October Term 2024

Subscribe to October Term 2024 via RSS

Congress authorized the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to establish and implement universal service subsidy programs to promote affordable and reliable nationwide communications services funded by mandatory contributions from telecommunications carriers. 47 U.S.C. § 254. As part of the regulatory scheme to implement its programs, the FCC appointed the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), a private company, to administer the programs. Among its tasks, the USAC calculates projections used in computing universal service contribution rates (a tax determined by a private entity according to the Fifth Circuit), which the FCC may adopt.Continue Reading Grant Alert: The Court Continues To Scrutinize the Administrative State but Questions the Claimed Procedural Laxity of Challenges to Agency Action

In Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States, ex rel. Todd Heath, another case testing the limits of the False Claims Act (FCA), the question presented is whether requests for money from the FCC’s E-rate program are “claims” under the False Claims Act (FCA).Continue Reading Supreme Court Scrutinizes Definitions To Determine Scope of False Claims Act

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

In E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, the Supreme Court will grapple with the question of whether the standard of proof for Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemptions is a preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence. Under the FLSA, employers must pay employees time-and-a-half for work exceeding 40 hours a week unless an exemption applies.Continue Reading Supreme Court Examines Standard of Proof for FLSA Exemptions

The Supreme Court recently decided U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In dissent, Justice Thomas questioned the constitutionality of the qui tam regime under the False Claims Act (FCA), by which a private “relator” represents the interests of the United States in litigation. Concurring with the majority, Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett nevertheless agreed with Justice Thomas that the constitutional issue he raised should be considered in “an appropriate case.” Dykema covered the decision, including the dissent, in a previous article.Continue Reading Federal Court Tees Up False Claims Act Constitutionality Dispute

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

In Royal Canin v. Wullschleger, the Supreme Court will determine whether a plaintiff, whose state court action has been removed by the defendant to federal court, may seek to have the case remanded to state court by amending the complaint to remove all references to federal law.Continue Reading Supreme Court Grapples With Footnotes and Forum-Shopping