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
The recent Supreme Court decision, that no single judge may block President Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship on a nationwide basis, was set to go into effect on July 27, 2025. But a court ruling in a class action...more
On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a ruling to limit the ability of federal district judges to issue broad nationwide injunctions. This decision was issued in connection with several legal challenges to prevent the...more
The Supreme Court agreed to a partial stay to severely limit universal injunctions issued by district court judges as part of ongoing litigation over President Donald Trump’s executive order (EO) on birthright citizenship —...more
In a closely watched decision, the Supreme Court has upheld the authority of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (Task Force), preserving the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) requirement that health plans cover preventive...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 a 6-3 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court partially stayed the nationwide injunctions issued by three district courts against enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order (EO) fundamentally changing birthright...more
On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more
The Supreme Court is prepared to determine the legality of a powerful but controversial judicial remedy — the universal injunction. The case, Trump v. CASA, Inc., reached the Justices after a lower court barred the Trump...more
While legal analysts focus on landmark Supreme Court decisions each term, equally significant are the cases the Court declines to hear. These certiorari denials often reveal critical jurisprudential trends that shape...more
The Supreme Court recently handed a victory to employers by giving them more tools to challenge federal agencies during administrative proceedings. Employers likely know how daunting it can seem to challenge federal officials...more
Many employers are already well aware of how scary it can seem to be on the receiving end of a federal agency’s investigation or action – be it the National Labor Relations Board, the Department of Labor, OSHA, the EEOC, or...more
The past year saw appellate courts weigh in on a number of critical questions regarding the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), headlined by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S....more
OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard - On November 5, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) requiring most employers with 100 or more employees to either...more
Wednesday, OSHA formally withdrew the ETS (large employer "vaccinate-or-test" rule) as a binding, enforceable emergency temporary standard. OSHA took this action after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked OHSA from implementing its...more
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) formally withdrew the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for large private employers effective Jan. 26, 2022. This announcement follows the United States Supreme Court’s recent...more
On November 5, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) released its controversial Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”), which required “large” employers to implement COVID-19 vaccine mandates or...more
On Jan. 13, 2022, the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) granted an emergency request for relief staying the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), requiring all employers with...more
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”) that would have required all employers with 100+ employees to mandate vaccination or testing, while allowing the Department of Health and...more
The Biden Administration continues its march towards implementation and enforcement of permanent vaccination mandates. OSHA withdraws OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) - On January 13, 2022, the Administration’s...more
On January 26, 2022, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) withdrew its COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), which required large employers to ensure that their...more
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is withdrawing its COVID-19 vaccination or testing rule that previously applied to large employers. The withdrawal follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 13 decision...more
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this month, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) is withdrawing the vaccination and testing emergency temporary standard (“ETS”). The withdrawal is effective...more
Effective January 26, 2022, OSHA withdrew its enforcement of its COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), which would have required many employers to mandate vaccination or regular testing for employees. As we have...more
On January 25, 2022, OSHA filed a notice withdrawing its Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”). The ETS had mandated that employers with 100 or more employees require all employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or to...more
The legal landscape around COVID-19 policies and vaccine mandates in the workplace continues to shift under the feet of US employers. With the January 13 US Supreme Court ruling on the OSHA and CMS vaccine rules, and...more