On May 16, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Federal Election Comm’n v. Ted Cruz for Senate, No. 21-12, holding that the federal statute that prohibits repaying campaign-finance loans over $250,000 with money raised after...more
Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Ass’n, No. 18-540.
Most states have enacted legislation regulating “pharmacy benefit managers”— businesses that act as middlemen between health insurers and pharmacies, earning...more
1/17/2020
/ Auto-Dialed Calls ,
Barr v American Association of Political Consultants Inc ,
Benefit Plan Reimbursements ,
Certiorari ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Content-Based Restrictions ,
Denial of Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Final Written Decisions ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Government Debt-Exception ,
Judicial Review ,
Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) ,
Preemption ,
Railroad Retirement Act ,
Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) ,
Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA) ,
Rate Regulations ,
Right To Appeal ,
Rutledge v Pharmaceutical Care Management Association ,
Salinas v United States Railroad Retirement Board ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Stare Decisis ,
State Law Claims ,
TCPA
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Matal v. Tam, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that “disparage” any person violates the First Amendment.
The Lanham Act prohibits...more
On June 18, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, No. 14-144, holding that a State’s specialty vehicle license plates constitute government speech, so a State that allows...more