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
In high-stakes litigation, expert testimony that cannot withstand a Daubert or Robinson challenge can derail even the most well-prepared case. A failed Daubert or Robinson challenge can leave attorneys without their key...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that courts may not impose heightened evidentiary requirements on Title VII plaintiffs simply because...more
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, significantly impacting how majority-group discrimination claims are evaluated under Title VII of the...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
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous ruling authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the U.S. Supreme Court revived the employment discrimination claims of an Ohio woman who contends that she was the victim of “reverse...more
In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that Title VII’s protections against discrimination do not require majority group individuals (including white people, men, and heterosexuals) to...more