Meeting the Moment: How Lawyers Can Unite to Protect Democracy and the Rule of Law - On Record PR
Legal Implications of the Supreme Court's Ruling on Universal Injunctions
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 65 -The Power of Interpretation: Constitutional Meaning in the Modern World
Federal Court Strikes Down FDA Rule on LDTs - Thought Leaders in Health Law®
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
Episode 7 | Order in the Court: A Conversation with Judge Brendan Sheehan of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
On Friday, June 27, the Supreme Court held that so-called universal injunctions (sometimes called nationwide injunctions) likely exceed federal courts’ equitable authority as granted by the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Court...more
On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in a 6-3 decision in Trump v. Casa, that federal courts lack the authority to issue nationwide injunctions under the Judiciary Act of 1789 (Judiciary Act). In doing so, the Court...more
The United States Supreme Court issued a decision that curtailed the practice of “universal” or “nationwide” injunctions and may have a significant impact for individuals and organizations that seek redress from the courts,...more
On February 18, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14215 “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” Section 7 of which provides that: “[t]he President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are...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
The Honorable Pauline Newman, Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has been battling her suspension from the Court imposed by the Judicial Council for two years (including proceedings leading...more
In June 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court sunk what remained of Chevron deference. Under that doctrine, tracing back to the 1984 decision Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense...more
The end of the Supreme Court’s recent term saw two major decisions in the field of administrative law: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. The Loper Bright decision, which...more
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued its decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which put an end to Chevron Deference. Chevron Deference was a doctrine that required courts to...more
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court published a landmark ruling that overturned decades of judicial deference to government agencies under the so-called Chevron doctrine. This decision fundamentally alters the landscape of...more
At the end of its 2024 term, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down four decisions limiting the power of federal agencies. While none of those decisions involved a labor and employment agency, all of them could transform labor...more
On June 28, 2024, in a maximalist decision that went further than even the most ardent opponents of Chevron deference thought possible, the Supreme Court finally and emphatically overruled Chevron deference, the watershed...more
“Landmark” perhaps gets applied too often to court decisions these days, but the Supreme Court of the United States this week decided a pair of cases—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Securities and Exchange Commission...more