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 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
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
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
On May 12, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) on drug pricing: “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients.” The EO requires a 30-day government negotiation with drug companies...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 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
On May 28, 2025, in a major development, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of International Trade (“CIT”) held that President Trump’s recent imposition of tariffs pursuant to the International Emergency Economic...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
The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) – an association of several hundred employers and employer associations – sent letters to US Attorney General Pam Bondi to direct the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to...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
President Trump recently imposed a wide variety of tariffs on U.S. imports....more
Recently, President Donald Trump directed agencies to take steps to immediately repeal illegal regulations under the good cause exception to the notice-and-comment requirement. Because this latest effort could have...more
President Trump issued a Memorandum on April 6 directing the heads of all executive departments and agencies to identify on a fast-track basis (60 days) certain categories of “unlawful and potentially unlawful” regulations...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
On April 9, 2025, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum (Memorandum) entitled Directing the Repeal of Unlawful Regulations. The Memorandum – part of a broader “Department of Government Efficiency” Deregulatory...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