The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prof. Hal Scott Doubles Down on His Argument That CFPB is Unlawfully Funded Because of Combined Losses at Federal Reserve Banks
Hospice Insights Podcast - What a Difference No Deference Makes: Courts No Longer Bow to Administrative Agencies
False Claims Act Insights - How a Marine Fisheries Dispute Opened an FCA Can of Worms
The Loper Bright Decision - What Really Happened to Chevron and What's Next
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 210: Impacts of the Chevron Doctrine Ruling with Mark Moore and Michael Parente of Maynard Nexsen
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 3: The Future of Agency Deference in Healthcare Regulation
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Supreme Court Hears Two Cases in Which the Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn the Chevron Judicial Deference Framework: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Will Chevron Deference Survive in the U.S. Supreme Court? An Important Discussion to Hear in Advance of the January 17th Oral Argument
Podcast: Chevron Deference: Is It Time for Change? - Diagnosing Health Care
Are You a Foreign Agent? [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 21
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 248: Listen and Learn -- Introduction to Homicide
In Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Interim Storage Partners, LLC (ISP) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The case...more
In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....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
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2025, decided Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), which involved challenges to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC or Commission) decision to grant a...more
On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Nuclear Regulatory Commission, et al. v. Texas, et al., reinstated a license originally issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), permitting the storage of depleted...more
On Wednesday, June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in NRC v. Texas to resolve a circuit split over the storage of spent nuclear fuel between the Tenth Circuit, D.C. Circuit, and Fifth...more
On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, clarifying the standards for judicial review of challenges to agency action under the National Environmental Policy Act...more
Dans l’affaire Opsis Services aéroportuaires inc. c. Québec (Procureur général) (l’« affaire Opsis »), la Cour suprême du Canada (la « CSC ») a statué que la doctrine de l’exclusivité des compétences demeure une composante...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
Supreme Court aims to provide predictability by narrowing the scope of NEPA review - The Supreme Court’s latest ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County marks a significant “course correction” in how...more
Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado, et al. The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified the scope of federal agency review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”)...more
In a significant decision interpreting the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado on May 29, 2025. For certain...more
In a landmark ruling issued May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the D.C. Circuit in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, sharply limiting the scope of environmental review...more
The Supreme Court of the United States’ opinion, issued May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, reaffirms the Court’s earlier, seminal decisions expounding judicial review under the...more
Over the last half century, federal courts have interpreted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to require federal agencies to study an ever-growing range of indirect effects and impacts when approving large...more
On May 29, 2025, in a 8-0 ruling (Justice Gorsuch recused himself from the case), the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit erred in requiring federal regulators to evaluate the potential...more
The decision emphasizes the importance of judicial deference to agencies on NEPA and narrows the scope of environmental analyses....more
Changes in federal and many states’ laws (e.g., just last month in Arizona) may put industry on more equal footing with agencies when interpreting rules and permit terms. If agencies have overreached on these interpretations,...more
In another rebuke to federal regulatory overreach, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (“District Court”) has vacated the Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) 2024 final rule that sought to bring...more
When operating a business, it is nearly impossible not to have to interact with state or other local government agencies. Decisions regarding permits, licenses, government contracts, workforce compliance, environmental...more
On March 31, a judge in the Eastern District of Texas vacated the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) rule that sought to regulate laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) as medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and...more
On March 31, 2025, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas struck down the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) final rule under which FDA would have started regulating most laboratory-developed tests...more
As Wilson Sonsini previously reported,1 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had been preparing the industry to comply with the 2024 LDT Final Rule, which phases out the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy for...more
We have previously written about two consolidated cases (Loper Bright and Relentless), in which the Supreme Court reversed a decades-old rule known as the Chevron doctrine. Broadly, the Chevron doctrine required courts to...more
In a landmark ruling on 28 June 2024, the US Supreme Court expressly overruled the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine with its decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, eliminating the requirement that courts defer to...more