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
The first six months of the second Trump Administration have brought a variety of transformations to the federal government. As many of these changes unfold on nearly a daily basis, it can be difficult to ascertain exactly...more
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced on July 9, 2025, that it will no longer conduct environmental analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when...more
On July 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 vote, granted the Trump Administration’s request to stay a permanent injunction that had ordered the reinstatement of three Democratic CPSC Commissioners: Mary Boyle,...more
A federal judge has ruled that the President Trump violated federal law when he fired Rebecca Slaughter, a Democrat, as a member of the FTC....more
On July 2, 2025, the Tax Court issued its unanimous reviewed opinion in JM Assets, LP v. Commissioner, 165 T.C. 1. It held that the Service did not timely issue a final partnership adjustment (FPA) to JM Assets, LP (JM...more
This week, I discuss with my colleague, Kelly N. Garson, a Senior Associate here at B&C and Regulatory Consultant for The Acta Group (Acta®), B&C’s consulting affiliate, the implications of the demise of Chevron deference,...more
In a decision with sweeping implications for the administrative law and the regulation of tele-communications practices—to say nothing of one of the most dangerous class-action devices in history—the Supreme Court ruled in...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
In one of its final decisions in 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in interpreting the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), signaling a broader...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 United States Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) addressed in a June 5th interpretive letter the application of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (“HMR”) applicable to reclassifying a...more
U.S. District Court Judge Barbara J. Rothstein granted, in part, the CFPB's motion to withdraw its amicus brief filed by the Biden-era CFPB regarding the "proper interpretation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's...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
The NRC is undergoing a period of transition, including the unexpected departure of Commissioner Christopher Hanson. Commissioner Christopher Hanson Dismissed On June 14, 2025, Commissioner Christopher Hanson was relieved...more
On June 9, 2025, Sullivan & Worcester submitted a comment letter to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in response to Notice 2025-6, which requests public input on the possible expansion of the cloud transaction framework...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued an opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado et al., which narrowed the requirements of environmental review under the National...more
On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court—minus recused Justice Neil Gorsuch—decided Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, the first major NEPA dispute before the Court in 20 years. It’s a really big deal—coverage...more
After nearly two decades of silence, the US Supreme Court on May 29, 2025, weighed in on an issue that has tremendous significance for permitting of complex infrastructure and other development projects—the depth and breadth...more
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in the case City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, in which it held that “end-result” requirements routinely imposed by the U.S....more
A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 29 that lower courts had overstepped their bounds when reviewing federal agency actions pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The decision in Seven County...more
In a significant decision issued on May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Surface Transportation Board (the Board) was entitled to substantial deference under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and...more
On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court held that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) — which requires federal agencies to analyze the environmental impacts of projects that they carry out, fund, or approve — does not...more
Readers of this blog will recall our recent discussion concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Court overruled the long-standing doctrine of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v....more
On May 29, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued an 8-0 opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado, et al. that affirmed agency deference in review of environmental documents...more
Individuals and businesses regulated by independent federal agencies may find immediate changes in agency leadership following a May 22, 2025, ruling by the United States Supreme Court....more