In Environmental Protection Agency v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, the Supreme Court is weighing whether legal challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) denial of Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) exemptions for small oil refineries must be filed exclusively in the D.C. Circuit under the Clean Air Act (CAA).Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers Venue and Nationwide Applicability of EPA Actions in Renewable Fuel Case

In a case with potentially sweeping implications for administrative and constitutional law, the Supreme Court is weighing whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) administration of universal telecommunications services violates the nondelegation doctrine—a principle that limits Congress’s ability to transfer legislative authority to agencies or private entities.Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers Nondelegation Challenge to FCC’s Universal Service Program

The Supreme Court is set to resolve a critical issue in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services—whether majority-group plaintiffs must meet a higher evidentiary burden to prove reverse discrimination under Title VII. The case challenges the long-standing requirement that plaintiffs from majority groups must establish “background circumstances” suggesting discrimination, a standard not applied to minority-group plaintiffs.Continue Reading Supreme Court To Rule on Additional Burden for Reverse Discrimination Claims

Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas raises significant questions about the scope of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s decision-making and who can contest those decisions. The issues before the Court are whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) may license private companies to store depleted nuclear fuel and whether a nonparty can challenge the agency’s final orders.Continue Reading Supreme Court Tackles Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Powers and Nonparty Challenges to Final Orders

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)

The clock is winding down on TikTok’s future in the United States, as the popular video-sharing website’s China-based owner, ByteDance, has until this Sunday, Jan. 19, to sell TikTok to a non-Chinese owner or shut it down in the U.S—the day before President-Elect Donald Trump takes office. That’s because Congress recently passed a bipartisan law, called the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (or PAFACA), banning internet service providers and firms from hosting or offering apps controlled by foreign governments hostile to the U.S. The proponents of the Act believe the website gathers user data and that China could manipulate personalized video feeds to influence U.S. public opinion. TikTok is reportedly used by more than 170 million Americans.Continue Reading Tik-ing Down?: Supreme Court Considers TikTok’s Future Amid National Security Concerns

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

In FDA v. Wages and White Lion Investments, LLC,the Supreme Court is set to decide whether the court of appeals erred in ruling that the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) denial of authorization for new e-cigarette products was arbitrary and capricious.Continue Reading Supreme Court To Determine Limits of Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action

In Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, the challenge before the Court is whether the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) mandates a federal agency to study environmental impacts beyond those within its regulatory authority.Continue Reading Supreme Court To Resolve NEPA Dispute Over Environmental Review Boundaries