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 August 3, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, heard nearly two hours of oral argument in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump. Argument focused on whether the president has the authority to...more
In a closely watched decision issued on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Trump v. CASA, Inc., No. 24A884, that federal district courts lacked authority to issue universal (nationwide) injunctions...more
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Trump v. CASA (the birthright citizenship case) contrasts with two of its opinions from a year ago, Fischer v. United States and Snyder v. United States, in at least the following way:...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday, June 27, that federal district courts may not issue “universal” injunctions (the term the Court used instead of “nationwide” injunctions), as it decided that doing so is beyond their...more
In Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court addressed three emergency applications challenging the use of universal injunctions that bar enforcement of federal action across the country. The case concerned the entry of a temporary...more
On June 27, 2025, in a 6-3 opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Trump v. CASA, Inc., No. 24A884, 606 U.S. ___ (2025), that federal courts lack the power to issue “universal injunctions,” a...more
Today, on the last day of the 2024-2025 term, the Supreme Court of the United States issued five decisions: Trump v. CASA, Inc., No. 24A884: This case addresses whether district courts had the authority to issue...more
The United States Supreme Court issued a decision that curtailed the practice of “universal” or “nationwide” injunctions and may have a significant impact for individuals and organizations that seek redress from the courts,...more
On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. that federal courts lack the authority to issue universal injunctions under the Judiciary Act of 1789. In so ruling, the Court granted the...more
On June 5, 2025—in the midst of heightened scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives triggered by executive orders issued by President Trump as well as various federal agency guidance—the Supreme Court...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
On June 10, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) stayed the Court of International Trade’s (“CIT”) permanent injunction on the Trump Administration’s executive orders...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas recently issued a ruling vacating the “gender-identity related portions” of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC’s) 2024 Guidance interpreting Title...more
President Trump continues to expand his trade policy by announcing proposed increased tariffs, while trading partners attempt to effectuate trade deals with the US, and as President Trump’s authority to impose his initial...more
On February 18, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14215 “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies,” Section 7 of which provides that: “[t]he President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are...more
Two courts this week invalidated the tariffs issued by the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). First, late Wednesday night (May 28), the US Court of International Trade (CIT) in V.O.S. v....more
On May 28, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) issued a decision vacating and permanently enjoining many of the most economically significant tariff orders issued over the past four months by President Trump....more
Summary - Recent rulings in courts throughout the country may signal more uncertainty in the tariff landscape. Here, we provide an overview of a May 28 ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) effectively...more
On May 28, 2025, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) unanimously struck down the extensive tariffs imposed by President Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The...more
On May 28, 2025, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) does not give the President authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from...more
On May 28, 2025, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), in a unanimous decision, held tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of...more
In a sweeping decision released May 28, 2025, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) invalidated a broad set of tariffs imposed by President Trump earlier this year under the International...more
These are trying times for those of us who are looking to see whether American rule of law can survive its current challenges. As our executive branch tests the limits of Congressional authority, and bucks the traditions of...more
Monday, a group of five plaintiffs filed an action in the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) asking the court to enjoin and declare illegal the reciprocal tariffs imposed under Executive Order 14257 (April 2, 2025) and...more
A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a favorable ruling for President Trump, staying a recent district court decision that ruled his termination of National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”)...more