What Every Law Firm Leader Can Learn from Law Day and the Perkins Coie Ruling: On Record PR
100 Days In: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week® - #WorkforceWednesday®
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday®: Can the President Fire NLRB Members Without Cause? SCOTUS May Decide - Employment Law This Week®
072: Prepare For Trump Executive Orders To Hit Your Law Firm
Early Returns Podcast with Jan Baran - Brody Mullins: Goldilocks and the Wolves of K Street, A Historical Account of Lobbying in the U.S.
(Podcast) The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
NYS Gov. Hochul’s 2025 State of the State – Legislative Recap
Early Returns Podcast: FEC Commissioner Trey Trainor – Understanding and Respecting the Federal Election Commission
Early Returns Podcast with Jan Baran - AG Jason Miyares: Addressing Virginia’s Legal Issues
Podcast - Defense Dynamics: Navigating the Post-Election Landscape for the National Security Sector, Part 2
#WorkforceWednesday®: What a Trump Win Means for Unions - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: NLRB’s Expanding Power - Pushback and Legal Challenges Ahead - Employment Law This Week®
False Claims Act Insights - Are the FCA’s Qui Tam Provisions Unconstitutional? One Federal Judge Says “Yes"
Podcast — Drug Pricing: How the Demise of Chevron Deference and Other Litigation May Impact the Pharmaceutical Industry
#WorkforceWednesday®: DOL Authority Challenged - Key Rulings on Overtime and Tip Credit - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: After the Block - What’s Next for Employers and Non-Competes? - Spilling Secrets Podcast - Employment Law This Week®
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Balch’s Decision Dive: Texas Trial Court Struck Down the FTC’s Noncompete Rule
In That Case: Department of State v. Muñoz
In a win for landlords, on June 6th, 2025, the Federal Circuit denied the government’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in Darby Development Company, Inc. v. United States. Darby arose out of a nationwide...more
On May 31, 2025, the Texas legislature passed House Bill 149 (H.B. 149), the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (“TRAIGA”), and presented the bill to Governor Greg Abbott on June 2, 2025 for signature....more
The growth of final-mile package deliveries, especially to residential delivery following the global pandemic, raises important legal questions about the transportation service performed by delivery drivers and their...more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Scott v. Miami - probable cause - USA v. Ferretiz-Hernandez - immigration, reentry prohibition, constitutionality - Jekyll Island v. Polygroup Macau - personal jurisdiction,...more
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, vacating and remanding a Sixth Circuit ruling against a heterosexual woman in a Title VII “reverse...more
On Friday, Judge Matthew J. Maddox of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland ruled that the removal of Democratic Commissioners from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) without cause was unlawful....more
Deivert v. Zartman and Borough of Northumberland, 2025 WL 83747 (M.D.Pa. 2025) - (Neither a municipality nor a municipal manager had immunity under the Pennsylvania Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act (“PPSTCA”) for the...more
On 5 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that, in order to establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority group” is not required to show “background...more
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected use of a special legal test for plaintiffs to prove illegal bias in reverse discrimination cases. ...more
Unionization campaigns often become heated, resulting in claims and criticism by both management and organized labor that walk a fine line between protected speech and illegal intimidation....more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court changed course and dismissed the writ of certiorari that it previously had granted in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, No. 24-304 (U.S. June 5, 2025). In doing so,...more
In early April, President Trump issued several energy-related presidential actions aimed at reviving the coal industry. These actions could boost the domestic coal industry, including by rolling back environmental regulations...more
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous ruling authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the U.S. Supreme Court revived the employment discrimination claims of an Ohio woman who contends that she was the victim of “reverse...more
A Pennsylvania federal district court held that a school district may have violated fundamental parental rights by not informing a parent of her child’s request to be considered transgender. In 2022, an eighth-grade...more
Restem filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,803,176, directed to stem cells obtained from umbilical cord tissue and isolated through a two-step process to create a specific cell marker expression...more
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Jackson in Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Services, ruling that the “background circumstances” test—which applies a heighted...more
A recent Supreme Court decision clarified that discrimination claims brought by members of majority groups in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases cannot be subject to a heightened evidentiary burden. In Ames v. Ohio...more
A recent Supreme Court decision is reshaping how employers must think about workplace discrimination—confirming that all employees, majority or minority, are held to the same legal standard under Title VII. This shift could...more
A case pending before the Supreme Court could jeopardize the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) mandate that certain preventive services be provided on a first dollar coverage basis to plan members. Kennedy v. Braidwood Management...more
Can members of a majority group be subject to a heightened pleading standard for their Title VII discrimination claims? The United States Supreme Court answered this question with a unanimous “no” in Ames v. Ohio Department...more
In the first two parts of this series, we explored how grandparents in Ohio can seek visitation rights and obtain temporary custody through parental agreements. But what happens when a grandparent believes that a more...more
Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson states that Title VII does not require a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority” group to present “additional background circumstances” as the lower court had...more
The ongoing legal battle over President Trump’s tariffs has taken another not completely unexpected turn, as a federal appeals court has decided to keep the tariffs in effect—at least for now. This decision comes amid a...more
The US District Court for the Eastern District of California on May 2, 2025 granted summary judgment in favor of the California Chamber of Commerce, holding that Proposition 65 warning requirements for acrylamide in food...more
Before June 5, 2025, the law (at least in some jurisdictions) was that majority-group employees (e.g., white or heterosexual) had to show additional “background circumstances” in addition to a prima facie case to prove...more