1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |President Biden Signs Bipartisan Legislation Requiring Agencies to Refer Potential Human Trafficking Matters for Suspension/Debarment Consideration

President Biden Signs Bipartisan Legislation Requiring Agencies to Refer Potential Human Trafficking Matters for Suspension/Debarment Consideration

Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.07.22

On October 17, 2022, President Biden signed the End Human Trafficking in Government Contracts Act of 2022 (“the Act”) into law, amending the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (“2013 NDAA”) to require U.S. government agency heads to refer any suspected instances of human trafficking to the agency’s suspension and debarment official (“SDO”) for consideration and disposition.

In March 2012, both the House of Representatives and the Senate introduced the End Trafficking in Government Contracting Act of 2012, which Congress eventually passed as part of the 2013 NDAA. The goal of this law was to strengthen anti-human trafficking compliance efforts in federal contracts. However, in recent years, the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Defense Inspector General have released reports finding that human trafficking still persisted among a number of U.S. government contractors. 

In addition to requiring agency heads to report suspected instances of human trafficking to SDOs, the Act also requires the director of the Office of Management and Budget to submit a report to Congress on implementation of the provisions within 90 days of the Act’s enactment.  

Given this heightened scrutiny, contractors should review the relevant rules, including the requirement to have an anti-human trafficking compliance plan for contracts exceeding $550,000.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.26.24

Banks and Financial Service Providers Take Note: EU Law on Greenwashing and Social-Washing Is Changing – And It Is Likely Going to Have a Wide Impact

The amount of litigation regarding environmental and climate change issues is, perhaps unsurprisingly, growing worldwide.[1] A significant portion of that litigation relates to so-called ‘greenwashing’, ‘climate-washing’ or ‘social-washing’ disputes. In other words, legal cases where people or organisations (often NGOs and consumer groups) accuse companies, banks, financial institutions or others, of making untrue statements. They argue these companies or financial institutions are pretending their products, services or operations are more environmentally-friendly, sustainable, or ethically ‘good’ for society – than is really the case. Perhaps more interestingly, of all the litigation in the environmental and climate change space – complainants bringing greenwashing and social washing cases have, according to some of these reports, statistically the most chance of winning. So, in a nutshell, not only is greenwashing and social washing litigation on the rise, companies and financial institutions are most likely to lose cases in this area....

View All Insights