On Wednesday, June 23, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., a much-anticipated decision regarding schools’ regulation of off-campus speech. The Court held that while schools may discipline students for some off-campus speech, their ability to do so is much more limited than for on-campus speech. B.L. was a student at Mahanoy Area High School and cheered on the junior varsity team during her freshman year ...
Lawyers and clients, take note: on January 9, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument on probably one of the most consequential cases on the scope of the attorney-client privilege in decades.In re Grand Jury, 23 F.4th1088 (9th Cir. 2021),cert granted, 143 S. Ct. 80 (2022), a tax case, addresses the application of the attorney-client privilege to “multipurpose” communications involving legal and non-legal topics ...
A unanimous Supreme Court held on June 5, 2017, that the SEC’s ability to recover funds through disgorgement is subject to a five-year statute of limitations. The SEC routinely seeks disgorgement as an equitable remedy in actions alleging securities law violations and asserted that disgorgement was not a penalty subject to the five year statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 2462 ...
[!<CDATA[ This term the Supreme Court is set to resolve a circuit split over the extent of a federal district court’s power to order a person “who resides in or is found” in its district “to give testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” pursuant to 28 U.S.C Section 1782(a) ...
We previously reported on recent efforts to rescind the Obama Administration’s rule amending the Clean Water Act’s “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) definition. This followed, as we also reported, the Sixth Circuit’s nationwide stay of the Obama Administration’s WOTUS rule ...
As the Trump administration is pushing forward on its deregulatory agenda and, in particular, its efforts to improve the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and its implementation by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (together, the Services), the Supreme Court is poised to hear a landmark case on designation of critical habitat under the ESA that could provide some guideposts for the Services’ new regulations ...
A divided Supreme Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) when it required certain sources emitting greenhouse gases (GHG) to obtain permits under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Operating Permits (Title V) programs. The decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA (No. 12-1146) on Monday, June 23, reversed the decision of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal that upheld EPA’s rules ...
The Supreme Court has handed down one of the most anticipated Endangered Species Act (ESA) rulings in recent years. In Weyerhaeuser Co. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., the Supreme Court unanimously overruled the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, holding that the Fish and Wildlife Service can only designate property that is “habitat” as critical habitat under the ESA ...
Key Points Adoption of Water Rates not subject to challenge by referendum; challenges are limited to those provided for by Proposition 218. California Supreme Court overrules Court of Appeal decision that found that water rates are not a "tax" under Article II, Section 9. Supreme Court disagrees, finding municipal water rates fall within the broad understanding of the term "tax," and referendum cannot be used to disrupt essential government services ...
On March 21, 2012, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in the much-publicized case of Sackett v. EPA (No. 10-1062), less than three months after oral argument, holding that the Sacketts were not precluded from judicially challenging EPA’s issuance of an administrative compliance order ...
On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not follow appropriate administrative procedures to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and, therefore, was unauthorized to do so. The decision was a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor ...
On June 17, the Supreme Court rejected another court challenge to the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge its minimum essential coverage provisions. For the third time, the Supreme Court upheld the ACA. More than a decade after the ACA was enacted, the long and winding road of ACA challenges may be over and healthcare industry participants may finally be able to rely on the ACA as settled law moving forward ...
In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court rejected efforts to limit access to the abortion pill mifepristone, overturning an earlier decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court ruled that the physicians and medical associations who brought the case did not have the right to challenge the FDA's regulation of the drug. To have standing, plaintiffs must show they have a “personal stake” in the case ...
On November 15, 2011, the Supreme Court of Yukon released its decision in Ross River Dena Council v. Government of Yukon, 2011 YKSC 84. 1 The case is important as it is the first court decision to consider the issue of whether the Government of Yukon has a duty to consult with First Nations when recording quartz mineral claims under the Quartz Mining Act (the “Act”) ...
In a recent decision concerning off-site drilling, the Texas Supreme Court affirmed the San Antonio Court of Appeals1 and held that an oil and gas operator could drill through the mineral estate underlying an adjacent tract of land without the adjacent mineral lessee’s permission. Lightning Oil Co. v. Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC, No. 15-0910, 2017 Tex. LEXIS 463, --- S.W.3d --- (Tex. May 19, 2017) ...
On April 19, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in Société des casinos du Québec inc. v. Association des cadres de la Société des casinos du Québec, marking the end of an almost 15 year-long debate on the freedom of association of managers and their exclusion under the Labour Code ...
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision confirming aboriginal title to approximately five percent of the Tsilhqot’in First Nation’s traditional territory in British Columbia. This decision is very significant because it marks the first time a ruling defines aboriginal title “on the ground”. ABORIGINAL RIGHTS The Constitution Act, 1982 provides that existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are recognized and affirmed ...
In a decision released Wednesday, July 20,(1) the Supreme Court of Canada has overturned Court of Appeal decisions from New Brunswick and Nova Scotia finding that Mi’kmaq people have a treaty right to harvest timber for commercial purposes. In so doing, the Court also provided guidance on how to assess aboriginal title claims ...
In its highly anticipated judgment, the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada found the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act constitutional in a split 6-3 decision. The key issue before the court was whether the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (“GGPPA”) was constitutional. The majority decided that it was, because Parliament has jurisdiction to enact this law as a matter of national concern ...
Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2010 SCC 43 On October 28, 2010, the nine justices of Supreme Court of Canada issued a unanimous judgment in this appeal that confirmed the decision of the British Columbia Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) to accept the 2007 Electricity Purchase Agreement between BC Hydro and Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. for filing ...
On December 2, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed leave to appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal's decision in Standing Buffalo Dakota First Nation v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc., 2009 FCA 308. Lawson Lundell acted for the Respondent, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), and took an active role in successfully defending the appeal proceedings.Standing Buffalo Dakota First Nation v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc ...
Key Points A permitting agency's blanket designation of an entire category of permit decisions as ministerial for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may be held to be improper if the agency has the ability to modify or deny the permit based on any concern that may be examined under CEQA review. Courts will afford a larger degree of deference to an agency’s designation of a single permit decision as ministerial on a case-by-case basis ...
Debtors hoping to discharge their obligations in bankruptcy may find a new hurdle based on the US Supreme Court’s Feb. 22 ruling. Relying on the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code, and Congress’s use of passive voice, the Supreme Court held that funds obtained through fraud, regardless of who committed such fraud, are not dischargeable through bankruptcy ...
At the end of its 2023 term, the United States Supreme Court handed down several buzz-worthy decisions. Two opinions may have substantial and lasting impacts on employers and their efforts to promote diversity and inclusion. In Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General, the Court addressed religious accommodation and clarified the parameters of its “undue burden” standard set forth in its prior decision in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U. S. 63 (1977). 2023 U.S. LEXIS 2790 ...
