United States: The False Claims Act and DEI

A Legal Tightrope for Government Contractors

In brief

President Trump's Executive Order 14173 calls for the elimination of what it characterizes as "illegal" DEI programs in the federal government. In addition, by making express references to the False Claims Act, the order provides another avenue for qui tam relators to bring FCA lawsuits and potentially signals increased FCA enforcement for government contractors with DEI programs. This alert provides essential insights and recommendations to help government contractors mitigate these risks and navigate the evolving legal landscape following President Trump's orders.


Contents

In depth

Introduction 

The False Claims Act (FCA), originally enacted to confront massive fraud committed against the US government during the Civil War, has now been enlisted by the Trump Administration as a tool to combat what it characterizes as "illegal" DEI programs, policies, and mandates in the federal government. On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14173, titled, "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity" ("EO 14173" or the EO). Nestled within this EO is a directive requiring the head of each executive agency to include two specific terms in every contract or grant award: (1) a term requiring the contractor or grant recipient to "agree that its compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is material to the government's payment decisions for purposes" of the FCA; and (2) a term requiring the contractor or grant recipient to "certify that it does not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws." 

This language, in addition to recent policy statements issued by Attorney General Pam Bondi, signals that government contractors with DEI programs are potentially at an increased risk of civil or even criminal enforcement from the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Brief Refresher On The FCA

At its core, the FCA's purpose is to root out fraud, waste, and abuse committed against the federal government. In recent years, the FCA has been an extraordinary enforcement tool, resulting in nearly USD 3 billion in judgments and settlements in Fiscal Year 2024 alone. The statute is particularly punitive because it imposes treble damages and penalties (adjusted for inflation) on those who knowingly and falsely claim money from the United States, and it allows both the government and private whistleblowers (referred to as qui tam relators) to bring an action for alleged violations on the government's behalf.

There are several forms of misconduct that can give rise to civil liability under the FCA, but the provision most relevant to EO 14173 is the false statement provision (31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(B).) This provision makes it unlawful for any individual or corporation to knowingly make, use, or cause to be made or used, "a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim" submitted to the government.1

While the FCA does not define the term "false," courts have determined that a legally false claim occurs when a federal contractor certifies compliance or fails to disclose noncompliance with all material contractual, statutory, and regulatory prerequisites to payment.2 In addition, a claim is "material" when it has "a natural tendency to influence, or be capable of influencing, the payment or receipt of money or property."3

Potential Implications For FCA Enforcement

There are a number of open questions regarding how EO 14173 will be implemented and work in practice, including (but not limited to):

  • Will the certification to "not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws" be the same across all federal agencies? For multi-national corporations, will this certification create a conflict of laws risk with public procurement requirements and expectations in other countries and jurisdictions?
  • What is the difference between an "illegal DEI" program and a lawful one?
  • Will the Federal Acquisition Regulation—the set of rules and guidelines that govern federal government procurement—be updated to reflect the EO's directives?
  • Is the EO retroactive, or does it only impact federal contracts and grants executed as of the date of the EO's issuance?
  • Will federal agencies amend the terms/provisions of open contracts to account for the EO's directives?
  • Since under the Small Business Administration's 8(a) program, socio-economically certified businesses qualify for a percentage of the federal government's contracting dollars, what does the EO mean for small businesses, women-owned businesses, or minority-owned businesses?
  • What does the EO mean for federal government subcontractors?

All of these unanswered questions make it difficult to fully assess the impact of EO 14173 on FCA enforcement at this time. Nonetheless, we anticipate seeing an uptick in FCA claims in the coming years for two primary reasons. First, employees who oppose DEI programs might see the EO as an easy opportunity to file a complaint if they have reason to believe their employer is continuing DEI programs and initiatives despite the EO's mandate. Second, such complaints are likely to be well-received by Trump's DOJ. Indeed, Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to continue prosecuting FCA cases at her confirmation hearing, where she noted the critical role whistleblowers play in FCA enforcement and their contributions to recovering taxpayer dollars.

Recommendations For Federal Government Contractors

Despite the uncertainty surrounding the impacts of EO 14173, there are certain steps federal government contractors can and should take to minimize the risk of being subject to a FCA claim or from having their contract(s) with the federal government suspended or terminated.

For instance, federal contractors should consider conducting a comprehensive review of their existing contracts with federal agencies, identify those that contain references to DEI programs, and assess whether and to what extent removing or eliminating those programs would implicate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines.

Federal contractors should also consider whether and to what extent they need to modify what is externally projected on their websites and social media platforms when it comes to DEI programs and initiatives, including all press clips referencing this work.  Under the EO, US contracting officers will likely scrutinize what the contractor certifies to the government as it pertains to these DEI programs/initiatives, and any external statements that contravene the EO could form an early basis for an FCA claim. However, it is critical that multi-national contractors with public procurement agreements in multiple jurisdictions around the world conduct a conflict of laws analysis to ensure that their efforts to comply with the EO do not conflict with regulations in other countries that require certifications to implement diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and practices.

Federal contractors may also want to create an accounting of their performance and all expenses incurred under their existing contracts with federal agencies. All performance milestones and incurred expenses should be supported by robust documentation (e.g., receipts, performance awards, email correspondence with the contracting officer) in the event of a FCA claim or contract termination or suspension.

*********

If you are a federal government contractor affected by EO 14173, contact a lawyer on our team. Our firm can assist in helping you implement and navigate these risk-mitigation steps, all of which are critical exercises that will ensure your organization is able to continue providing services in light of the federal government's evolving requirements.


1 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(B) (emphases added).

2 Universal Health Serv., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 579 U.S. 176, 191 (2016).

3 31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(4).

4 Baker McKenzie is partnering with clients to conduct such health checks under legal privilege. Prioritized areas of review include what is externally projected on company websites, social media platforms, and public filings (such as Forms 10-K) when it comes to DEI programs and initiatives. (For more information, click here.)


Copyright © 2025 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Ownership: This documentation and content (Content) is a proprietary resource owned exclusively by Baker McKenzie (meaning Baker & McKenzie International and its member firms). The Content is protected under international copyright conventions. Use of this Content does not of itself create a contractual relationship, nor any attorney/client relationship, between Baker McKenzie and any person. Non-reliance and exclusion: All Content is for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal and regulatory developments. All summaries of the laws, regulations and practice are subject to change. The Content is not offered as legal or professional advice for any specific matter. It is not intended to be a substitute for reference to (and compliance with) the detailed provisions of applicable laws, rules, regulations or forms. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action or refraining from taking any action based on any Content. Baker McKenzie and the editors and the contributing authors do not guarantee the accuracy of the Content and expressly disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or permitted to be done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the Content. The Content may contain links to external websites and external websites may link to the Content. Baker McKenzie is not responsible for the content or operation of any such external sites and disclaims all liability, howsoever occurring, in respect of the content or operation of any such external websites. Attorney Advertising: This Content may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. To the extent that this Content may qualify as Attorney Advertising, PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME. Reproduction: Reproduction of reasonable portions of the Content is permitted provided that (i) such reproductions are made available free of charge and for non-commercial purposes, (ii) such reproductions are properly attributed to Baker McKenzie, (iii) the portion of the Content being reproduced is not altered or made available in a manner that modifies the Content or presents the Content being reproduced in a false light and (iv) notice is made to the disclaimers included on the Content. The permission to re-copy does not allow for incorporation of any substantial portion of the Content in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form or for commercial purposes.