Law Commons^™

Enhanced Debriefings: A Toothless Mandate?, Steven L. Schooner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This short piece discusses the (alleged) manner in which the Department of Defense (DoD) conducted the disappointed offeror's post-award debriefing following the award of the $10 billion, $10-year Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) cloud computing contracting opportunity. While the quality of DoD’s debriefing is unlikely to alter the outcome in the pending protest litigation, it seems inconsistent with policy, the current trend favoring greater transparency, and the recent Congressional mandate for “enhanced debriefings.”

The piece suggests that, consistent with decades of study and experience, debriefings make sense, but only if they are informative or, more to the point, responsive. Conversely, …

Postscript Ii: Enhanced Debriefings, Steven L. Schooner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This short piece, which supplements the discussion from February 2020 (also on SSRN) discusses the Department of Defense (DoD) post-award debriefing of the disappointed offeror (Amazon) following the award (to Microsoft) of the $10 billion, $10-year Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) cloud computing contracting opportunity.

This supplemental discussion derives from the extraordinary, 300+ page, DoD Inspector General review and report on the procurement (issued in April 2020) and highlights a number of the surprises in the IG report, including: DoD's assertion of a “presidential communications privilege” to avoid responding to inquiries related to alleged White House influence of the procurement; …

Eyes On The Prize, Head In The Sand: Filling The Due Process Vacuum In Federally Administered Contests, Steven L. Schooner, Nathaniel E. Castellano

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

The article introduces readers to the recent proliferation of federal prize contests, which sovereigns have employed, albeit sporadically, since the mid-sixteenth century to incentivize breakthrough innovation. In the past decade, the federal government’s use of prize contests has skyrocketed, which makes sense in an era of constrained government resources. Prize contests offer seemingly unlimited potential to break through existing technological barriers at less expense than traditional innovation incentivizing tools such as contracts, grants, and patents. But that upside potential comes at a cost.

For every ebullient prizewinner, there are potentially innumerable “losers,” many of whom feel wronged, exploited, or, at …

A Random Walk: The Federal Circuit’S 2010 Government Contracts Decisions, Steven L. Schooner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This Article discusses the Federal Circuit's 2010 government contracts cases. It begins with some perspective on, and empirical quantification of, the Federal Circuit’s level of specialization and evolving jurisprudence in the field of government contracts. It eventually turns to analysis of a hodge-podge of unrelated cases: three award controversies (or bid protests), a handful of post award performance disputes, a few selections from the ongoing behemoths of litigation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims - Winstar and Spent Nuclear Fuel, and a potentially analogous implied warranty case. Overall, the article suggests that the Federal Circuit's 2010 government contracts cases …