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
The Puerto Rico Supreme Court has issued a landmark decision limiting the deference that Puerto Rico courts owe to administrative agencies’ legal conclusions. The ruling recalibrates the balance of power between courts and...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (together, the “Services”) proposed to rescind their longstanding regulatory definition of “harm”, which has for decades served...more
Changes in federal and many states’ laws (e.g., just last month in Arizona) may put industry on more equal footing with agencies when interpreting rules and permit terms. If agencies have overreached on these interpretations,...more
On May 9, President Trump issued a new Executive Order (EO) titled “Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal Regulations” to address criminal enforcement of regulatory offenses, particularly strict liability offenses where the...more
The distinctions and relationships between the three branches of government—legislative, judicial, and administrative—are not static, but ever-changing, both at the federal and state levels. The separation of powers required...more
On April 9, 2025, President Trump issued a presidential memorandum (the order) directing the heads of all Federal agencies to identify unlawful or potentially unlawful regulations that clearly exceed the agency’s statutory...more
The Trump administration changes course on regulatory interpretations relating to the scope of protections for endangered and threatened species and migratory birds. ...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (Services) proposed a rule to rescind the regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The proposed rule...more
On April 17, 2025, the Departments of Interior and Commerce issued a proposed rule to rescind the regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which, if finalized, would fundamentally alter a...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) (collectively the “Services”) published a notice in the Federal Register of a proposed rulemaking that would...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (collectively, the Services) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register to rescind their respective...more
Earlier this week, my colleagues Adam Kahn and Kevin Chen posted about the proposed rule issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service that would rescind the definition of “harm” under the...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a proposed rule to rescind the regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This...more
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) propose rescinding the regulatory definition of "harm" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that currently includes habitat modification,...more
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (collectively, “Service”) is proposing to rescind the regulatory definition of “harm” in the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) regulations...more
On April 17, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (together Services) published a proposed rule to rescind the long-standing definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species...more
On April 17, 2025, the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration published a notice of proposed rulemaking to rescind the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act...more
Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (together, the Services) proposed rescinding the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Harming a listed...more
On April 9, the White House issued a memorandum directing federal executive departments and agencies to repeal regulations deemed unlawful pursuant to certain U.S. Supreme Court decisions. This directive aims to address...more
Practitioners and government contractors are well aware that federal agencies are afforded a great deal of discretion in making procurement-related decisions. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC),...more
On March 29, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (District Court) vacated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) special 4(d) rule for the northern distinct population segment (DPS) of the lesser...more
In a realignment of judicial review standards, the Kentucky General Assembly overrode Governor Andy Beshear’s (D-KY) veto of Senate Bill (SB) 84, effectively abolishing judicial deference to all agency interpretations of...more
This article focuses on the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. (2024) and how it might apply to Split Dollar life insurance and possibly resurrect one of my favorite life...more
The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Loper Bright case stands to have significant ramifications for various federal agencies, including the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB or Board). The ruling centered...more
The legal landscape regarding federal agency authority fundamentally changed in 2024 with the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This landmark case dismantles the Chevron deference standard,...more