Expert Analysis

• 1st Gender Care Ban Provides Context For High Court Case

  

  The history of Arkansas' ban on gender-affirming medical care — the first such legislation in the U.S. — provides important insight into the far-reaching ramifications that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Skrmetti next term will have on transgender healthcare, says Tyler Saenz at Baker Donelson.

• Series

  After Chevron: FCC And Industry Must Prepare For Change

  

  The Chevron doctrine was especially significant in the communications sector because of the indeterminacy of federal communications statutes, so the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of the doctrine could have big implications for those regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, bringing both opportunities and risks for companies, say Thomas Johnson and Michael Showalter at Wiley.

• Series

  After Chevron: Uniform Tax Law Interpretation Not Guaranteed

  

  The loss of Chevron deference will significantly alter the relationship between the IRS, courts and Congress when it comes to tax law, potentially precipitating more transparent rulemaking, but also provoking greater uncertainty due to variability in judicial interpretation, say Michelle Levin and Carneil Wilson at Dentons.

• Series

  After Chevron: Environmental Law May Face Hurdles

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling overturning Chevron deference could prove to be as influential as the original 1984 decision, with far-reaching implications for U.S. environmental laws, including rendering recently promulgated regulations more vulnerable to challenges, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Opinion

  'Trump Too Small' Ruling Overlooks TM Registration Issues

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month in Vidal v. Elster, which concluded that “Trump Too Small” cannot be a registered trademark as it violates a federal prohibition, fails to consider modern-day, real-world implications for trademark owners who are denied access to federal registration, say Tiffany Gehrke and Alexa Spitz at Marshall Gerstein.

• Colo. Ruling Adopts 'Actual Discharge' Test For The First Time

  

  After a Colorado court’s recent decision in Potts v. Gaia Children, adopting for the first time a test for evaluating an actual discharge claim, employers must diligently document the circumstances surrounding termination of employment, and exercise particular caution when texting employees, says Michael Laszlo at Clark Hill.

• Texas Ethics Opinion Flags Hazards Of Unauthorized Practice

  

  The Texas Professional Ethics Committee's recently issued proposed opinion finding that in-house counsel providing legal services to the company's clients constitutes the unauthorized practice of law is a valuable clarification given that a UPL violation — a misdemeanor in most states — carries high stakes, say Hilary Gerzhoy and Julienne Pasichow at HWG.

• Why High Court Social Media Ruling Will Be Hotly Debated

  

  In deciding the NetChoice cases that challenged Florida and Texas content moderation laws, what the U.S. Supreme Court justices said about social media platforms — and the First Amendment — will have implications and raise questions for nearly all online operators, say Jacob Canter and Joanna Rosen Forster at Crowell & Moring.

• Series

  After Chevron: Good News For Gov't Contractors In Litigation

  

  The net result of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision overturning Chevron deference is that individuals, contractors and companies bringing procurement-related cases against the government will have new pathways toward success, say Joseph Berger and Andrés Vera at Thompson Hine.

• Series

  After Chevron: Scale Tips Favor Away From HHS Agencies

  

  The loss of Chevron deference may indirectly aid parties in challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' interpretations of regulations and could immediately influence several pending cases challenging HHS on technical questions and agency authority, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Series

  After Chevron: FDA Regulations In The Crosshairs

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of the Chevron doctrine is likely to unleash an array of challenges against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, focusing on areas of potential overreach such as the FDA's authority under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, say attorneys at Debevoise.

• 2 Options For Sackler Family After High Court Purdue Ruling

  

  After the U.S. Supreme Court recently blocked Purdue Pharma's plan to shield the family that owns the company from bankruptcy lawsuits, the Sacklers face the choice to either continue litigation, or return to the bargaining table for a settlement that doesn't eliminate creditor claims, says Gregory Germain at Syracuse University.

• In Memoriam: The Modern Administrative State

  

  On June 28, the modern administrative state, where courts deferred to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes, died when the U.S. Supreme Court overruled its previous decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council — but it is survived by many cases decided under the Chevron framework, say Joseph Schaeffer and Jessica Deyoe at Babst Calland.

• Series

  After Chevron: Expect Limited Changes In USPTO Rulemaking

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling overturning Chevron deference will have limited consequences for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office given the USPTO's unique statutory features, but it is still an important decision for matters of statutory interpretation, especially those involving provisions of the America Invents Act, say Andrei Iancu and Cooper Godfrey at Sullivan & Cromwell.

• Opinion

  It's Time For Nationwide Race-Based Hair Protections

  

  While 24 states have passed laws that prohibit race-based hair discrimination, this type of bias persists in workplaces and schools, so a robust federal law is necessary to ensure widespread protection, says Samone Ijoma and Erica Roberts at Sanford Heisler.