By a 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court has ordered the restructuring of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, “ruling the agency’s structure was unconstitutional because its director held too much unchecked power.” The fix,...more
On February 25, 2020, the Supreme Court decided Hernandez et al. v. Mesa, No. 17-1678, declining to extend a judicially created damages remedy for a constitutional violation by a federal employee, a U.S. Border Patrol agent...more
Despite political and economic uncertainties, markets and deal activity were resilient in 2019, and strong fundamentals remain in place heading into 2020. Companies continue to face a challenging litigation and enforcement...more
In just one opinion, the landscape surrounding national security tariffs has undergone a dramatic shift. In Transpacific Steel LLC v. United States, an otherwise narrow dispute regarding steel imports from Turkey subject to...more
On March 25, 2019, the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) issued its opinion in Am. Inst. For Int’l Steel, Inc. v. United States, a decision addressing whether Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (“TEA”)...more
In late March, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a highly anticipated opinion addressing Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Section 232 authorizes the President to take measures against imports...more
On January 27, 2017, barely a week into office, President Donald J. Trump issued Executive Order 13769 for the stated purpose of “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” Both vigorously...more
Last week, in In re National Security Letter, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California found unconstitutional two sections of the federal law allowing the FBI to issue “National Security...more