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
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in one case: Barrett v. United States, No. 24-5774: A jury convicted Dwayne Barrett of robbery under the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, which prohibits...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, No. 22-1074: This case involves the “unconstitutional conditions doctrine,” set forth in Nollan v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n,...more
One of the most interesting aspects of marijuana law and policy in the U.S. is its tendency to strike at our most foundational democratic principles. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Gonzales v. Raich, that Congress...more
Law firms periodically receive requests for advice from CPAs regarding a client’s need to come into compliance with the relatively new and sometimes confusing “economic nexus” or “Wayfair” rules for selling goods or providing...more
The due process framework that has cabined personal jurisdiction over nationwide and global businesses for the last eight decades — since the U.S. Supreme Court's 1945 ruling in International Shoe Co. v. Washington — looks...more
When served with a summons and complaint for an out-of-state lawsuit, one of the first things a defendant is likely to ask is—can this court compel me to appear? Given that most transportation and logistics-related disputes...more
The test for personal jurisdiction, which asks whether a defendant can be compelled to litigate in a particular state, has been extensively developed over the past several decades, and notably refined in the last fifteen...more
Every first-year law student learns two ways that a court can have jurisdiction over a corporate defendant. If the defendant has "minimum contacts" with a state, and the plaintiff's injuries arise out of those contacts, then...more
On June 27, 2023, the United States Supreme Court held in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern R. Co., No. 21-1168, 2023 WL 4187749, that Norfolk Southern submitted to the state of Pennsylvania’s general jurisdiction (that is, being...more
The dormant Commerce Clause is one of the oldest constitutional doctrines, dating to the early 1800s. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the dormant...more
The Supreme Court issued a decision on May 11, 2023, upholding California’s Proposition 12 against a challenge under the U.S. Constitution’s Dormant Commerce Clause. Proposition 12 is a ballot initiative passed by the state’s...more
On Monday, March 28, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear industry’s challenge to California’s Proposition 12, a law restricting certain confinement practices in industrial animal agriculture. The case, styled National...more
The Pennsylvania Department of Revenue issued a bulletin announcing its view that the US Supreme Court’s sales and use tax decision in Wayfair v. South Dakota applies equally to corporate net income tax and authorizes the...more
High Court’s action clears pathway for low-carbon fuel standard programs. On May 13, 2019, the US Supreme Court denied certiorari in American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), et al., v. O’Keeffe, et al...more
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court decided on the much-anticipated case of South Dakota v. Wayfair, 585 U.S. ___, 138 S.Ct. 2080 (2018). At issue was the validity of a statute applying sales tax to internet retailers that...more
On June 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court dramatically altered the state tax world when it issued its decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc....more
Executive Summary - After Wayfair, unless Congress intervenes: The physical presence sales tax taxability standard is now gone - at least under circumstances like those presented by South Dakota’s situation. Income...more
Maine Revenue Services issued guidance, August 8, 2018, regarding remote sellers’ sales tax collection obligations in light of the Supreme Court’s June 21, 2018 decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc....more
In its 5-4 decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, the U.S. Supreme Court gave states the authority to require online retailers to collect state sales taxes even if the retailer has no physical presence in a state. The decision...more
Just about every State in the U.S. imposes a “sales tax” on the retail sale of goods and services in their State. That sales tax is required to be collected and remitted by the seller of the goods or services; however, if the...more
Stand Your Ground! Substantial Nexus Lives After Wayfair - The U.S. Supreme Court decided in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. that the U.S. Constitution does not require a physical presence in a taxing state in order for...more
The US House Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday, July 24 at 10:00 am EDT in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building. According to a press release circulated July 19, the topic of the hearing will be...more
In a sign of how far e-commerce has changed in just a little over two decades, on June 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its 1992 decision of Quill v. North Dakota (504 U.S. 298). The implications of this...more
What is the practical risk that states would take in applying Wayfair retroactively? And should taxpayers rush to limit exposure for historical periods by entering into voluntary disclosure agreements with states that might...more