DOJ settles first DEI-related False Claims Act case

One and done, or are there more to come? 

The U.S. Department of Justice announced a $17 million settlement with International Business Machines Corporation, resolving allegations that its diversity initiatives violated the False Claims Act. This is the first time the federal government has pursued an FCA claim against a federal contractor based on its diversity policies.

President Trump set the stage for federal contractors to be sued for False Claims Act violations when he signed Executive Order 14173, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” In addition to rescinding Executive Order 11246, the new executive order required federal contractors “to agree that . . . compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is material to the government’s payment decisions” and “to certify that [the contractor] does not operate any program promoting DEI that violates any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.”

A few months after President Trump signed Executive Order 14173, the Department of Justice announced its Civil Rights Fraud Initiative, warning recipients of federal funds that the government was vigorously enforcing anti-discrimination laws and pursuing FCA claims against violators.

The FCA generally provides that any person who knowingly submits false claims to the government can be liable for three times the government’s damages, plus a penalty tied to inflation. According to the Justice Department, the FCA is implicated when an entity “knowingly violates civil rights laws – including but not limited to Title IV, Title VI, and Title IX, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – and falsely certifies compliance with such laws.” 

The challenged policies

According to the settlement agreement between the Justice Department and IBM, the government took issue with the following employment practices:

  • Developing race and sex demographic goals, and taking race and sex into account when making employment decisions to achieve those goals.
  • Tying bonus compensation to employees’ achievement of demographic targets based on race, sex, and other protected characteristics.
  • Using diverse interview slates and altering interview eligibility criteria based on race, sex, and other protected characteristics.
  • Limiting eligibility to training, mentorship, and leadership development programs based on race, sex, or other protected characteristics.

The settlement agreement notes that IBM was credited with “taking voluntary remedial measures, including the termination and/or modification of various programs, policies, or other [challenged] practices. . . .”

IBM denies that it engaged in the challenged practices.

Given the Trump Administration’s focus on “illegal DEI,” which has not abated, federal contractors should proactively evaluate their employment practices for potential risk.

Please contact any member of Constangy’s EEO/Contractor Compliance, Reporting & Analytics Practice Group with questions or for assistance. 

From developments in pay equity and changing requirements in data reporting, to DEI risk mitigation, Title VII compliance, and shifts in enforcement of Section 503 & VEVRAA, the EEO Compliance Dispatch blog is designed to keep employers informed and ahead of the curve.

Whether you’re a federal contractor navigating audits, an HR professional tackling pay transparency, or in-house counsel tracking state and local reporting requirements, our updates, legal analysis, and compliance strategies are tailored to help you manage risk and support a more inclusive workplace.

Search

Get Updates By Email

Subscribe

Archives

Jump to Page

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP Cookie Preference Center

Your Privacy

When using this website, Constangy and certain third parties may collect and use cookies or similar technologies to enhance your experience. These technologies may collect information about your device, activity on our website, and preferences. Some cookies are essential to site functionality, while others help us analyze performance and usage trends to improve our content and features.

Please note that if you return to this website from a different browser or device, you may need to reselect your cookie preferences.

For more information about our privacy practices, including your rights and choices, please see our Privacy Policy. 

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Always Active

Strictly Necessary Cookies are essential for the website to function, and cannot be turned off. We use this type of cookie for purposes such as security, network management, and accessibility. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but if you do so, some parts of the site will not work. 

Functionality Cookies

Always Active

Functionality Cookies are used to enhance the functionality and personalization of this website. These cookies support features like embedded content (such as video or audio), keyword search highlighting, and remembering your preferences across pages—for example, your cookie choices or form inputs during submission.

Some of these cookies are managed by third-party service providers whose features are embedded on our site. These cookies do not store personal information and are necessary for certain site features to work properly.

Performance Cookies

Performance cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Powered by Firmseek