This UPDATED post summarizes the situation as of late evening on Monday, February 28, concerning current U.S. sanctions and export restrictions related to Russia and Ukraine. This post supplements our post of late evening on Wednesday, February 23, which is available here, our post of late evening on Thursday, February 24, which is available here, and our post of late evening on Friday, February 25, which is available here.

Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control Announces New Sanctions

On Monday, February 28, the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed additional sanctions on the Central Bank of Russia, the National Wealth Fund of the Russian Federation, and the Russian Ministry of Finance. These actions effectively freeze all assets of the Central Bank of Russia in the United States or held by a U.S. entity (such as a bank or other financial institution) or individual, wherever located.  OFAC also added the following parties to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List:

  • The Russian Direct Investment Fund.
  • Kirill Aleksandrovich Dmitriev – CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
  • Joint Stock Company Management Company of the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
  • Limited Liability Company RVC Management Company.

Continue Reading Russia, Ukraine: Update as of the Evening of February 28

This UPDATED post summarizes the situation as of late evening on Friday, February 25, concerning current U.S. sanctions and export restrictions related to Russia and Ukraine. This post supplements our post of late evening on Wednesday, February 23, which is available here, and our post of late evening on Thursday, February 24, which is available here.

As of late evening on Friday, February 25, the U.S. government announced that it is imposing sanctions on Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov along with two other senior Russian government officials.  Each of these individuals has been designated as a Specially Designated National (SDN).  Correspondingly, U.S. individuals and entities are prohibited from conducting any business with these designated parties, whether directly or indirectly.

The European Union had previously imposed sanctions on President Putin.

Continue Reading Russia, Ukraine: Update as of the Evening of February 25

This UPDATED post summarizes the situation as of late evening on Thursday, February 24, concerning current U.S. sanctions and export restrictions related to Russia and Ukraine. This supplements our post of late evening on Wednesday, February 23, which is available here.

As of late evening on Thursday, February 24, OFAC has taken the following additional actions, as follows:

Multiple additional banks were designated as SDNs.  Most prominently, OFAC designated VTB Bank Public Joint Stock Company (VTB Bank), which is reportedly Russia’s second-largest bank, along with 20 VTB Bank subsidiaries.  (Recall that any entity owned 50% or more by one or more SDN is itself an SDN, even if not specifically identified as an SDN.  In the case of a large entity such as VTB Bank, this means there may be many other entities affiliated with VTB Bank that are SDNs even though not identified on the SDN List).

Continue Reading Russia, Ukraine: Update as of the Evening of February 24

Please note that this post has been updated with information as of late evening on Thursday, February 24. Click here for the latest updates.

This post is to summarize the situation as of late evening on Wednesday, February 23, concerning current U.S. sanctions and export restrictions related to Russia and Ukraine. It is important to note that these new measures add to the existing framework of restrictions that the United States has maintained beginning in 2014 when Russia first invaded the eastern part of Ukraine. In addition, the EU, the UK, and Canada – among others – are imposing restrictions, many of which are comparable to the restrictions imposed by the United States.

The situation is likely to change quickly – and almost certainly in the direction of greater restrictions. We will provide updated guidance as the situation progresses.

Continue Reading Russia, Ukraine: Update as of the Evening of February 23

Over the past year, the Biden administration has issued a number of labor and employment executive orders applicable to government contractors. Some of those requirements are updates to Obama-era executive orders, while others are new. Together, these obligations, which include an almost 50% increase to the applicable minimum wage, can have a significant impact on contractors.

For any government contractors that have questions about these labor and employment changes, we hope you can join us for an overview of these recent developments.

Continue Reading [WEBINAR] What Was Old is New Again – Government Contractor Labor & Employment Updates

On February 4, President Biden signed the Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects, which mandates, with limited exceptions, that contractors and subcontractors working on federal construction projects valued at $35 million or more agree that for that project, the companies will “become a party to a project labor agreement [PLA] with one or more appropriate labor organizations.”  A prior EO issued by President Obama, which the recent EO drew liberally from, encouraged the use of labor agreements on large construction projects, but we are not aware of any prior EO mandating their use.

Continue Reading Union Labor or Bust! Project Labor Agreements Now Required for Large Federal Construction Projects

Last week, the District Court for the Eastern District of California denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment of a False Claims Act (FCA) count against Aerojet Rocketdyne (Aerojet) for allegedly fraudulently inducing the government to enter into federal contracts when the company knew it was not compliant with cybersecurity requirements.

The order contains important lessons for government contractors in the emerging area of FCA liability based on noncompliance with cybersecurity obligations. While the litigation is ongoing and may ultimately be resolved in Aerojet’s favor, the order demonstrates the growing importance of cybersecurity compliance.

Continue Reading Government Contractors Face False Claims Act Liability for Cybersecurity Non-Compliance

After we published our article last week about the status of the four federal vaccine mandates, we learned that a seventh district court had enjoined the federal contractor COVID-19 vaccine mandate, continuing a remarkable string of losses for the Department of Justice (DOJ) in their attempts to defend President Biden’s Executive Order (EO) 14042. While the District Court for the District of Arizona has not yet finalized all of the details of its injunction that only applies in Arizona (the parties will be briefing that issue over the next week), this is yet another indication that the contractor mandate is unlikely ever to be fully implemented in its current form.

On September 14, the state of Arizona, along with several other entities and individuals, filed suit challenging both the contractor vaccine mandate and the federal employee vaccine mandate ordered in EO 14043. The Order issued on January 27 held the challenge to the federal employee mandate was not yet ripe, but it enjoined the contractor mandate.

As an initial matter, the court agreed with DOJ that the plaintiff challenging the employee mandate did not have standing because he had a medical exemption request pending and was, therefore, not required to be vaccinated or subject to discipline at that time and may never be if the request is granted. Because his alleged injury – have the vaccine or be terminated – may never occur, any opinion issued in response to his claim would be “merely advisory,” and therefore, his claim was unripe. The court similarly held that Arizona did not have standing to challenge the employee mandate because its employees were not subject to it, and the mandate did not infringe on Arizona’s sovereignty.

Continue Reading DOJ’s Run of Bad Luck Continues – A Seventh District Court Enjoins the Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate

The vaccine mandates President Biden announced on September 9 have not aged well. Two are enjoined nationwide and a skeptical Supreme Court so undermined one that the government withdrew it, at least for the immediate future. Only one, an interim final rule applicable to employees at healthcare facilities receiving Medicare and Medicaid funds, is still standing. And it is questionable whether that mandate will remain in place once it becomes clear what the impact on operations will be on attrition caused by requiring personnel at those medical facilities to be vaccinated irrespective of their personal objections (those employees can apply for medical or religious accommodations, but the exceptions are narrow).

While three of the federal mandates are unraveling, contractors should understand their current status and continue to monitor them.  Litigation is ongoing, so it is possible, although increasingly unlikely, that two of them – the federal contractor and federal employee mandates – will be back. In addition, several federal facilities are still requiring as a condition of entry that contractor employees working on those facilities sign certifications as to their vaccination status and, if not vaccinated, present a negative COVID-19 test within the prior 72 hours.

Continue Reading

I am looking forward to participating in the Labor & Employment panel as part of the Pub K Annual Review 2022. I will be presenting with Nichole Atallah (PilieroMazza PLLC), Howard Wolf-Rodda (Abrahams Wolf-Rodda) and Michael Schrier (Husch Blackwell). Our panel will take place on Monday, January 24, 2022 at 3:00 p.m. EST and highlights will include:

  • The status of the vaccine mandates applicable to government contractors.
  • The increased minimum wage for government contractors.
  • The return of the non-displacement of qualified workers under service contracts requirement.
  • OFCCP trends and new certification requirements.

The Pub K Annual Review 2022 offers many panels over their four-day conference taking place January 24-27, 2022. There is no charge to attend, but registration is required. For additional information and to register, please click here.

From the Bass, Berry & Sims Blog Network
From the Bass, Berry & Sims Blog Network

Thought Leadership by our Attorneys.