Photo of Nathaniel J. Greeson

Nathaniel Greeson helps clients solve government contracts challenges. Nathaniel represents clients in a range of government procurement issues, including bid protests, claims, disputes, audits and investigations. He has extensive experience with GAO bid protests, agency-level protests, Court of Federal Claims (COFC) bid protests, and SBA OHA size and NAICS appeals, as well as experience with agency-level requests for equitable adjustments (REA) and claims, and Boards of Contract Appeals claims. View articles by Nathaniel.

When a federal agency terminates a grant award, the consequences can be severe for the recipient. Whether you’re a nonprofit, research institution, public entity, or otherwise, a sudden termination can disrupt operations, staff retention, and mission-critical projects. Fortunately, grant recipients do have legal recourse options when facing termination — provided they act quickly and understand

Introduction

Federal government contractors operating in today’s volatile global trade environment are no strangers to sudden and sometimes dramatic shifts in material costs. With tariffs periodically imposed or adjusted by executive action, contractors frequently find themselves grappling with unexpected increases in the cost of steel, aluminum, electronics, and other imported goods. A natural question arises:

As global trade policies shift, U.S. government contractors must navigate the evolving landscape of tariffs and their implications. The recent introduction of new tariffs by the federal government has significant consequences for contractors working with federal agencies, particularly those in industries reliant on imported materials and components.

Understanding the New Tariffs

The latest tariffs target

In the recent MicroTechnologies LLC and SMS Data Products Group, Inc. decisions, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustained protests challenging the Agency’s failure to perform the required price risk analysis under DFARS 252.204-7024. These cases mark the first time the GAO has addressed the application of the relatively new DFARS provision. 

This article discusses the

When a government contract is terminated for convenience, contractors may find themselves navigating the complex process of preparing a termination settlement proposal. One critical consideration that often arises is whether the costs associated with hiring legal counsel to assist with the preparation of these proposals are recoverable from the government. The good news for contractors

Government contracts often include a termination for convenience clause, generally allowing federal agencies to cancel agreements when it serves the government’s interest. While this power is fairly broad, it is not absolute — and when misused, contractors may have legal recourse. Several court cases highlight situations where termination for convenience was found to be an

The Trump administration, as part of its efforts to reshape the federal government, began terminating federal contracts for the convenience of the government almost immediately after coming back to town. These contract terminations show no signs of slowing in the near term. Accordingly, government contractors need to know their rights and obligations so that they

In a recent decision, the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) ruled on bid protests filed by 12 construction companies challenging the implementation of a February 4, 2022, Executive Order 14063 that mandated the use of project labor agreements (PLAs). FAR Council implemented EO 14063 in January 2024, and it was the first executive mandate

On January 21, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” The executive order’s stated purpose is to end “illegal” diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts.

Among other things, the executive order directs the director of the Office of Management and Budget to “[t]erminate all

We recently blogged about New Jersey’s bid protest requirements for procurements solicited under the New Jersey Division of Purchase and Property (DPP) here. As we noted, public procurements by local governmental authorities fall outside the jurisdiction of the DPP. A recent intermediate appellate court opinion from January 10, 2025, Anselmi & Decicco, Inc. v.