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
Over the past several months, international students in F-1 status have experienced heightened scrutiny. Increasing numbers of reports indicate that students are facing visa revocations and the termination of their records in...more
The Department of State (DOS) has recently increased scrutiny of existing student visa holders and those requesting new student visas at U.S. consulates abroad. Some F-1 visas and SEVIS records have been rescinded or...more
In the last five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided several cases involving the limits on federal appellate review of immigration agency decisions, turning out an average of a decision per year. Originally published...more
USCIS has been issuing challenges and even denials to some H-1B petitions based upon allegations of suspected lottery fraud. USCIS appears to be taking the position that fraud occurs when multiple registrations are submitted...more
The filing of an H-1B petition requires submission of a Labor Condition Application certified by the U.S. Department of Labor. The LCA certifies, among other things, that the H-1B beneficiary will be paid the prevailing wage...more
On January 20, 2023, as part of a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs in Edakunni v. Mayorkas, USCIS agreed to adjudicate Forms I-539 and I-765 for extensions of H-4 and L-2 spouses and employment authorization documents...more
On January 8, 2021, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) published a final rule that would dramatically change how H-1B cap petitions are selected in the annual “lottery.” Under this final rule, the current random...more
On December 1, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a decision overturning two recent Interim Final Rules promulgated by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and U.S. Department of...more
The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay a day after a federal district court held the Public Charge Rule violated the Administration Procedures Act (APA) and issued summary judgment in favor...more
On October 8, 2020, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its interim final rule, “Strengthening the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa Classification Program,” which will become effective December 7, 2020. This rule...more
On October 8, 2020, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its long-speculated interim final rule, “Strengthening the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa Classification Program.” According to the interim final rule’s...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In light of the recent Supreme Court decision, DHS continues the DACA program, but implements new guidance as it conducts a complete review of the program....more
USCIS Will Increase Filing Fees as of October 2, 2020 - On July 31, 2020, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) announced it will increase filing fees effective October 2, 2020. The fee increases will...more
On June 18, 2020, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration's termination of the Deferred Action for Children Arrivals (DACA) program violated Federal law....more
Court Decision - On June 18, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) decision in 2017 to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program violated the...more
The Trump administration has already announced its goal to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy commenced on June 15, 2012 by President Obama within the next six months post the decision of the U.S....more
In a landmark 5–4 decision issued June 18, the US Supreme Court held that the Department of Homeland Security’s rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was unlawful agency action....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Supreme Court allows DACA to proceed on the grounds that DHS did not meet the regulatory Administrative Procedures Act requirements in rescinding the program. The Court did not rule on the legality of...more
- The U.S. Supreme Court held that the Trump administration did not properly terminate the DACA program under the APA. - The DACA program is restored to its full form, as it existed prior to the rescission in 2017. -...more
On Thursday, June 18, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump Administration’s attempt to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program for undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children, known as...more
On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in DHS v. Regents of the University of California, No. 18-587, effectively blocking the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) attempt to end...more
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., No. 18-587; Trump v. NAACP, No. 18-588; Wolf v. Vidal, No. 18-589: In 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) announced the Deferred Action for Childhood...more
The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program on June 18, 2020, finding that the Department of Homeland Security’s actions in retracting the immigration relief program...more
On June 18, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision regarding the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) choice to rescind the immigration program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”). The...more
On June 18, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, holding that the Department of Homeland Security’s rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood...more