In Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis (No. 24-304), the Supreme Court has the opportunity to decide whether a federal court may certify a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) when some members of the proposed class lack any Article III injury. If the Court reaches the question presented, its ruling has the potential to send shockwaves through the high-stakes world of class action litigation, where defendants are often pressured to settle claims regardless of their merit when faced with potentially catastrophic damages awards. But a gleaming procedural infirmity appears likely to prevent the Court from doing so.Continue Reading Supreme Court Weighs Certification of a Class Including Uninjured Plaintiffs
Decision Alert: Supreme Court Clarifies Medicare DSH Reimbursement—Key Implications for Hospitals in Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Kennedy
On April 29, in a 7-2 decision authored by Justice Barrett, the Supreme Court held in Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Kennedy (No. 23-715) that the “Medicare fraction” of the Medicare program includes only those patients who were eligible to receive supplementary social income (SSI) payments during the month of their hospitalization, as opposed to patients who were merely enrolled in the SSI system at the time of their hospitalization.Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Clarifies Medicare DSH Reimbursement—Key Implications for Hospitals in Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Kennedy
Supreme Court Considers Whether EPA’s Collective Disapprovals of State Environmental Plans Create a Nationwide Action Subject to D.C. Circuit Review
In a pair of consolidated cases—Oklahoma v. EPA and PacifiCorp v. EPA—the Supreme Court is considering the scope of the Clean Air Act’s (CAA) judicial review provision, and whether the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) coordinated disapproval of state implementation plans (SIPs) constitutes a “nationally applicable” action or one of “nationwide scope or effect” that must be challenged in the D.C. Circuit.Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers Whether EPA’s Collective Disapprovals of State Environmental Plans Create a Nationwide Action Subject to D.C. Circuit Review
Decision Alert: Supreme Court Narrows EPA Authority Under Clean Water Act in 5-4 Decision
In the closely watched case, City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that Section 1311(b)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) does not authorize the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to condition compliance with its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits on the quality of the receiving waters. The ruling is expected to significantly impact wastewater treatment facilities nationwide by narrowing the scope of EPA enforcement authority.Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Narrows EPA Authority Under Clean Water Act in 5-4 Decision
The Supreme Court Weighs Rule 60(B) Finality Against Rule 15(A)
Earlier this month, in BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman, the Supreme Court considered whether a court must balance the finality principles of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) with the liberal amendment policies of Rule 15(a) when plaintiffs seek to reopen a final judgment to file an amended complaint.Continue Reading The Supreme Court Weighs Rule 60(B) Finality Against Rule 15(A)
Up in Smoke: The Supreme Court Explores Who Can Challenge FDA Orders Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act—and Where.
In FDA v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., the Supreme Court will decide whether an e-cigarette manufacturer can seek review of the FDA’s denial of its marketing application in a forum where it does not reside by joining a retailer who does.Continue Reading Up in Smoke: The Supreme Court Explores Who Can Challenge FDA Orders Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act—and Where.
Hypotheticals and Humor: The Supreme Court Explores Wire Fraud’s Proof Boundaries
What do a horse named Charlie, a painting of Grover Cleveland, $1 million worth of coal, and hiring a babysitter have in common? All were the subject of hypothetical scenarios raised during the December 9, 2024, oral argument in Kousisis v. United States. The question before the Court is whether conspiring to commit wire fraud, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, requires proof of harm to a property interest in the form of financial loss.Continue Reading Hypotheticals and Humor: The Supreme Court Explores Wire Fraud’s Proof Boundaries
Supreme Court to Examine Medicare Reimbursement Calculations
In what promises to be another opportunity to further clarify the scope of federal agency influence after the fall of Chevron deference, on June 10, 2024, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Advocate Christ Medical Center, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, Secretary of Health and Human Services. The case involves the calculation of Medicare reimbursements to hospitals under the “disproportionate share hospital” (DSH) adjustment, which provides additional compensation to hospitals serving an unusually high percentage of low-income patients. Continue Reading Supreme Court to Examine Medicare Reimbursement Calculations
Navigating the New Landscape of Clean Water Regulations: Supreme Court Weighs in on EPA’s Authority Amidst Shifting Deference Standards
In what may be its first opportunity to test the waters of federal agency influence after the fall of Chevron deference, on October 16, 2024, the Supreme Court heard arguments in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency. This case comes to the Court after a divided Ninth Circuit panel rejected a challenge to the EPA’s authority to enforce the Clean Water Act (“CWA” or the “Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., through “general narrative prohibitions” spelled out in permits issued under the EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permitting program.Continue Reading Navigating the New Landscape of Clean Water Regulations: Supreme Court Weighs in on EPA’s Authority Amidst Shifting Deference Standards
Last Month at the Supreme Court | 2023 Term Conclusion
Our final edition of Last Month at the Supreme Court for the 2023 Term captures the outcomes of several critical cases in which the Justices tackle modern issues like the constitutionality of social media speech restrictions, standing to sue officials allegedly pressuring social media companies, and challenges to a federal plan imposing emissions standards.
Continue Reading Last Month at the Supreme Court | 2023 Term Conclusion