Injunctions for All – Speaking of Litigation Podcast
The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Adopts Pro-Labor Remedies for Alleged Unfair Labor Practices, Part III
#WorkforceWednesday: New COVID-19 Testing Guidance, NLRB Increases Use of Injunctive Relief, D.C. Amends Near-Universal Ban on Non-Competes - Employment Law This Week®
The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Adopts Pro-Labor Remedies for Alleged Unfair Labor Practices, Part II
The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Adopts Pro-Labor Remedies for Alleged Unfair Labor Practices
JONES DAY TALKS®: Consumer Protection Enforcement Changes Likely After SCOTUS AMG Decision
Key Takeaways from the AMG Capital Management v. FTC Decision
#WorkforceWednesday: New AB5 Exemptions, EEOC COVID-19 Updates, Joint-Employer Rule Partially Struck Down - Employment Law This Week®
In December 2022, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued two important opinions regarding guardianships in Michigan. The first case, In re Guardianship of Roberta More Asplund, had to do with guardianship of an incapacitated...more
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the 2022 OPPS Rule’s 340B rates on a prospective basis, meaning that HHS will pay 340B hospitals the drug’s average sales...more
Report on Patient Privacy 22, no. 5 (May, 2022) - Compared to other agencies, the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is a little fish in the big federal pond, but it has an outsize effect on HIPAA covered entities (CEs) and...more
In Religious Sisters of Mercy v. Azar, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9156 (D.N.D. Jan. 19, 2021), a district court awarded a group of plaintiffs permanent injunctive relief against a provision of the Affordable Care Act ("ACA") that...more
Florida AG Ashley Moody sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) over allegations that the CDC’s Framework for Conditional Sailing and Initial Phase...more
Per recent federal employment law guidance, private employers can generally require employees to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as long as they comply with federal employment laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of...more
Introduction - Recent litigation has once again illustrated the ways in which religious beliefs and bioethics can collide under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits discrimination in healthcare by entities...more
Report on Medicare Compliance 29, no. 30 (August 24, 2020) - A federal court on Aug. 17 blocked HHS from enforcing its revised definition of sex discrimination in Sec. 1557, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of...more
On July 8, 2020, the United States Supreme Court decided two cases addressing employers’ religious freedoms in very different contexts: one concerning whether religious school teachers could challenge adverse employment...more
On July 8, 2020, in the consolidated cases of Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania et al. and Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Pennsylvania et al., the U.S. Supreme...more
On Wednesday, July 8, 2020, the Supreme Court weighed in on whether religious employers are required to offer their employees health plans that include contraceptive coverage. In its opinion in Little Sisters of the Poor v....more
The Supreme Court just upheld two Trump-era rules expanding religious and moral exemptions to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraceptive mandate. The July 8 decision in Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania is just...more
In Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court this week upheld regulations issued by the U.S. Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services (the Departments) that...more
On July 8, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two 7-2 decisions involving religious exemptions to federal employment and benefits laws....more
This week, the Supreme Court ruled that employers may exclude coverage for birth control from their health plans based upon moral or religious objections to contraception. ...more
Until this week, federal law required most insurance plans to cover the cost of birth control without a copay. However, the history behind this issue can be traced back much further....more
On July 8, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania and Trump v. Pennsylvania, holding that the Department of Health and Human Services validly created...more
On September 25, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision to deny a motion for a preliminary injunction to stay the implementation of the new policy for allocating...more
A federal district court has ruled, for a second time, in favor of hospitals challenging the legality of Medicare payment cuts targeting certain hospitals in the 340B drug pricing program. In a May 6, 2019 decision, the U.S....more
The claim that the MMR vaccine caused autism was meritless on its face, held the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of New York (Doe v. Merck & Co, Inc.). The action filed on behalf of “Baby Doe” stemmed from Merck-manufactured...more
Timely Topics - By Shannon B. Hartsfield - The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on Jan. 18, 2018, the creation of a new division within its Office for Civil Rights (OCR). OCR is described as...more
Senators Call For Removal of Dioxane from Cosmetic Products - U.S. Sens. Chuck Schumer (DN. Y.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (DN. Y.) have petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to prohibit detectable levels of 1,4dioxane...more