Aligning Business Goals with Legal Strategies Amid Regulatory Change – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
Predictions regarding the 2023 CRA Rule and Section 1071 and how to prepare for expected developments
Early Days of the Trump Administration: Impact on the CFPB — The Consumer Finance Podcast
2024 Payments Year in Review: CFPB and FTC Regulatory Trends – Part Two — Payments Pros – The Payments Law Podcast
FCRA Regulatory Year in Review — FCRA Focus Podcast
The Congressional Review Act – A Critical Tool for the New Administration
#WorkforceWednesday®: NLRB’s Expanding Power - Pushback and Legal Challenges Ahead - Employment Law This Week®
Cannabis Law Now Podcast: What’s Next for Schedule III Marijuana
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Reasons Why the CFPB Should Deny the Petition for Rulemaking on Post-Dispute Consumer Arbitration Agreements
AD Nauseam: Junk Fees Will Keep Us Together
CFPB's Rulemaking Under the FCRA (Part 3) – Crossover Episode With FCRA Focus Podcast
PLI's inSecurities Podcast - The Dangers of Regulation by Enforcement
CFPB's Rulemaking Under the FCRA – Crossover Episode With FCRA Focus Podcast - The Consumer Finance Podcast
CFPB's Larger Participant Rule for Consumer Payments - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Quick Takeaways From the 2024 Proposed Hospice Wage Index Rule
State AG Pulse | State AGs and Feds: The Dynamics of Influence & Collaboration
New Trends in How the CFPB Gathers Information - The Consumer Finance Podcast
State AG Pulse | Attorneys General as State Policymakers: The NY Model
Paredes on SEC Policies & Priorities
Podcast: 2023 Health Policy Outlook - Diagnosing Health Care
On February 14, 2025, the Fifth Circuit denied the appellants’ petition for rehearing en banc in Mayfield v. United States Dep’t of Labor—a September 2024 decision holding that the U.S. Department of Labor’s authority to...more
In a major blow to the Trump administration, a federal court recently struck down two immigration rules that would limit the ability of skilled foreign workers to obtain H-1B visas. In a December 1 ruling, the U.S. District...more
"Joint Employer" Status in the Wage and Hour Context - A New York federal court has struck down a Final Rule from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) that set out a four-factor test to determine “joint employer” status,...more
The Situation: Seventeen states and the District of Columbia filed suit in the Southern District of New York seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the U.S. Department of Labor's ("DOL") new joint employer...more
Q: What does the latest decision on joint employer liability mean for businesses? A: On September 8, 2020, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a decision overturning the U.S....more
On September 8, 2020, Federal District Court Judge Gregory Woods struck down critical parts of the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) new joint employer rule, which took effect in March of this year and which was intended to...more
On September 8, 2020, a federal district court struck down the U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) Final Rule on joint employer liability, concluding that the Rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) by...more
Last week’s EmployNews discussed the National Labor Relations Board’s issuance of final regulations on joint employer status. These regulations followed a similar rulemaking by the Department of Labor that we covered in...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n invalidated a significant line of D.C. Circuit case law known, after the leading case, as the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine. A case involving a series...more
For the past several years, an action by the Mortgage Bankers Association has been brewing in the courts challenging the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) for issuing contradictory opinion letters on whether mortgage loan...more
When federal agencies change their interpretive rules, they are exempt from the formal notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), says the Supreme Court in its recent ruling in...more
Recently, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous judgment that government agency "interpretive rules" are not subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, but cautioned that those same rules do not carry the "force and effect of...more
In a March 9, 2015, decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass'n., the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an interpretative rule issued by an administrative agency does not require notice and opportunity for comment,...more
The U.S. Supreme Court decided in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association that federal agencies are not required to use the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) notice and comment procedures when issuing or making changes to...more
The legal ping-pong match between the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) over whether mortgage loan officers are eligible for overtime appears to be at an end. The Supreme Court recently...more
On March 9, 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously in two consolidated cases that a federal agency does not have to go through the formal rulemaking process, which includes providing public notice and an...more
Companies subject to federal agency regulations sometimes face situations where measures taken to comply with such rules work one day, and then result in violations of those rules the next. Federal administrative agencies...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that when a federal administrative agency wants to amend or repeal an “interpretive rule,” it does not have to follow the notice-and-comment procedures set forth in the...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court wiped away a longstanding judicial doctrine that had placed greater procedural requirements on a federal agency when it changes its prior interpretation of a federal regulation....more
On March 9, 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal agency is not required to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking when it issues an interpretation of a regulation that is significantly different from its prior...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n et al. The case, if decided against the Department of Labor (Thomas E. Perez is the Secretary of Labor), will have a significant...more
On December 1, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association and Nickols v. Mortgage Bankers Association to address whether a federal agency must engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking...more
As we discussed recently, this month marked the opening of the Supreme Court’s new term. For employment law practitioners, this session will be particularly busy with seven cases analyzing a range of employment questions,...more