Expert Analysis

• ESG Challenges In Focus After Sierra Club Opposes SEC Rule

  

  The Sierra Club's recent objection to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's climate-related disclosures for investors presents an unusual — pro-disclosure — legal challenge and an opportunity to take a close look at the varying critiques of ESG regulations, say Colin Pohlman, and Jane Luxton and Paul Kisslinger at Lewis Brisbois.

• Opinion

  High Court Should Settle Circuit Split On Risk Disclosures

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court should grant the petition for writ of certiorari in the Facebook case to resolve a growing circuit split concerning when risk disclosures can be misleading under federal securities laws, and its decision should align with the intent of Congress and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, says Richard Zelichov at DLA Piper.

• Opinion

  Why Supreme Court Should Allow Repatriation Tax To Stand

  If the U.S. Supreme Court doesn't reject the taxpayers' misguided claims in Moore v. U.S. that the mandatory repatriation tax is unconstitutional, it could wreak havoc on our system of taxation and result in a catastrophic loss of revenue for the government, say Christina Mason and Theresa Balducci at Herrick Feinstein.

• For Lawyers, Pessimism Should Be A Job Skill, Not A Life Skill

  

  A pessimistic mindset allows attorneys to be effective advocates for their clients, but it can come with serious costs for their personal well-being, so it’s crucial to exercise strategies that produce flexible optimism and connect lawyers with their core values, says Krista Larson at Stinson.

• High Court's Jan. 6 Rioter Case May Have Wide Ripple Effects

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in Fischer v. United States, a case that will determine whether a law enacted after the Enron scandal can be used to prosecute Jan. 6 rioters, and could affect the government’s ability to charge those who impede a range of official proceedings, say Brook Dooley and Sara Fitzpatrick at Keker Van Nest.

• 5th Circ. Clarifies What Is And Isn't A 'New Use' Of PFAS

  

  The Fifth Circuit's March 21 decision in Inhance Technologies v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, preventing the EPA from regulating existing uses of PFAS under "significant new use" provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act, provides industry with much-needed clarity, say Joseph Schaeffer and Sloane Wildman at Babst Calland.

• CORRECTED: Endoscope Patent Case Offers Guidance On Right To Repair

  

  An Alabama federal court's decision in Karl Storz v. IMS reaffirmed that product owners have broad rights to repair or modify their property as they see fit, highlighting the parameters of the right to repair in the context of patent infringement, say Dustin Weeks and Dabney Carr at Troutman Pepper. Correction: Due to an editing error, a previous version of this article and headline attributed the Karl Storz ruling to the wrong court. The error has been corrected.

• Trump's NY Civil Fraud Trial Spotlights Long-Criticized Law

  

  A New York court’s recent decision holding former President Donald Trump liable for fraud brought old criticisms of the state law used against him back into the limelight — including its strikingly broad scope and its major departures from the traditional elements of common law fraud, say Mark Kelley and Lois Ahn at MoloLamken.

• How A Motion Before Justices May Help Trump Beyond Court

  

  Even if Donald Trump loses his presidential immunity claim before the U.S. Supreme Court, the delay created by the motion may mean a trial can't be completed before the November election, says Paul Tuchmann at Wiggin and Dana.

• Opinion

  $175M Bond Refiled By Trump Is Still Substantively Flawed

  

  The corrected $175 million bond posted by former President Donald Trump on Thursday to stave off enforcement of the New York attorney general's fraud judgment against him remains substantively and procedurally flawed, as well as inadequately secured, says Adam Pollock of Pollock Cohen.

• Opinion

  Requiring Leave To File Amicus Briefs Is A Bad Idea

  

  A proposal to amend the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure that would require parties to get court permission before filing federal amicus briefs would eliminate the long-standing practice of consent filing and thereby make the process less open and democratic, says Lawrence Ebner at the Atlantic Legal Foundation and DRI Center.

• NJ Ruling Offers Road Map To Fight Dishonored Check Claims

  

  As ATM and mobile check deposits become more common, a New Jersey state appellate court’s recent ruling in Triffin v. Neptune shows that issuers can rely on copies of checks to defend against claims that checks were wrongfully dishonored after being electronically deposited, say attorneys at Sherman Atlas.

• 4 Ways To Motivate Junior Attorneys To Bring Their Best

  

  As Gen Z and younger millennial attorneys increasingly express dissatisfaction with their work and head for the exits, the lawyers who manage them must understand and attend to their needs and priorities to boost engagement and increase retention, says Stacey Schwartz at Katten.

• A Look At Recent Challenges To SEC's Settlement 'Gag Rule'

  

  Though they have been unsuccessful so far, opponents of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's so-called gag rule, which prevents defendants from denying allegations when settling with the SEC, are becoming increasingly vocal and filing more challenges in recent years, say Mike Blankenship and Regina Maze at Winston & Strawn.

• How 3 Unfolding Cases Could Affect The Energy Industry

  

  Three judicial decisions now in the pipeline — Texas' challenge to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's methane regulations, Delaware's climate suit against big energy companies, and a case before the Supreme Court of Texas on royalty lease interpretation — could have important implications for the energy industry, say Michelle Scheffler and Rachael Cox at Skadden.