Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
The Loper Bright Decision - What Really Happened to Chevron and What's Next
Podcast - Legislative Implications of Loper Bright and Corner Post Decisions
#WorkforceWednesday®: After the Block - What’s Next for Employers and Non-Competes? - Spilling Secrets Podcast - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Supreme Court Hears Two Cases in Which the Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn the Chevron Judicial Deference Framework: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
The Future of Chevron Deference - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Hooper, Kearney and Macklin on Cutting Edge Topics in the False Claims Act
Part Two: The MFN Drug Pricing Rule and the Rebate Rule: Where Do We Go From Here?
Part One: Two new Medicare Drug Pricing Rules in One Day: What are the MFN and the Rebate Drug Pricing Rules?
Employment Law Now IV-78- BREAKING: US DOL Issues New Regulations After Federal Court Invalidated Old Regulations
Podcast - Developments in FDA & DOJ Regulation and Enforcement of Manufacturer Communications
Podcast - Chamber of Commerce v. Internal Revenue Service
The Federal Maritime Commission (the “FMC” or the “Commission”) recently issued its highly anticipated decision on remand in TCW, Inc. v. Evergreen Shipping Agency (America) Corp. et al. (the “Order on Remand”),[1] a...more
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("the Bureau" or CFPB) released an Interpretive Rule - which is exempt from notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act - that sets out its view on the power of...more
In a major win for providers that serve a disproportionate share of indigent patients, the Supreme Court today upheld the D.C. Circuit’s earlier decision invalidating CMS’s policy to treat beneficiaries enrolled in Part C...more
On January 15, 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Azar v. Allina Health Services, a prominent case involving a challenge by hospitals over when Medicare’s instructions to its contractors impact a “substantive...more
On January 15, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a hotly-contested case involving a challenge by hospitals over when Medicare’s instructions to its contractors impact a “substantive legal standard” and thus...more
Is the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or the government) required to engage in notice and comment rulemaking when it changes a requirement that has an important impact on hospitals' reimbursement? As we reported...more
In what amounts to a victory for the pharmaceutical industry, on October 14, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the interpretive rule issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services...more
A federal court vacated the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Orphan Drug Rule that had allowed certain 340B Drug Pricing Program (340B Program) hospital covered entities to receive discounted prices when...more
As forecast in our June 12, 2015 blog post David Weil, Administrator of the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has released Administrator’s Interpretation (AI) No. 2015-1, entitled “The Application of the Fair...more
Over the last three decades, federal agencies have increasingly used “interpretations” to “explain” what a formal regulation means, rather than to go through the more expensive, complicated and slow process of changing the...more
When federal agencies change their interpretive rules, they are exempt from the formal notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), says the Supreme Court in its recent ruling in...more
Recently, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous judgment that government agency "interpretive rules" are not subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, but cautioned that those same rules do not carry the "force and effect of...more
Federal agencies now have the authority to interpret their own rules. On March 9, 2015, in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n, No. 13-1041, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 9, 2015), the United States Supreme Court effectively gave...more
As we discussed recently, this month marked the opening of the Supreme Court’s new term. For employment law practitioners, this session will be particularly busy with seven cases analyzing a range of employment questions,...more