Listen to this post

On February 24, the Supreme Court released its unanimous decision in Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist, affirming the Fifth Circuit’s decision to vacate the post-trial final judgment because the district court’s erroneous dismissal of a nondiverse defendant based on improper joinder resulted in a jurisdictional defect that existed at the time of removal, which was not cured prior to final judgment.

Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Rules Post-Trial Final Judgment Must Be Vacated if Jurisdictional Defect Lingers Through Judgment
Listen to this post

In a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed the Texas Court of  Criminal Appeals’ holding that an order prohibiting a criminal defendant and his attorney from discussing the defendant’s testimony during a mid-testimony, overnight recess does not violate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Holds That Courts Can Prohibit Consultation About Ongoing Testimony During Overnight Recess
Listen to this post

On March 31, the Supreme Court released its 8-1 decision in Chiles v. Salazar, holding that Colorado’s Minor Conversion Therapy Law (MCTL), C.R.S. §§ 12-245-101, 12-245-202, unconstitutionally regulates speech as applied to the Petitioner. The narrow ruling offers some clarification of the rules that govern speech incidental to the conduct of regulated professionals.

Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Limits Colorado’s Conversion Therapy Ban
Listen to this post

As summarized in Dykema’s December 2025 edition, the Supreme Court heard oral argument this fall in two consolidated cases (Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. VOS Selections) that presented the question of whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) authorizes the President to impose tariffs. In a 6-3 decision out last month, the Supreme Court held that it does not.

Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Holds President Not Authorized To Impose Tariffs Under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act
Listen to this post

The Supreme Court will utilize the case of Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties (No. 25-83) to clarify an important jurisdictional question in the enforcement of domestic arbitration awards: whether a federal court, which initially exercises jurisdiction over a claim that was sent to arbitration, is able to later confirm or overturn an arbitration award when there is no other basis for federal-court jurisdiction.

Continue Reading Supreme Court to Elucidate Federal Court Jurisdiction in Enforcing Arbitration Awards
Listen to this post

The Supreme Court recently held oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, a case pitting President Trump’s Executive Order barring persons born in the United States from receiving citizenship if their parents lack legal status against the Fourteenth Amendment’s “birthright citizenship” clause. When this Executive Order first came before the Supreme Court last year on a procedural question, the Court curtailed the reach of universal injunctions issued by federal courts. See Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. 831 (2025). This time around, Barbara squarely presents the question of the constitutionality of the Executive Order. And, in an unprecedented move, President Trump attended the oral argument to watch Solicitor General John Sauer defend his Executive Order.

Continue Reading The Supreme Court Reaches the Merits of Birthright Citizenship in Trump v. Barbara
Listen to this post

On March 25, the Supreme Court heard argument in Flowers Foods, Inc v. Brock, a case presenting a key issue regarding interstate commerce: whether “last-mile” delivery drivers are classified as transportation workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce under Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Continue Reading Supreme Court Set To Clarify Whether “Last-Mile” Delivery Drivers Are Engaged in Interstate Commerce
Listen to this post

The Supreme Court heard argument in Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel (No. 24-783), a case that presents a deceptively narrow procedural question with potentially significant consequences for federal jurisdiction: whether the 30-day deadline for removal set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) is subject to equitable tolling. The case arises from high-profile litigation brought by the Michigan Attorney General seeking to decommission Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline, but the Court’s resolution is likely to reverberate far beyond the energy sector.

Continue Reading Enbridge Energy: Can Equitable Tolling Salvage a Defendant’s Untimely Removal to Federal Court?
Listen to this post

In Pung v. Isabella County (No. 25-95), the Supreme Court is considering whether the Takings Clause requires governments to compensate property owners based on the fair market value of their property following a tax foreclosure, rather than limiting compensation to the proceeds generated by the foreclosure sale. The case also asks whether the government’s retention of the difference between the property’s alleged fair market value and the amount realized at auction may implicate the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment. The dispute arises from a foreclosure in which the property was sold for less than its asserted market value, raising questions about whether constitutionally “just compensation” turns on market value or the results of the auction-priced foreclosure process itself.

Continue Reading Supreme Court to Determine the Limits of State Powers in Tax Foreclosures
Listen to this post

On March 4, the Supreme Court heard argument in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport, II, a case that presents an important question at the intersection of federal preemption and state tort law: whether common-law negligent selection claims against freight brokers are preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA). The dispute centers on whether such claims impermissibly regulate a broker’s core services—particularly the selection of motor carriers—or instead fall within the statute’s safety savings clause preserving state authority over motor vehicle safety.

Continue Reading Supreme Court Weighs Whether Negligent Selection Claims Are Preempted By the FAAAA