Federal Court Strikes Down FDA Rule on LDTs - Thought Leaders in Health Law®
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court decision yesterday that likely will get the most attention is Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, in which a 6–3 Court that lined up according to the conservative vs. liberal stereotype, held...more
"Wrong-house" raids by law enforcement can cause terror and physical injury, significant property damage, and potentially innocent civilian deaths. Suits for damages almost always follow....more
On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions that clarify a deceptively simple question under the Clean Air Act: Where should lawsuits challenging EPA actions be filed? The rulings – EPA v. Calumet Shreveport...more
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the Medicaid Act’s any-qualified-provider provision does not confer individual rights enforceable under 42 U.S.C. §1983. This decision reverses the Fourth Circuit’s...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
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., holding that the federal Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to a...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that courts may not impose heightened evidentiary requirements on Title VII plaintiffs simply because...more
On June 18th, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two rulings determining where challenges to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) actions under the Clean Air Act must be filed. The Court held challenges to EPA actions that are...more
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Thompson v. United States may have significant implications for the False Claims Act (FCA). In Thompson, the Court was tasked with interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered an opinion that could dramatically change the landscape of class actions under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)....more
Suppose an administrative agency issues a rule governing private conduct. And suppose no one uses an available judicial review process to challenge that rule before it takes effect. If that rule is then invoked against a...more
On June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, the United States Supreme Court concluded that a retiree who could no longer work because of a disability is not a “qualified individual” entitled to protection under Title I...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a pair of decisions in EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining and Oklahoma v. EPA on June 18, 2025, resolving two related circuit splits regarding proper venue for challenging certain U.S....more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions: Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 24-7: This case addresses fuel producers’ Article III standing to...more
On June 5, 2025—in the midst of heightened scrutiny of diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives triggered by executive orders issued by President Trump as well as various federal agency guidance—the Supreme Court...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in NRC v. Texas gives nuclear energy generators and storage facilities, as well as NRC, the latest win in the decades-long struggle over used-fuel storage....more
On June 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari in Navellier & Associates, Inc. v. SEC, declining to resolve a circuit split regarding the circumstances under which the U.S. Securities and Exchange...more
On June 12, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in A. J. T. v. Osseo Area Schools, No. 24-249, holding that discrimination claims brought under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of...more
On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more
On June 12, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that claims based on educational services brought under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of...more
A recent Supreme Court decision clarified that discrimination claims brought by members of majority groups in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases cannot be subject to a heightened evidentiary burden. In Ames v. Ohio...more
A case pending before the Supreme Court could jeopardize the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) mandate that certain preventive services be provided on a first dollar coverage basis to plan members. Kennedy v. Braidwood Management...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued an opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado et al., which narrowed the requirements of environmental review under the National...more
On June 6, 2025, in a decision authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned a ruling of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which denied Catholic Charities Bureau an exemption from the state’s...more
On May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado (2025) 605 U.S. ____, the Supreme Court gave instruction that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) “is a procedural cross-check, not...more