On June 27, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Janus v. American Federal of State, County, and Municipal Employees, holding that the First Amendment does not permit states to require public-sector employees to contribute...more
6/28/2018
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Fair Share Contribution ,
First Amendment ,
Janus v AFSCME ,
Non-Union ,
Public Employees ,
Public Sector Unions ,
SCOTUS ,
Stare Decisis ,
Union Dues
On June 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, upholding President Trump’s “travel ban,” which restricts admission to the United States for citizens of certain countries.
Presidential Proclamation No....more
6/27/2018
/ Appeals ,
Establishment Clause ,
Foreign Nationals ,
Immigration and Nationality Act ,
Immigration Reform ,
Likelihood of Success ,
Muslims ,
National Origin Discrimination ,
Presidential Decrees ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Travel Ban ,
Trump Administration ,
Trump v Hawaii
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, holding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act allows some but not all of the property of a state sponsor of terrorism to be attached to...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Digital Realty Trust v. Somers, holding that the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibition on employer retaliation against whistleblowers extends only to individuals who have reported...more
2/22/2018
/ Anti-Retaliation Provisions ,
Digital Realty Trust Inc v Somers ,
Dodd-Frank ,
Internal Reporting ,
Rule 21F ,
Sarbanes-Oxley ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Securities Violations ,
Whistleblower Protection Policies ,
Whistleblowers
1. Freedom of Speech; Labor and Employment. Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, No. 16-1466.
May a government require its employees to pay agency fees to an exclusive representative for...more
On June 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, holding that, when the government offers a public benefit to organizations that meet specified criteria, the Free Exercise...more
On June 23, 2017 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board, holding that when the Merit Systems Protection Board dismisses a government employee’s “mixed case” (a case where the employee claims...more
On June 22, 2017 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Maslenjak v. United States, holding that to revoke naturalized citizenship based on a crime committed in the naturalization process, the government must show that the crime had...more
At the end of 2016, we highlighted the United States Supreme Court’s hearing of Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court as a decision “of great concern to drug and device companies” as it pertains to plaintiff forum...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Matal v. Tam, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that “disparage” any person violates the First Amendment.
The Lanham Act prohibits...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, holding that in determining whether a forum’s exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over a party complies with the Fourteenth...more
On March 22, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., No. 15-866, holding that artistic designs on cheerleading uniforms were eligible for copyright...more
On December 6, 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. United States ex rel. Rigsby, No. 15-513, holding that the False Claims Act (FCA) does not mandate dismissal of the case when a...more
On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 14-981, holding that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits the University of Texas’ use of race-conscious...more
On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, holding that a Department of Labor formal regulation that reversed the Department’s longstanding informal position exempting service advisors...more
On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed Technologies, Inc. v. Lee, holding that, in an inter partes review, the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may give a patent claim its broadest reasonable...more
On June 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., No. 15-375, holding that, in assessing whether a prevailing party in copyright litigation should recover its attorneys’ fees, the...more
On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., No. 14-1513, and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc., No. 14-1520, holding that a patent-infringement plaintiff can...more
On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistrict Commission, No. 13-1314, holding that a State legislature has standing to challenge a State constitutional amendment...more
On June 22, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720, declining to overrule Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964), and holding that a contract transferring or licensing patent...more
On June 18, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, No. 14-144, holding that a State’s specialty vehicle license plates constitute government speech, so a State that allows...more
On June 15, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Kerry v. Din, concluding that when the government denies a visa to enter the United States to the alien spouse of a U.S. citizen based on the alien’s terrorist activities, the...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Mellouli v. Lynch, holding that a legal permanent resident may not be deported for a state-law drug conviction unless that conviction necessarily involves a drug covered by the...more
On April 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Mach Mining, LLC v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The Court held that the EEOC’s compliance with its statutory obligation to attempt to informally conciliate claims...more
On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354, holding that, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), closely-held for-profit corporations cannot be required by...more