Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Impact of the Election on the FTC
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Everything You Want to Know About the CFPB as Things Stand Today, and Lots More - Part 2
Podcast - FTC Commissioner Dismissals: Background and Implications
FCPA Compliance Report: Death of CTA
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prof. Hal Scott Doubles Down on His Argument That CFPB is Unlawfully Funded Because of Combined Losses at Federal Reserve Banks
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 55 - The Power of the Presidential Pardon: Traditions and Turning Points
False Claims Act Insights - Are the FCA’s Qui Tam Provisions Unconstitutional? One Federal Judge Says “Yes"
In That Case: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
#WorkforceWednesday® - SpaceX Victory: Court Questions NLRB's Constitutional Authority - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: Can FTC’s Non-Compete Ban Survive Without Chevron Deference? - Spilling Secrets Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Did the Supreme Court Hand the CFPB a Pyrrhic Victory?
Early Returns Law and Politics with Jan Baran: A Supreme Path: From Latin to Campaign Finance Law, to 38 Oral Arguments – Kannon Shanmugam
A Supreme Path: From Latin to Campaign Finance Law, to 38 Oral Arguments – Kannon Shanmugam
Proceso constituyente en Colombia Parte II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Use of Unfairness to Regulate Discriminatory Conduct: A Discussion of the Consumer and Industry Perspectives
John Neiman on the Corporate Transparency Act
After the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term, few areas of government have avoided disruption or controversy, and the regulation of credit unions—normally a quiet corner within the federal bureaucracy—has...more
Delaware had barely birthed changes to Section 144 of its General Corporation Law when the Plumbers & Fitters Local 295 Pension Fund filed a complaint challenging those changes. The plaintiff seeks a declaration that the...more
As widely reported, the Delaware legislature has responded to increasing chatter and speculation about the intentions of some companies—as well as action in some cases—to change their states of incorporation from Delaware to...more
Vice Chancellor Leo Strine famously wrote that "Delaware law does not charter law breakers". In re Massey Energy Co., 2011 WL 2176479, at *20 (Del. Ch. May 31, 2011). Professor William J. Moon picks up on this theme in a...more
In 2018 and 2020, California enacted laws mandating that publicly held corporations (as defined) having their principal executive offices in California have specified minimum numbers of directors who are female and from...more
In a 9-8 decision on December 10, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down Nasdaq’s efforts to promote diversity on public company boards. The case, Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment v. SEC, vacated...more
On December 11, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) order approving The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC’s (Nasdaq’s) board diversity listing standards....more
Since 1972, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has enforced an informal yet impactful provision, Rule 202.5(e) (17 § C.F.R. 202.5(e)), commonly referred to as the “No Admit No Deny” or just “No Deny” policy or,...more
On July 25, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) notified the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that at least part of the basis for the currently pending legal attack on the Nasdaq’s proposed...more
Following the death of George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter protests against racial inequity in 2020, many companies increased their commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), as well as their external...more
A Fifth Circuit panel recently upheld Nasdaq’s diversity disclosure rules after petitioners challenged them under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Alliance For Fair Board...more
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld Nasdaq's board diversity rule, which the SEC first approved in August 2021 and was then challenged as unconstitutionally discriminatory and an improper...more
On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted,...more
Last month, on May 13, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis ruled that SB 826, which requires publicly held California corporations with a principal executive office in California to follow gender...more
The California courts have cast doubt on the legality of laws mandating the number of women and individuals from “underrepresented communities” on the boards of directors of publicly traded corporations based in California....more
California courts have now struck down the second of the state’s two board diversity laws as unconstitutional. The recent decision affects California's gender diversity requirement for certain boards of directors. In April,...more
In Crest v. Padilla, No. 19STCV27561, 2022 WL 1565613 (Cal. Super. May 13, 2022), the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles (Duffy-Lewis, J.) issued a decision following a bench trial finding that Senate...more
In a little over a month’s time, the Superior Court of California (the “Superior Court”) struck down both AB 979 and SB 826, California’s two board diversity statutes. SB 826 required that a public company whose principal...more
Last Friday, the Los Angeles Superior Court in Crest et al. v. Padilla (“Crest”) held that Senate Bill 826 (“SB 826”), also known as the “Women on Boards” law, is unconstitutional. The lawsuit challenging the law was brought...more
Ruling Follows Similar Decision on Underrepresented Minority Directors in April 2022 - A California court has held that California Senate Bill 826, which required that “publicly held” corporations that listed a California...more
On May 13, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, issued a verdict following a bench trial that effectively struck down SB 826, a California statute requiring the boards of public corporations based in the...more
On May 13, 2022, the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles County held that SB 826, the law requiring companies with headquarters in California to have a prescribed number of women on their boards of directors, is...more
The law suffers the same fate as the California board diversity law requiring directors from “underrepresented communities.” On May 13, 2022, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis issued a ruling in Crest...more
California’s Assembly Bill 979 (California Corporations Code § 301.4) was signed into law in September 2020 and requires public corporations with principal executive offices in the state to include a specific number of people...more
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge recently ruled that California Assembly Bill 979 violated the state’s constitution. What is California Assembly Bill 979?...more