Balch’s Consumer Finance Compass: How Standing Can Make or Break Certification for Class Action Lawsuits in Debt Collection
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
In North End Chamber of Commerce (“NECC”) v. City of Boston, the NECC and several restaurants in the North End neighborhood of Boston (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit against the City of Boston (“City”), alleging that the City...more
On March 12, 2025, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Kumar v. Koester, dismissing a constitutional challenge to a university’s anti-discrimination policy that added “caste” as a protected class. Effective January 1,...more
On January 30, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a landmark opinion in Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), holding that 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1) and (c)(1), which...more
Last week, the Illinois federal court in Volkswagen Group of America v. Illinois Secretary of State, 2024 WL 2020036 (N.D. Ill. May 6, 2024) granted a motion to dismiss a challenge brought by Volkswagen (“VW”) against a 2022...more
This week, the Court confronted constitutional challenges to a California statute altering the test for determining whether workers are employees or independent contractors and an Arizona statute governing civil forfeitures. ...more
A case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit highlights that, even in times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritizing federal grant money based on race and gender will likely violate the equal...more
On January 17, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Juliana v. United States that a coalition of young people lacked standing to require the federal government to develop a plan to “phase...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held today that federal District Courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction to entertain challenges to ongoing SEC administrative enforcement proceedings. A...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
Signed into law in 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, defined “marriage” for purposes of federal law as a union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and “spouse” as a person of the opposite sex....more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued its decisions in Windsor v. United States and Hollingsworth, et. al. v. Perry et. al., thus ending a four year "fast-track" judicial expedition of the validity of the...more
On June 26, 2013, the US Supreme Court (the “Supreme Court”) struck down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as unconstitutional in the case of United States v. Windsor (“Windsor”). In a related case, the...more
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decisions in two same-sex marriage cases. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, the Court ruled that the proponents of a popular voter initiative that reversed...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision in United States v. Windsor means that same-sex couples who are married under state law...more
Windsor v. United States - Issue: Can the federal government define marriage? Holding: No. Loser: The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was...more
As the 2012 term of the U. S. Supreme Court comes to a close, the Justices left the most politically and emotionally charged decisions for last. On June 26, 2013, the Court handed down its decision striking down the federal...more
This morning, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its highly anticipated decision in United States v. Windsor, ruling that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional on equal protection grounds. With...more