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
This paper critically assesses the legality of Decision No. 001/ARECOMS/2025, which imposed a temporary suspension on cobalt exports from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Adopted in a context of declining cobalt...more
The US Supreme Court in EPA v. Calumet Shreveport clarified where challenges to certain US Environmental Protection Agency actions under the Clean Air Act must be filed. The Court split the difference between competing...more
Within this term, the US Supreme Court’s major environmental and administrative focus was on statutory text in its environmental and administrative decisions....more
The Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Federal Communications Commission (FCC) v. Consumers’ Research removed the uncertainty that hung over the FCC’s Universal Service Fund (USF) programs since July 2024, when the U.S. Court...more
On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in NRC v. Texas, issued an opinion holding that the State of Texas did not have standing to challenge a license granted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to a private entity,...more
Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) is pleased to present “Loper Bright: Has the Demise of Chevron Deference Mattered?,” a complimentary webinar reviewing changes to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) determinations in light of...more
In Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Interim Storage Partners, LLC (ISP) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The case...more
In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....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
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2025, decided Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), which involved challenges to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC or Commission) decision to grant a...more
On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Nuclear Regulatory Commission, et al. v. Texas, et al., reinstated a license originally issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), permitting the storage of depleted...more
On Wednesday, June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in NRC v. Texas to resolve a circuit split over the storage of spent nuclear fuel between the Tenth Circuit, D.C. Circuit, and Fifth...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
Dans l’affaire Opsis Services aéroportuaires inc. c. Québec (Procureur général) (l’« affaire Opsis »), la Cour suprême du Canada (la « CSC ») a statué que la doctrine de l’exclusivité des compétences demeure une composante...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
Supreme Court aims to provide predictability by narrowing the scope of NEPA review - The Supreme Court’s latest ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County marks a significant “course correction” in how...more
Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado, et al. The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified the scope of federal agency review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”)...more
In a significant decision interpreting the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado on May 29, 2025. For certain...more
In a landmark ruling issued May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the D.C. Circuit in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, sharply limiting the scope of environmental review...more
The Supreme Court of the United States’ opinion, issued May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, reaffirms the Court’s earlier, seminal decisions expounding judicial review under the...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
On May 29, 2025, in a 8-0 ruling (Justice Gorsuch recused himself from the case), the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit erred in requiring federal regulators to evaluate the potential...more
The decision emphasizes the importance of judicial deference to agencies on NEPA and narrows the scope of environmental analyses....more
Changes in federal and many states’ laws (e.g., just last month in Arizona) may put industry on more equal footing with agencies when interpreting rules and permit terms. If agencies have overreached on these interpretations,...more
In another rebuke to federal regulatory overreach, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (“District Court”) has vacated the Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) 2024 final rule that sought to bring...more