In Trump v. Cook, the Supreme Court is considering whether to stay a district court order that prevents the President from removing Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook. Although the case reaches the Court at the preliminary-injunction stage, it raises a significant structural question: how far presidential removal power extends over officials serving in congressionally-designed independent institutions such as the Federal Reserve.Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers the Limits of Presidential Removal Power Over the Federal Reserve
Summary
When Property Rules Shape Gun Rights: The Supreme Court Considers Wolford v. Lopez
In Wolford v. Lopez, the Supreme Court is examining how far states may go in regulating licensed concealed-carry firearms after New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). The case challenges Hawaii and California laws that restrict concealed carry in numerous “sensitive places” and, more significantly, prohibit licensed individuals from carrying firearms onto private property open to the public unless the owner gives express permission. The case places front and center a fundamental question: when does a state’s definition of property rights impermissibly burden Second Amendment rights?Continue Reading When Property Rules Shape Gun Rights: The Supreme Court Considers Wolford v. Lopez
Supreme Court Considers Whether Idaho’s Ban on Transgender Participation in Women’s Sports Violates Equal Protection
In Little v. Hecox, the Supreme Court is considering whether Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act violates the Equal Protection Clause by barring transgender women and girls from participating on female-designated sports teams in public schools. The case, argued alongside West Virginia v. B.P.J., places before the Court a closely watched dispute at the intersection of equal protection doctrine, sex-based classifications, and athletic regulation.Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers Whether Idaho’s Ban on Transgender Participation in Women’s Sports Violates Equal Protection
Supreme Court Examines Scope of Rule 60(b) Ability To Reopen Cases
In Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., the Supreme Court will determine whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which allows a district court to “relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding,” can be invoked when a party voluntarily dismisses its case.Continue Reading Supreme Court Examines Scope of Rule 60(b) Ability To Reopen Cases
Supreme Court Tackles Post-Employment Disability Discrimination
Stanley v. City of Sanford raises significant questions about the scope of protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for individuals after employment.Continue Reading Supreme Court Tackles Post-Employment Disability Discrimination
Supreme Court To Clarify Finality of Federal Agency Orders
In McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corporation, the Supreme Court is set to determine whether the Hobbs Act requires district courts to follow the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)—specifically, the FCC’s understanding that the TCPA does not prohibit electronically received faxes, a mundane issue that involves seemingly extinct technology (fax machines), but arising in a case that holds potentially significant constitutional consequences.Continue Reading Supreme Court To Clarify Finality of Federal Agency Orders
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.