Recent Developments in Florida Energy and Environmental Legislation
State AG Pulse | The Laboratories of Democracy
On February 26, 2025, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, District II, determined that a program that provided taxpayer-funded educational grants to financially needy students of specific racial, national origin, and ancestry...more
On January 30, 2025, the Appellate Division Second Department handed down a decision regarding the constitutionality of the New York State Voting Rights Act. The case, Clarke v. Town of Newburgh, concerned a challenge under...more
On January 20th, President Trump issued an executive order entitled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Trust to the Federal Government.” The executive order included provisions for the...more
On December 2, 2024, a Dane County, Wisconsin Circuit Court issued a landmark decision striking down portions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 (“Act 10”) and thus affecting the collective bargaining rights of public sector employees...more
On November 6, 2024, New Yorkers across the state voted “yes” on the Equal Rights Amendment, commonly known as Proposition 1. The newly passed Equal Rights Amendment expands New Yorkers’ constitutional civil rights and...more
On September 30, the Superior Court of Fulton County held that the Georgia Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act (the LIFE Act) is unconstitutional on both due process and equal protection grounds. Accordingly, Georgia’s...more
Failure to Extend Extracurricular Opportunities to Parochial School Students Violates Free Exercise In Religious Rights Foundation of Pa. v. State College Area Sch. Dist., No. 23-CV-01144, 2023 WL 8359957 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 1,...more
On November 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire decided Brown v. Secretary of State, a 3–2 decision that held that partisan gerrymandering (the act of drawing voting districts in a way that favors one political party...more
On November 7, 2023, the citizens of the state of Ohio voted to codify reproductive rights, including the right to abortion, in the state constitution. In 2019, Ohio banned nearly all abortions once fetal cardiac...more
Last year, Superior Courts in Los Angeles County invalidated two California statutes requiring specific diversity mandates for California public company boards (Senate Bill 826 “SB 826” and Assembly Bill 979 “AB 979”). The...more
On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted,...more
This week, the Court addresses the retroactive effect of a preemption decision by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and the constitutionality of California’s prohibition on an incumbent appearing on the ballot...more
Ruling on the State of Georgia’s November 18, 2022 Emergency Petition for Supersedeas, this past Wednesday (November 23, 2022) the Georgia Supreme Court enjoined the lower court’s decision thereby reinstating the prohibitions...more
The first half of 2022 illuminated important trends in the corporate governance space. In recent months, there were notable developments in the enforcement of economic sanctions and export control measures, and the oversight...more
Last month, on May 13, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis ruled that SB 826, which requires publicly held California corporations with a principal executive office in California to follow gender...more
The California courts have cast doubt on the legality of laws mandating the number of women and individuals from “underrepresented communities” on the boards of directors of publicly traded corporations based in California....more
California courts have now struck down the second of the state’s two board diversity laws as unconstitutional. The recent decision affects California's gender diversity requirement for certain boards of directors. In April,...more
On Friday, May 13, a California Superior Court judge struck down Senate Bill (“SB”) 826—California’s landmark gender diversity law regarding the representation of women directors on the boards of publicly held corporations...more
On May 13, 2022, a judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled in Crest v. Padilla, Case No. 19STCV27561, that California’s statute requiring California-based public companies to have one to three women on their...more
In a little over a month’s time, the Superior Court of California (the “Superior Court”) struck down both AB 979 and SB 826, California’s two board diversity statutes. SB 826 required that a public company whose principal...more
On May 13, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, issued a verdict following a bench trial that effectively struck down SB 826, a California statute requiring the boards of public corporations based in the...more
The law suffers the same fate as the California board diversity law requiring directors from “underrepresented communities.” On May 13, 2022, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis issued a ruling in Crest...more
On April 1, 2022, a Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that California Assembly Bill 979—a bill designed to increase diversity and improve the persistently low number of underrepresented groups on corporate...more
Earlier this month, a Los Angeles County Superior Court order put the brakes on one of California’s much contested board diversity requirements, a decision certain to reverberate among the business community and efforts to...more
On April 1, 2022, a Los Angeles County judge ruled that AB 979, which requires publicly held corporations with a principal executive office in California to have at least one member of the Board of Directors from an...more