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
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prof. Hal Scott Doubles Down on His Argument That CFPB is Unlawfully Funded Because of Combined Losses at Federal Reserve Banks
Hospice Insights Podcast - What a Difference No Deference Makes: Courts No Longer Bow to Administrative Agencies
False Claims Act Insights - How a Marine Fisheries Dispute Opened an FCA Can of Worms
The Loper Bright Decision - What Really Happened to Chevron and What's Next
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 210: Impacts of the Chevron Doctrine Ruling with Mark Moore and Michael Parente of Maynard Nexsen
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 3: The Future of Agency Deference in Healthcare Regulation
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Supreme Court Hears Two Cases in Which the Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn the Chevron Judicial Deference Framework: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Will Chevron Deference Survive in the U.S. Supreme Court? An Important Discussion to Hear in Advance of the January 17th Oral Argument
Podcast: Chevron Deference: Is It Time for Change? - Diagnosing Health Care
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) held in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida that a retired employee who could no longer hold or seek to hold her job could not sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified in Stanley v. City of Sanford, No. 23-997, that individuals who have already retired are generally not considered “qualified individuals” eligible to assert claims under the Americans...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Stanley v. City of Sanford, No. 23-997, addressing the scope of protections available to retired workers under Title I of the Americans with...more
On June 2, 2025, the Department of Labor (DOL) launched its Opinion Letter program. Opinion Letters are official written responses from the DOL that explain how it would apply statutes and regulations under particular facts...more
Sapp v. Sims Crane & Equip. Co./Bridgefield Cas. Ins. Co., Fla. 1st DCA 2025, No: 1D2024-0300, May 7, 2025 - In a per curium opinion from the First District Court of Appeal on May 7, 2025, the court addressed what at first...more
On June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, the United States Supreme Court concluded that a retiree who could no longer work because of a disability is not a “qualified individual” entitled to protection under Title I...more
Do former employees have the right to sue their previous employer under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination in the administration of post-employment fringe benefits? Resolving a circuit...more
Last week in Troy Grove v. NLRB, No. 23-1164 (D.C. Cir., June 13, 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit delivered a sharp rebuke to the National Labor Relations Board, finding “irrational” the Board’s...more
The recent federal district court decision in Faulk Company, Inc. v. Xavier Becerra, et al., No. 24-cv-00609-P (N.D. Tex. 2025) significantly alters the primary mechanism used by the U.S. Department of Health and Human...more
This month’s Friday Five examines recent court rulings on both short- and long-term disability benefits, focusing on key interpretations—including how "earnings" are defined under an employer’s plan....more
The US Department of Labor just relaunched and significantly expanded its opinion letter program, offering employers across five enforcement agencies a direct line to legal interpretations of federal laws on wage and hour,...more
In a 9-0 decision authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which held that Catholic Charities Bureau Inc. (the “Charities) and its subsidiaries were not...more
The recent New York Court of Appeals decision in Matter of Schulze v. City of Newburgh Fire Department (April 10) has significant implications for municipal employers and workers’ compensation insurance carriers in New York,...more
Four workers’ compensation decisions came down from the Appellate Division Thursday, May 29. It was a mixed bag: two good for defense, two not so much....more
The U.S. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury have announced that they will pause enforcement of the 2024 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) Final Rule (the “2024 Final Rule”) for...more
Heeding outcry by employers, the Connecticut legislature has nullified the state Supreme Court’s interpretation of temporary partial disability provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act....more
A federal district court in Illinois became the first court to rule that an employer’s credit for a prior partial withdrawal should be applied at the end of the statute’s “waterfall” for calculating withdrawal liability. The...more
The lone decision from the 3rd Dept today is very harsh. In Matter of Coyle v. W & W Steel Erectors, the 3rd Dept. affirmed the Board Panel’s decision to reject an appeal as late, despite the basis for the appeal being a...more
We recently reported on a district court decision holding that the Central States Pension Fund’s calculation of withdrawal liability should not have included contribution rate increases imposed after the Fund’s implementation...more
2025 marks the centenary of the Trustee Act 1925, which received Royal Assent in Parliament on 9 April 1925. This article explores how, 100 years on, the Act continues to provide crucial guidance and protection for trustees,...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court again decided only a single case, that of Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, and, to many Court observers, the most interesting thing about it is the lineup of Justices—one that...more
On April 30, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, No. 23-861, holding that federally employed military reservists called to active duty during wartime or a national emergency are...more
Girardin v. AN Fort Myers Imports, LLC, Fla. 1st DCA, No. 1D2022-1485, February 19, 2025 - The First District Court of Appeal overturned an award for nonprofessional attendant care because the judge of compensation claims...more
In a move with potentially significant implications for entities subject to the Affordable Care Act, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has reversed course and now contends that Section 1557 of the Affordable...more
On January 17, 2025, the ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, claiming that the 2024 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) Final Rule...more