Regulatory Rollback: CFPB’s Withdrawal of Informal Guidance Sparks New Litigation Dynamics – The Consumer Finance Podcast
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
On September 2, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Frazier v. X Corp., No. 24-1948, --- F.4th ----, 2025 WL 2502133 (2d Cir. Sept. 2, 2025), that a district court cannot intervene in an ongoing...more
The California Supreme Court issued its decision, on August 11, 2025, in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (Golden State Foods Corp.), S284498, addressing whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California’s statutory...more
On August 11, the California Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressing the interplay between the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and California’s statutory requirements for timely...more
The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay...more
After years of appellate cases and several rulings holding California employers to the very strict payment standards of the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the California Supreme Court has, for the first time, addressed...more
In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98—a do-or-die statute requiring employers to pay arbitration fees within 30 days or waive the right to...more
On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in the matter of Dana Hohenshelt v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not preempt the California...more
The California Supreme Court recently held in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a California law that penalizes businesses that have consumer and employee arbitration...more
On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court decided Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, which addresses whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts a California statute known as Senate Bill 707 (SB 707) that regulates...more
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court marks an important moment for arbitration in California, particularly in the context of consumer disputes, employment disputes, and mass arbitrations....more
On Aug. 11, 2025, in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98. The statute, intended to deter the...more
The California Supreme Court issued its decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, addressing whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California's rule governing late payment of arbitration fees, Cal. Code Civ....more
In its August 11, 2025 decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (S284498), the California Supreme Court clarified the reach of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98, the 30-day arbitration fee payment rule. While...more
Case Background - A sanitation employee at Golden State Foods Corporation, signed an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) at the start of his employment. In 2020, after reporting alleged...more
SCOTUS Says: Hobbs Act Does Not Bind a District Court to the FCC’s Interpretation of a Statute - On May 1, 2025, the American Arbitration Association’s new amendments to the Consumer Arbitration Rules officially went into...more
In 1925, Congress enacted the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requiring courts to enforce agreements to arbitrate as valid contract provisions. Business communities and trade associations campaigned vigorously in support of its...more
A recent Fourth Circuit decision extends the trend of cases refusing to use federal statutes to invalidate arbitration agreements waiving the right to bring class claims in federal court. The statute at issue in Espin v....more
In May 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided an issue that has divided the federal courts of appeals. When the claims at issue in a federal court suit are subject to arbitration, does the court have authority to dismiss the...more
Since its enactment in 2019, Code of Civil Procedure 1281.98, which governs arbitration fee payments, has been inviolate: arbitrators do not have the unilateral power to extend the fee payment deadline; “checks in the mail”...more
Real World Impact: A recent New Jersey Superior Court decision interpreting the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) may require New Jersey employers to defend an employee’s...more
Since its enactment, California courts have universally established the California Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.97 et seq., which governs the timely payment of fees in arbitration, allows no room for error....more
Executive Summary: On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Spizzirri, holding that federal district courts have no discretion under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“the FAA”) to dismiss a case once...more
On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled that an individual does not need to work directly in the transportation industry to be within the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) exemption for...more
On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision that answers the question of whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) exemption from arbitration for any “class of workers engaged in foreign or...more
On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) transportation exemption—meaning the FAA would not apply—only relates to workers within the transportation industry....more