in claims and disputes proceedings before administrative boards of contract appeals and the Court of Federal Claims, as well as in international arbitration. His claims recovery experience includes unprecedented damages and fee awards. Tully has appeared and tried cases before judges and juries in federal district courts, state courts, and administrative boards of contract appeals, and he has argued successful appeals before the D.C. Circuit, the Federal Circuit, and the Fourth and Seventh Circuits.

Photo of Katie Erno Katie Erno

Katie Erno is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Labor & Employment Group. Katie represents companies in a wide range of complex commercial disputes, with a focus on employment litigation and counseling.

Specifically, Katie litigates a variety of wage and hour claims, class…

Katie Erno is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Labor & Employment Group. Katie represents companies in a wide range of complex commercial disputes, with a focus on employment litigation and counseling.

Specifically, Katie litigates a variety of wage and hour claims, class actions, discrimination and harassment claims, shareholder disputes, and issues related to corporate governance. She has deep experience in all stages of litigation, from drafting and challenging complaints, fact and expert discovery, drafting and arguing discovery and dispositive motions, trial, and appeals. Her cases range from single-plaintiff disputes to class actions and complex litigation involving large liability exposure in the context of high-profile bankruptcies. Katie enjoys learning the intricacies of her clients’ businesses and tailors her litigation approach with her clients’ ultimate business objectives in mind.

Photo of Alexandra Barbee-Garrett Alexandra Barbee-Garrett

Alexandra Barbee-Garrett is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where she practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Alex helps companies navigate the complex requirements around doing business with the U.S. government, with a particular focus on government contracts and grants

Alexandra Barbee-Garrett is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where she practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Alex helps companies navigate the complex requirements around doing business with the U.S. government, with a particular focus on government contracts and grants compliance issues, government ethics, and lobbying laws. Her practice spans a broad range of counseling, investigatory, and litigation matters, including: compliance reviews and enhancing contractor compliance programs; representing clients in suspension and debarment proceedings; counseling on supply chain security and sourcing issues; voluntary and mandatory disclosures; internal investigations related to the False Claims Act, the Procurement Integrity Act, and other civil and criminal matters; and bid protest and claim litigation. Alex also helps clients understand developing legislative requirements in the supply chain and government contracting spaces.

Prior to joining Crowell & Moring, Alex was a law clerk to Judge Richard A. Hertling of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Before law school, Alex worked as a health care legislative assistant for Rep. Rick Larsen (WA) in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Photo of Jillian Ambrose Jillian Ambrose

Jillian Ambrose is a Labor & Employment Group associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. Prior to joining the firm, Jillian served as a law clerk to Judge Anthony Epstein and then to Judge Steven M. Wellner, both of the D.C. Superior…

Jillian Ambrose is a Labor & Employment Group associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. Prior to joining the firm, Jillian served as a law clerk to Judge Anthony Epstein and then to Judge Steven M. Wellner, both of the D.C. Superior Court. Before law school, Jillian was an analyst in the human capital practice of an international consulting firm, where she provided management consulting services to a portfolio of federal agency clients.

Jillian’s practice focuses on litigation of individual and class actions arising in all areas of labor and employment law. She provides counseling to clients on a variety of employment issues, including non-competition/non-solicitation agreements and contract disputes. She also assists clients with affirmative action compliance, preparing affirmative action plans, analyzing compensation practices, and providing counseling in connection with Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs audits. Jillian has substantial experience in representing employers in wage & hour litigation and in conducting audits and compliance review of employer wage & hour policies and procedures.