Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
Notorious: The RBG Podcast - Episode 11: Three Cheers for Beer: A Discussion of Craig v. Boren
The M&A Word of the Day® from the Book of Jargon® – Global Mergers & Acquisitions Is Revlon Doctrine
Konczal: Dodd-Frank Reforms Get Roughed Up in Court
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
The Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) of 1984 establishes a procedure that effectively pauses performance of a federal contract award during a bid protest. If a disappointed bidder files a protest with the Government...more
Until recently, a single judge sitting on a panel of the North Carolina Court of Appeals could tee up an issue for the Supreme Court of North Carolina simply by filing a dissenting opinion. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-30(2) allowed...more
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Trump v. CASA (the birthright citizenship case) contrasts with two of its opinions from a year ago, Fischer v. United States and Snyder v. United States, in at least the following way:...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday, June 27, that federal district courts may not issue “universal” injunctions (the term the Court used instead of “nationwide” injunctions), as it decided that doing so is beyond their...more
A federal judge has blocked the Trump Administration from ending TPS for Haiti months earlier than initially planned under the 2024 government extension. On June 27, 2025, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary...more
On June 23, 2025, Judge Matthew J. Maddox of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland denied a motion by President Donald J. Trump and other officials (“Defendants”) to stay his order reinstating three Democratic...more
On May 21, 2025, the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico had the opportunity to address the judicial deference that was traditionally given to administrative decisions. In Vázquez v. Consejo de Titulares, 215 D.P.R. ___, 2025 TSPR...more
In McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs., Inc. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226, 2025 WL 1716136 (U.S. June 20, 2025), the Supreme Court determined that the Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to...more
Signed into law in January 2021, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Communities Act (the Communities Act) requires all 177 cities and towns with access to MBTA public transportation (e.g., commuter rail,...more
On Tuesday, June 24, 2025, the California Court of Appeal heard argument in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado. You may recall that the California Court of Appeal previously held that legislatively enacted development impact fees...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., holding that the federal Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to a...more
Suppose an administrative agency issues a rule governing private conduct. And suppose no one uses an available judicial review process to challenge that rule before it takes effect. If that rule is then invoked against a...more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions: Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 24-7: This case addresses fuel producers’ Article III standing to...more
On May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado (2025) 605 U.S. ____, the Supreme Court gave instruction that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) “is a procedural cross-check, not...more
In Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, the Supreme Court fundamentally altered the nature of judicial review of agency decisions involving Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) under the National...more
In a highly unusual unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 29, 2025 that federal agencies are entitled to “substantial judicial deference” with respect to how they review projects subject to the National...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an 8-0 opinion that clarifies the scope of environmental effects analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and requires substantial judicial deference to...more
These are trying times for those of us who are looking to see whether American rule of law can survive its current challenges. As our executive branch tests the limits of Congressional authority, and bucks the traditions of...more
On January 21, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation. As discussed here, the primary issue is whether the Hobbs Act, which limits judicial...more
In a landmark ruling on 28 June 2024, the US Supreme Court expressly overruled the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine with its decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, eliminating the requirement that courts defer to...more
In a historical opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, released at the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the “Chevron” doctrine, which for so long had controlled judicial review...more
The Supreme Court has now concluded its most recent term, and in its final two days handed down two decisions with major implications in the area of administrative law (each by a 6-3 margin). And while their precise...more
Republicans on Capitol Hill have introduced legislation that would require a review of all federal court decisions, laws, regulations and legal cases that used the Chevron Deference Doctrine as the basis for decisions....more
As summarized by our Government Division colleagues last week, the U.S. Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo has overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., holding that...more