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 held that a district court in an enforcement proceeding is not bound by an agency’s pre-enforcement interpretation of a statute. Rather, as the Court held in McLaughlin Chiropractic...more
In the last month, we have gained additional insight into the future of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) regulation and how class action litigation might be shaped by...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. marks a sea change for judicial review of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) orders, and creates both risks and...more
Does prior express written consent permit calls/texts to consumers during the Federal Communications Commission’s (“FCC”) proscribed quiet hours? As our readers know, the FCC is now considering this very issue insofar as it...more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 opinion holding that U.S. district courts are not bound to follow a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute even though the Hobbs Administrative Orders Review Act (“Hobbs...more
With its recent ruling in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. ___ (2025), the U.S. Supreme Court has continued its trend of reining in the power of agencies and giving litigants more avenues...more
In a landmark development for lawsuits brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), on June 20, 2025, the US Supreme Court issued its widely anticipated decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....more
On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. —- — S.Ct. —- 2025 WL 1716136 (2025), addressing whether, under the Administrative Orders Review...more
The Supreme Court recently signaled a further shift away from judicial deference to administrative rulings. The question of whether the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA or “the Act”) covers online faxes (think your...more
Key Takeaways: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Hobbs Act does not require district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to follow federal administrative agencies’ legal interpretations of federal statutes....more
Supreme Court just handed down the widely-watched decision in McLaughlin Chriopractric v. McKesson. Held: The Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a...more
The Administrative Order Review Act (better known as the "Hobbs Act") grants "exclusive jurisdiction" to the federal courts of appeals to "determine the validity" of most FCC orders and rules and certain other agency orders....more
In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court released a landmark opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc., v. McKesson Corp., further reshaping the scope of judicial review of agency action. ...more
The Supreme Court continued its recent trend toward limiting the independence of federal administrative agencies with its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. In McLaughlin, the Court held...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., holding that the federal Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to a...more
On Friday, June 20th, the Supreme Court in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assoc., Inc. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226 (U.S. June 2025), ruled in a 6-3 decision that the Hobbs Act does not bind federal district courts in civil...more
Suppose an administrative agency issues a rule governing private conduct. And suppose no one uses an available judicial review process to challenge that rule before it takes effect. If that rule is then invoked against a...more
Following in the wake of last years’ Loper Bright and Relentless, Inc. decisions that ended agency deference, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assoc., Inc. v. McKesson Corp. that the Hobbs Act...more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions: Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 24-7: This case addresses fuel producers’ Article III standing to...more
In a landmark decision released on June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the Hobbs Act does not require federal district courts to treat Federal Communications Commission (FCC) orders as binding precedent in private...more
With six more decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court decided no fewer than 11 cases in two business days last week, following 12 others over the previous two weeks. In other words, summer vacation is upon us, as the Court’s...more
In a significant ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered its 6-3 opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation, addressing the scope of judicial review under the Hobbs Act. The decision marks a...more
On January 21, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation. As discussed here, the primary issue is whether the Hobbs Act, which limits judicial...more
The United States Supreme Court will hear the case McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates Inc. v. McKesson Corporation, which poses the question of whether federal district courts, under the Hobbs Act, must adhere to the rulings...more