The Texas Tech University School of Law Digital Repository

Debarment and Suspension Revisited: Fewer Eggs in the Basket?

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Shannon, Brian D.
dc.date.accessioned 2010-03-09T17:45:58Z
dc.date.available 2010-03-09T17:45:58Z
dc.date.issued 1995
dc.identifier.citation 44 Cath. U. L. Rev. 363 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10601/110
dc.description.abstract This Article provides an analysis and assessment of the historical and continuing evolution of the procedures attendant with the debarment and suspension process. Part II of this Article recounts the early reports commissioned by the Administrative Conference of United States (ACUS). Part III focuses on the evolution of the current procedures for both procurement and non-procurement debarment and suspension activities. It analyzes the key differences between those procedures and the difficulties in resolving these differences. Part IV reviews significant court decisions that influenced the evolution of government-wide debarment and suspension regulations, such as due process standards and the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. Part V of this Article questions whether greater process such as post-deprivation hearings for contractors facing debarment or suspension should be provided and concludes that the existing regulations provide adequate due process. Notwithstanding the fundamental fairness of the regulations, Part VI of this Article argues that a lack of uniformity in implementing and apply it agency procedures exists. Specifically, Parts VII, VIII, and IX address respectively the lack of uniformity concerning the period of debarment, the mitigating factors agencies consider when imposing debarment or suspension of contractors, and the punitive nature with which agencies are imposing debarments. This Article concludes that although some debarment and suspension regulations are not implemented or applied uniformly, on balance the current regulations are fair and reasonable and do not warrant revision. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Catholic University Law Review
dc.relation.uri http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/cathu44&men_hide=false&men_tab=citnav&collection=journals&page=363
dc.relation.uri https://advance.lexis.com/api/document/collection/analytical-materials/id/3S3V-1HC0-00CW-B1H9-00000-00?context=1000516
dc.relation.uri https://a.next.westlaw.com/Document/I055677e14a7a11db99a18fc28eb0d9ae/View/FullText.html
dc.subject Debarment en_US
dc.subject Suspension en_US
dc.title Debarment and Suspension Revisited: Fewer Eggs in the Basket? en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View Description
shannon6.pdf 4.229Mb PDF View/Open shannon6

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ScHOLAR

Browse

My Account