Let me stipulate that trying to evaluate a Supreme Court nominee based on a 30-year old law review article is a bad idea. That said, some of the issues that Obama nominee Merrick Garland wrote about in the mid-1980s are...more
Earlier this year, we covered the Supreme Court’s decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, which held that a state regulatory board composed of “active market participants” was not immune to federal...more
As the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014-15 term draws to a conclusion, the Court has resolved — or will resolve in a matter of days — several cases with potentially wide-reaching implications for a range of important policy and...more
In a closely followed decision with significant consequences for state licensing boards and their members, the Supreme Court in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101...more
On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, holding that a regulatory board made up of market participants is exempt from...more
On February 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 1502 (2015). In the 6–3 opinion, the Court held that an action taken by...more
Federal and state courts are expected to rule on several nationally watched antitrust health care cases during the first half of 2015. As we enter into the first week of the New Year, Nexsen Pruet associate Rachel...more
After nearly two decades of silence on the state action doctrine, on October 14, 2014, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Court’s second case on the subject in two years: The North Carolina Board of...more
On October 14, 2014, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in a case that could have significant implications for hybrid public/private “regulatory” bodies. Many such bodies, like state and local wine...more