New DEI and Immigration Certification Requirement Proposed for Federal Grant Recipients in SAM.gov

On January 28, 2026, the General Services Administration (“GSA”) published a request for comments under the Paperwork Reduction Act on the regulatory burden of a proposed  update to  the SAM.gov Financial Assistance General Representations and Certifications, which are the representations and certifications that both current and potential federal financial assistance awardees are required to complete in order to be eligible for grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and government-sponsored insurance.

The proposed update would require SAM.gov registrants to certify compliance with new language addressing “Illegal DEI,” illegal immigration, and terrorism. As a result, recipients of federal financial assistance may face expanded civil False Claims Act or criminal liability for failing to comply with the terms of the certification. The proposed certification requirements will continue to foster uncertainty regarding what actions constitute illegal DEI, despite the examples provided by GSA. Interested parties may submit public comments until March 30, 2026.

GSA notes in the proposed amendment that approximately 222,760 entities registered in SAM for financial assistance may be affected by the revised certification requirements.  These updates will likely take effect shortly after the March 30, 2026 deadline for comments on the regulatory impact of the proposed changes.

DEI Certification

The proposed update to SAM.gov would implement the prohibition on “Illegal DEI” in Executive Order 14173 by requiring all current and potential federal financial assistance recipients to certify that they will comply with federal laws and executive orders prohibiting unlawful discrimination on the basis of race or color.

The proposed changes to the Financial Assistance General Certifications and Representations in SAM.gov include examples of practices that may violate anti-discrimination laws, including:

• Race-based scholarships, preferential hiring and promotion practices, or program eligibility, including “diverse slate” policies in hiring;
• Requirements to submit “overcoming obstacles” narratives, or “diversity statements”;
• Race-based training sessions;
• Training programs that “stereotype, exclude, or single out individuals based on protected characteristics or create a hostile environment;” and
• Retaliation against employees, participants, or beneficiaries for opposing DEI practices that they reasonably believe violate federal law.

These examples align with the Attorney General’s July 2025 Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination, which is cited in the notice.¹  

Immigration Certification

Citing the prohibition against smuggling and harboring aliens in 8 U.S.C. § 1324, the proposed revisions also require federal financial assistance recipients to certify that they:

• Will not knowingly bring or attempt to bring an unauthorized individual into the United States;

• Will not transport, conceal, harbor, or shield an unauthorized individual from detection; and
• Will not knowingly hire or recruit an unauthorized individual for employment for a fee.

Although these statutory prohibitions already exist under federal immigration law, the proposed certification would convert them into affirmative conditions of eligibility for federal financial assistance.

The proposed certification is consistent with broader executive branch efforts to tie federal financial assistance and program participation to compliance with federal immigration policies, such as:

• Executive Order 14159, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” (January 20, 2025), which directed the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to “evaluate and undertake any lawful actions to ensure that so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions[…] do not receive access to Federal funds”; and
• Executive Order 14218, “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” (February 19, 2025), which directed the head of each executive agency to “identify all federally funded programs […] that currently permit illegal aliens to obtain any […] public benefit, and, consistent with applicable law, take all appropriate actions to align such programs with the purposes of [the] order.” The purposes of the Order were described as preventing “taxpayer resources from acting as a magnet and fueling illegal immigration to the United States, and [ensuring], to the maximum extent permitted by law, that no taxpayer-funded benefits go to unqualified aliens.”

Anti-Terrorism Certification

In addition to the provisions on DEI and immigration, the proposed revisions would require recipients of federal financial assistance to certify that they will not fund, subsidize, or facilitate violence, terrorism, or other illegal activities that threaten public safety or national security.

Although the certification is framed broadly and does not define specific prohibited activities, recipients of federal financial assistance may look to executive branch guidance to understand the scope of the administration’s definition of terrorism.

For example, in a September 2025 National Security Presidential Memorandum, issued shortly after an Executive Order designating “antifa” as a domestic terrorist organization, the White House decried violent conduct animated by “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”

Shortly thereafter, a DOJ Memorandum identified examples of “criminal conduct rising to the level of domestic terrorism” including “organized doxing of law enforcement, mass rioting and destruction in our cities, violent efforts to shut down immigration enforcement, targeting of public officials or other political actors, etc.” Here, also, questions remain regarding what activities constitute terrorism, including for example whether allowing employees to exercise what some would consider the right to free speech in protesting immigration enforcement rises to the level of terrorism in violation of the certification.

Potential Enforcement Consequences

When finalized, the revised representations and certifications would expand the enforcement exposure associated with federal financial assistance by transforming a range of statutory interpretations and policy determinations into affirmative representations that may be considered material to the award or continuation of federal financial assistance. The proposed representations and certifications expressly warn that recipients of federal financial assistance may face criminal liability for false statements under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 or civil liability under the False Claims Act if the awardee provides false, fictitious, or fraudulent information to the federal government.

Additionally, the proposed certifications may invite increased scrutiny from agency inspectors general, the DOJ, and whistleblowers.

The proposed revisions pose especially high levels of risk to grantees and other federal financial assistance recipients because of the draft certification’s effort to cabin court intervention.  It addresses the frequent legal changes associated with many of the administration’s executive orders with language that attempts to limit the scope of any injunctive relief that a court may award:

“To the extent that any [sic] the certifications or representations on this page are the subject of an active court order or injunction that is legally binding on the recipient and the relevant awarding agency, and prohibits enforcement of such requirements, the affected certifications or representations will be deemed inapplicable to that recipient. All other certifications and representations not directly affected by such order shall remain in full force and effect.” 

The language attempts to provide that injunctive relief awarded to one set of recipients or in one jurisdiction, for example one judicial district or one Circuit, will not exempt other recipients, including in other jurisdictions, from the continuing duty to provide truthful certifications. The proposal does not explain how recipients other than litigants in a particular challenge should determine whether a particular certification is rendered inapplicable to them by a court order, nor does it clarify whether agencies will provide guidance to recipients on the applicability of injunctions to specific provisions. As a result, it will likely be difficult for entities to assess whether a certification requirement remains enforceable in light of evolving judicial decisions.

Accordingly, organizations that receive or seek federal financial assistance should closely monitor SAM.gov for implementation of the representation and certification requirements.  They should consider proactively assessing their compliance programs to ensure that, if the revisions become effective, they can confidently support the certifications and appropriately document their good faith decisions.

1 As noted in Akin Alert “DEI Cases Receiving ‘Expedited Priority Treatment’ at DOJ”,  current focuses of DOJ’s False Claim Act DEI investigations include tying compensation to demographic goals; executive training and mentoring programs linked to prohibited characteristics; and diverse slate hiring practices.