1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FAR Council Delivers Last-Minute Holiday Gift by Extending the Comment Period on Proposed Rule Imposing Mandatory Climate Disclosures for Federal Contractors

FAR Council Delivers Last-Minute Holiday Gift by Extending the Comment Period on Proposed Rule Imposing Mandatory Climate Disclosures for Federal Contractors

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.23.22

On December 23, 2022, the Department of Defense (“DoD”), General Services Administration (“GSA”), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”) extended the comment period on the proposed rule, “Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate-Related Financial Risk,” from January 13, 2023 to February 13, 2023.  As we summarized previously, the proposed rule would, if finalized, require thousands of federal contractors to inventory and publicly disclose their Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions, while further requiring “major” contractors to also establish and validate GHG emission-reduction targets tailored to the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The 30-day extension should be a welcome surprise to a wide range of contractors still attempting to unwrap the impact of this largely unprecedented proposal.  Crowell’s team stands ready to assist in evaluating the implications and identifying issues worthy of comment.    

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights