On September 11, 2024, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued an opinion holding that the Minnesota Franchise Act (MFA) does not “categorically preclude an out-of-state company from enforcing a claim for unfair practices” under...more
Loper Bright Review: The Death of Chevron Deference?
On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine of agency deference in its Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo decision. The doctrine takes...more
On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court decided Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, No. 22-1008, holding that a facial claim against enforcement of a regulation accrues under the Administrative...more
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Moyle v. United States, No. 23-726, and Idaho v. United States, No. 23-727, holding the writs of certiorari before judgment granted to hear the cases were improvidently...more
On June 14, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Garland v. Cargill, holding that semi-automatic rifles equipped with bump stocks are not “machineguns” under the National Firearms Act of 1934, and the Bureau of Alcohol,...more
On May 30, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided NRA v. Vullo, No. 22-842, holding that the National Rifle Association (NRA) stated a claim that Maria Vullo, while acting as the superintendent of the New York Department of...more
On June 15, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians et al. v. Coughlin, No. 22-227, holding that the Bankruptcy Code unambiguously abrogates the sovereign immunity of all...more
6/19/2023
/ Appeals ,
Bankruptcy Code ,
Bankruptcy Court ,
Chapter 11 ,
FACTA ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v Coughlin ,
Native American Issues ,
SCOTUS ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Tribal Corporations ,
Tribal Loans
On June 6, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon, No. 21-309, holding that a Southwest Airlines employee whose work involved loading and unloading cargo from planes that travel across state...more
On April 21, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Cassirer et al. v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation, No. 20-1566, holding that federal courts hearing state-law claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act...more
On April 21, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Vaello Madero, No. 20-303, holding that the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause does not require Congress to make Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits...more
On March 3, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center, No. 20-601, holding that the Sixth Circuit erred in prohibiting Kentucky’s attorney general from intervening to defend an abortion law...more
On June 28, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Pakdel v. San Francisco, holding that the plaintiffs were not required to exhaust state remedies through an inverse condemnation proceeding to bring a § 1983 claim for...more
On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Yellen v. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, holding that Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) qualify as “Indian tribes” under the Indian Self-Determination and...more
On June 23, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Collins v. Yellin, holding that: (1) shareholders could not bring a claim that the Federal Housing and Finance Agency (FHFA) violated the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of...more
On June 21, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Goldman Sachs Group Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, holding that: (1) the generic nature of misrepresentation is often important evidence of price impact that...more
6/23/2021
/ Arkansas Teacher Retirement System v Goldman Sachs Group ,
Basic v Levinson ,
Burden of Persuasion ,
Certiorari ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Conflicts of Interest ,
Goldman Sachs ,
Investors ,
Presumption of Reliance ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities Exchange Act ,
Securities Litigation ,
Shareholders
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 June 29, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided June Medical Services L.L.C. et al. v. Russo, Interim Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, holding that abortion providers had standing to assert the...more
7/1/2020
/ Abortion ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Due Process ,
Fourteenth Amendment ,
Legitimate State Interest ,
Patient Rights ,
Physician Admitting Privileges ,
Physicians ,
Right to Privacy ,
Russo v June Medical Services LLC ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Stare Decisis
On June 1, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, holding that the Appointments Clause of the Constitution does not restrict the appointment...more
6/2/2020
/ Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Aurelius Investment LLC v Puerto Rico ,
Board Members ,
Chapter 9 ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Creditors ,
De Facto Officer Doctrine ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Municipal Bankruptcy ,
Puerto Rico ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Senate Confirmation Hearings ,
State and Local Government
On April 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Babb v. Wilkie, holding that the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §633a(a), does not require proof that age...more
4/9/2020
/ ADEA ,
Age Discrimination ,
Babb v Wilkie ,
Burden of Proof ,
But For Causation ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Federal Employees ,
Hiring & Firing ,
McDonnell Douglas Formula ,
Remedies ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard of Care ,
Summary Judgment