On April 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, holding that to qualify as an “automatic telephone dialing system” (commonly referred to as an “autodialier”) under Section 227(a)(1)(A) of the...more
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715, holding that in assessing whether a congressional subpoena directed at personal information of the president is “related to, and in...more
7/13/2020
/ Appeals ,
Congressional Committees ,
Congressional Subpoenas ,
Donald Trump ,
Executive Branch ,
Foreign Interference in US Elections ,
Income Taxes ,
Money Laundering ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Separation of Powers ,
Tax Returns ,
Terrorism Funding ,
Trump v Deutsche Bank AG ,
Trump v Mazars USA LLP ,
Trump v Vance ,
Vacated ,
Valid Legislative Purpose
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635, holding that President Donald Trump was required to respond to a state subpoena of his tax returns and other financial information because “Article...more
7/13/2020
/ Absolute Immunity ,
Appeals ,
Article II ,
Criminal Investigations ,
Donald Trump ,
Financial Statements ,
Heightened Scrutiny ,
Income Taxes ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Sitting President ,
Standard of Review ,
State Prosecutors ,
Subpoena Duces Tecum ,
Subpoenas ,
Supremacy Clause ,
Tax Returns ,
Trump v Deutsche Bank AG ,
Trump v Mazars USA LLP ,
Trump v Vance
On July 8, 2020, the United States Supreme Court decided Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, No. 19-267, holding that the First Amendment’s “ministerial exception,” under the religion clauses, bars courts from...more
7/9/2020
/ Age Discrimination ,
Appeals ,
Disability Discrimination ,
Employment Discrimination ,
First Amendment ,
Freedom of Religion ,
Ministerial Exception ,
Our Lady of Guadalupe School v Morrissey-Berru ,
Religious Schools ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Teachers
On July 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, No. 19-631, holding that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA) exception for calls made for the sole purpose of...more
7/8/2020
/ ATDS ,
Auto-Dialed Calls ,
Barr v American Association of Political Consultants Inc ,
Cell Phones ,
Compelling Governmental Interest ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Content-Based Restrictions ,
Debt Collection ,
Exceptions ,
Federal Bans ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Government Debt-Exception ,
Robocalling ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Strict Scrutiny Standard ,
TCPA
On June 29, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, holding that the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) must be removable at will by the...more
On June 30, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. v. Booking.com B. V., No. 19-46, holding that a generic term, like “Booking,” combined with “.com” does not...more
7/1/2020
/ Acquired Distinctiveness ,
Appeals ,
Booking.com ,
Domain Name Registration ,
Domain Names ,
Generic Marks ,
Lanham Act ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
United States Patent and Trademark Office v Booking.com BV ,
USPTO
On December 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Rotkiske v. Klemm, et al., No. 18-328, holding that the one-year statute of limitations set out in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) begins to...more
12/11/2019
/ Cause of Action Accrual ,
Credit Cards ,
Debt Collectors ,
Default Judgment ,
Discovery Rule ,
Equitable Tolling ,
FDCPA ,
Rotkiske v. Klemm ,
SCOTUS ,
Service of Process ,
Statute of Limitations
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18-302, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that are “immoral” or “scandalous” violates the First...more
6/25/2019
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Viewpoint Discrimination
On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Flowers v. Mississippi, No. 17-9572, holding that the state court committed clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a black prospective juror...more
6/24/2019
/ Batson claim ,
Clear Error Standard ,
Criminal Convictions ,
Discriminatory Intent ,
Flowers v Mississippi ,
Murder ,
Peremptory Challenges ,
Race Discrimination ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more
6/21/2019
/ Administrative Orders ,
Administrative Procedure ,
Appellate Courts ,
Binding Precedent ,
Dismissals ,
Due Process ,
Exclusive Jurisdiction ,
FCC ,
Hobbs Act ,
Interpretive Rule ,
Judicial Review ,
Legislative Rule ,
PDR Network LLC v Carlton & Harris Chiropractic Inc ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Set-Asides ,
TCPA ,
Unsolicited Advertisements ,
Unsolicited Faxes ,
Vacated
On June 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, No. 16-1140, holding that the petitioners were likely to succeed on their claim that California’s...more
6/27/2018
/ Abortion ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
FACT Act ,
Family Planning Clinics ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v Becerra ,
Notice Requirements ,
Reproductive Discrimination ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard of Review ,
Strict Scrutiny Standard ,
Substantial Government Interest
On June 25, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Ohio v. American Express, No. 16-1454, holding that American Express’s antisteering rules, which prevent merchants from discouraging customers’ use of Amex cards to...more
6/26/2018
/ American Express ,
Anti-Steering Rules ,
Anticompetitive Agreements ,
Antitrust Provisions ,
Burden of Proof ,
Credit Card Surcharges ,
Merchant Fees ,
Merchants ,
Ohio v American Express ,
Rule-of-Reason Analysis ,
SCOTUS
On June 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Carpenter v. U.S., No. 16-402, holding that law enforcement, absent exigent circumstances, must get a warrant to obtain cell-site location information (CSLI) that...more
6/25/2018
/ Carpenter v US ,
Cell Phones ,
Cell Site Location Information (CSLI) ,
Criminal Convictions ,
Electronic Records ,
Electronically Stored Information ,
Exigent Circumstances ,
Fourth Amendment ,
Geolocation ,
Location Data ,
Probable Cause ,
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Third-Party ,
Warrantless Searches
On June 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., No. 17-494, holding that states can require out-of-state sellers to collect and remit sales tax on goods shipped to the state, even if...more
6/22/2018
/ Appeals ,
Commerce Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Internet Retailers ,
Interstate Commerce ,
Out-of-State Companies ,
Physical Presence Test ,
Quill ,
Reversal ,
Sales & Use Tax ,
SCOTUS ,
South Dakota v. Wayfair ,
Substantial Nexus
On June 26, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., No. 16-373, holding that the three-year statute of repose in the Securities Act of 1933 cannot...more
On June 23, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, holding that, in determining whether a regulatory taking has occurred under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, courts should...more
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Ziglar v. Abbasi, No. 15-1358, which was consolidated with Ashcroft v. Abbasi, No. 15-1359 and Hasty v. Abbasi, No. 15-1363, holding that detention-policy claims...more
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194, holding that a North Carolina statute that bars registered sex offenders from accessing social networking websites that...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, vacating the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanding to the Ninth Circuit to consider the “concrete-injury” requirement...more
On April 4, 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided Evenwel v. Abbott, No. 14-940, holding that a state may draw legislative districts based on total population.
In 2013, Texas adopted a new map for state Senate...more
On October 21, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission announced an agreement with Sprint to resolve allegations that Sprint violated disclosure requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Sprint will pay $2.95 million...more
On March 9, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, No. 13-1041, holding that a federal administrative agency does not need to use the Administrative Procedure Act’s (APA)...more
In Thomas v. Taco Bell Corp.,[3] a franchisee association planned a promotion in which text messages were sent to 17,000 people in the Chicago area to promote a local sweepstakes contest. The lower court dismissed the case...more
On June 19, 2014, the United States Supreme Court decided Lane v. Franks, No. 13-483, holding that a public employee's sworn testimony is entitled to First Amendment protection when it is given outside the scope of ordinary...more