I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
In the last month, we have gained additional insight into the future of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) regulation and how class action litigation might be shaped by...more
On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado et al. This decision held that agencies are afforded substantial deference in National...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, clarifying the standards for judicial review of challenges to agency action under the National Environmental Policy Act...more
Over the last half century, federal courts have interpreted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to require federal agencies to study an ever-growing range of indirect effects and impacts when approving large...more
The decision emphasizes the importance of judicial deference to agencies on NEPA and narrows the scope of environmental analyses....more
On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County that promises to significantly alter the scope of judicial review of environmental reviews performed under the...more
Are district courts bound by both interpretive and final rules issued by the Federal Communications Commission? The U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision to hear the case of McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates Inc. v. McKesson...more
In what is shaping up to be an increasingly active term for judicial scrutiny of agency deference, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assoc. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226 (U.S. Oct. 4,...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, __ U.S. __ (2024), overturning the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine, drastically reshapes administrative law....more
Last month, I moderated a live and virtual program at the American Bar Association Business Law Section 2023 Fall Meeting in Chicago. The program was entitled: “U.S. Supreme Court to Revisit Chevron Deference: What the...more
James Kisor, a Korean War Veteran, asked the Supreme Court to overrule a longstanding presumption that courts defer to an executive agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulation, a principle known as Auer...more
US Courts Will Decide Whether to Enforce US$2 Billion Award Against Petróleos de Venezuela - In April 2018, an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) tribunal awarded US$2.04 billion in damages to two subsidiaries of U.S....more
The Supreme Court has ruled US federal courts should carefully consider a foreign government’s interpretation of its own domestic laws, but are not required to give it conclusive effect. Key Points - ..The Supreme...more
International dispute practitioners are well aware of the challenges that arise when the substance of foreign law is disputed in U.S. courts. Most practitioners are aware that the question is governed by Rule 44.1 of the...more
The Situation: In Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co., the defendants in an anticompetition matter—who were China-based manufacturers of vitamin C—claimed that Chinese law required them to...more
In a 9-0 opinion delivered by Justice Ruth Ginsburg, the United States Supreme Court last week ruled that the federal courts are not “bound to accord conclusive effect” to a foreign government’s statement of its own law under...more
Rejecting an earlier appellate case that allowed Chinese companies to escape liability in the United States for allegations of price fixing because their government said it was not illegal under Chinese law, the U.S. Supreme...more
Is a federal court determining foreign law required to treat as conclusive a submission from a foreign government interpreting its law? The U.S. Supreme Court confronted this question in a case involving price-fixing claims...more
Alert: The Supreme Court clarified the principles of international comity this week in a ruling pertaining to the long-running vitamin C antitrust class action litigation. International comity is the recognition a nation...more
On June 14, Justice Ginsberg, writing for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, reversed a 2016 opinion by the Second Circuit and held that a foreign government’s interpretation of its own law is not binding on U.S. courts....more
On June 14, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., No. 16-1220, holding that a federal court determining foreign law under Fed. R. Civ. P....more
In U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision on standards of appellate review, holding that appellate courts should review a bankruptcy court’s determination of whether a...more
On January 12, 2018, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Animal Science Products v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. (In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation), No. 16-1220. The issue before the Supreme Court is...more
This episode discusses kneeling in the NFL/workplace, indefinite leave entitlement, and sufficient consideration for non-competes, provides an update from DC on OT exemptions and class action waivers, and questions whether...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court confirmed that federal appeals courts should apply a deferential standard of review to federal district court determinations regarding the legal sufficiency of EEOC subpoenas....more