False Claims Act Insights - The Mathematics of Nuclear FCA Verdicts
Podcast - Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. EPA: The Intersection of Constitutional and Environmental Law
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 65 -The Power of Interpretation: Constitutional Meaning in the Modern World
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: The Legal Frontlines in Iowa and Indiana — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Ampliación del fuero de paternidad
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Impact of the Election on the FTC
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Everything You Want to Know About the CFPB as Things Stand Today, and Lots More - Part 2
Podcast - FTC Commissioner Dismissals: Background and Implications
FCPA Compliance Report: Death of CTA
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prof. Hal Scott Doubles Down on His Argument That CFPB is Unlawfully Funded Because of Combined Losses at Federal Reserve Banks
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 55 - The Power of the Presidential Pardon: Traditions and Turning Points
False Claims Act Insights - Are the FCA’s Qui Tam Provisions Unconstitutional? One Federal Judge Says “Yes"
In That Case: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
#WorkforceWednesday® - SpaceX Victory: Court Questions NLRB's Constitutional Authority - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: Can FTC’s Non-Compete Ban Survive Without Chevron Deference? - Spilling Secrets Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
A great deal has happened on the subject of birthright citizenship under President Trump, including an Executive Order redefining parts of the long-standing meaning of birthright citizenship. As courts around the country...more
On June 27, 2025, in its long-anticipated decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court significantly narrowed the ability of a single federal court to issue “universal” or “nationwide” injunctions—through which...more
A federal district court in New Hampshire granted certification to a nationwide class and issued a preliminary injunction (PI) on July 10 that prevents the U.S. government from implementing Executive Order 14160. EO 14160...more
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s ruling on June 27 invalidating universal injunctions as the remedy imposed by three federal district courts that had determined that President Trump’s Executive Order limiting...more
On July 8, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to stay a lower-court judge’s order blocking President Donald Trump’s plan to reduce and restructure the federal workforce,...more
"Reverse discrimination," ADA, religion, and nationwide injunctions. The 2024-25 term of the U.S. Supreme Court is over. Two decisions at the end of the term directly addressed employment law issues, and two others will have...more
In a decision issued on June 27, 2025, Trump v. CASA, Inc. (a 6-3 ruling), the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal District Courts lack authority to grant universal injunctions. In CASA, the United States District Courts for...more
In Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court addressed three emergency applications challenging the use of universal injunctions that bar enforcement of federal action across the country. The case concerned the entry of a temporary...more
On June 27, 2025, in a 6-3 opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Trump v. CASA, Inc., No. 24A884, 606 U.S. ___ (2025), that federal courts lack the power to issue “universal injunctions,” a...more
On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal courts lack the authority to issue a “universal” injunction on President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. The executive order directs federal...more
On June 2, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge brought by a member firm against the enforcement power given to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). The Court’s decision to turn away...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued two historic rulings in the case of Learning Resources, Inc., et al., vs. Donald Trump, et al. First, it ruled that the Court of International Trade...more
On March 25, 2025, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) issued a 100-page Administrative Order and Decision confirming and modifying its sanctions of Alpine Securities Corporation, which include expulsion from...more
In April, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in Antonyuk v. James, a case challenging many of the restrictions imposed by New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). As a result, the Second Circuit’s...more
The short answer is that the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing (whose oral argument is scheduled for May 15 at 10 am) is of immense importance to all stakeholders in the consumer financial services industry. We will...more
Today’s podcast features Stephen Calkins, a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit and former General Counsel of the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”). President Trump recently fired, without good cause, the...more
The motions docket of the U.S. Supreme Court remains busy. Following the April 4 decision in Department of Education v. California—in which the Court, treating a temporary restraining order (TRO) as if it were a preliminary...more
On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14160, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” aiming to narrow the application of birthright citizenship in the United States. The...more
The Trump Administration urged the U.S. Supreme Court to limit nationwide injunctions blocking enforcement of the executive order (EO) to end birthright citizenship. Following his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025, President...more
The first weeks of the Trump Administration have been defined by executive orders and new policies that were immediately challenged on constitutional or statutory grounds....more
On February 25, 2025, the United States Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who obtain a preliminary injunction are not eligible for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) because they do not qualify as “prevailing...more
The U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases yesterday, one of which, Lackey v. Stinnie, involved an action brought pursuant to 42 U. S. C. §1983 and should be of particular interest to the many readers of this blog who practice...more
On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lackey v. Stinnie, holding that obtaining a preliminary injunction does not bestow a litigant with the status of “prevailing party,” as required for an award of attorney’s...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions today: Lackey v. Stinnie, No. 23-621: This case clarifies when attorneys’ fees may be awarded to a “prevailing party” in a civil rights lawsuit via 42 U.S.C....more
Developments concerning the enforceability and enforcement of the CTA came at a rapid clip last week. As things stand, the government may enforce the CTA pending a Texas court appeal in Smith v. U.S. Department of the...more