Podcast - Hot Topics in Nuclear Waste
On January 14, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions: Barrett v. United States, No. 24-5774: This case addresses whether a defendant who commits a single act that violates two subsections of...more
Contrary to the presupposition of many, the U.S. Supreme Court did not render a decision on Friday resolving the question of the president’s authority to impose tariffs through executive orders and related questions...more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - AB v. Barrow - insurance, notice, 58-month delay - Athos Overseas v. YouTube - copyright infringement, DMCA, safe harbor - USA v. Barry - sentencing, credit card fraud - ...more
On October 23, 2025, federal authorities unsealed indictments against more than 30 individuals—including current and former NBA players and coaches—in connection with two sweeping criminal investigations into illegal sports...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which regulates telemarketing, fax advertising, and the National Do Not Call Registry, has been around for over 30 years. During this time, the Federal Communications Commission...more
On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6–3 decision in Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), authored by Justice Kavanaugh with Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito dissenting....more
This post reviews the U.S. Supreme Court’s significant regulatory and administrative law decisions from the Court’s 2024 Term and previews cases on the docket for Fall 2025. ...more
Those of you who attended Law Conference of Champions III last week heard from the Czar on the critical impact of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in McKesson. That SCOTUS ruling through out Hobbs act deference...more
In the last month, we have gained additional insight into the future of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) regulation and how class action litigation might be shaped by...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. marks a sea change for judicial review of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) orders, and creates both risks and...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) continues to be hotly litigated by class action plaintiffs’ attorneys, with filed cases increasing significantly over the last year. ...more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 opinion holding that U.S. district courts are not bound to follow a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute even though the Hobbs Administrative Orders Review Act (“Hobbs...more
In a decision with sweeping implications for the administrative law and the regulation of tele-communications practices—to say nothing of one of the most dangerous class-action devices in history—the Supreme Court ruled in...more
With its recent ruling in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. ___ (2025), the U.S. Supreme Court has continued its trend of reining in the power of agencies and giving litigants more avenues...more
On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. —- — S.Ct. —- 2025 WL 1716136 (2025), addressing whether, under the Administrative Orders Review...more
Key Takeaways: The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Hobbs Act does not require district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to follow federal administrative agencies’ legal interpretations of federal statutes....more
In one of its final decisions in 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in interpreting the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), signaling a broader...more
In McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs., Inc. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226, 2025 WL 1716136 (U.S. June 20, 2025), the Supreme Court determined that the Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to...more
The TCPA landscape is being reshaped in real time and we’re here to bear witness. With the Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2385 (June 20, 2025), the...more
Supreme Court just handed down the widely-watched decision in McLaughlin Chriopractric v. McKesson. Held: The Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a...more
On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded a lower court decision, holding that the Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a statute. In this...more
The Administrative Order Review Act (better known as the "Hobbs Act") grants "exclusive jurisdiction" to the federal courts of appeals to "determine the validity" of most FCC orders and rules and certain other agency orders....more
In Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Interim Storage Partners, LLC (ISP) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The case...more
In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....more
In a new 6-3 opinion, the US Supreme Court has cast further doubt into TCPA litigation. The decade-old underlying case, McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation et al., was filed after the defendant...more