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
In the landscape of California civil litigation, few procedural devices carry the weight, complexity, and consequence of a motion for summary judgment (MSJ). Governed by California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c (which sets...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
Din v. Sutter Valley Hospital (June 10, 2025, C099101, unpublished) puts the spotlight on a dividing line in California law: when can a hospital be liable for actions taken by its medical staff? The case sharpens the contrast...more
The Congressional Review Act (“CRA”), enacted in 1996, allows Congress to disapprove federal regulations promulgated by government agencies within 60 legislative working days after the rule is submitted to Congress. In order...more
Like a gift to land use lawyers that never stops giving, the strange and wondrous interrelationship between CEQA and the Permit Streamlining Act (“PSA”; Gov. Code, § 65920 et seq) continues to inspire litigation and require...more
Under the Subdivision Map Act, the creation of legal parcels prior to 1972 requires more than a deed referencing multiple lots—only a conveyance that separates a portion of land from contiguous property creates a new legal...more
California Labor Code section 512 guarantees a thirty (30) minute, off-duty, meal period for employees after five (5) work hours, and a second thirty (30) minute, off duty, meal period after ten (10) work hours. Section 512...more
California Fish and Game Code Section 5937 has long been a subject of scholarly debate with uncertainty in its application. In a published opinion filed on April 2, 2025, California’s Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate...more
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, in part, “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The federal Endangered Species Act deals with a different type of “taking.”...more
On April 2, 2025, California’s Fifth Appellate District issued a decision in Bring Back the Kern v. City of Bakersfield (April 2, 2025, F087487) (2025 WL 98443). The Court held the “self-executing” reasonableness requirement...more
On April 2, 2025, the Court of Appeal for California’s Fifth Appellate District issued its decision in Bring Back the Kern v. City of Bakersfield, 2025 S.O.S. 909. That case held that courts must apply the reasonableness...more