In That Case: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
#WorkforceWednesday® - SpaceX Victory: Court Questions NLRB's Constitutional Authority - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: Can FTC’s Non-Compete Ban Survive Without Chevron Deference? - Spilling Secrets Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Did the Supreme Court Hand the CFPB a Pyrrhic Victory?
Early Returns Law and Politics with Jan Baran: A Supreme Path: From Latin to Campaign Finance Law, to 38 Oral Arguments – Kannon Shanmugam
A Supreme Path: From Latin to Campaign Finance Law, to 38 Oral Arguments – Kannon Shanmugam
Proceso constituyente en Colombia Parte II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Use of Unfairness to Regulate Discriminatory Conduct: A Discussion of the Consumer and Industry Perspectives
John Neiman on the Corporate Transparency Act
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in CFSA v CFPB: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
Understanding the SCOTUS Shadow Docket | Steve Vladeck | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: CFSA v. CFPB Moves to the U.S. Supreme Court - A Look at Constitutional Challenges to the CFPB’s Funding, with Special Guest GianCarlo Canaparo
Fifth Circuit Rules that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is Unconstitutionally Funded: What Does the Decision Mean? A Deep Dive with Special Guest Isaac Boltansky, BTIG
Initial Reactions to the Fifth Circuit CFSA Decision - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Recent Tenth Circuit Decision in John Q Hammons Fall Following SCOTUS’ Decision in Siegel v. Fitzgerald Could Result in Significant Refunds for Certain Chapter 11 Debtors
The Constitutionality of Increased Trustee Fees In Bankruptcy
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) laws against bypassing digital locks and distributing circumvention tools are designed to prevent piracy and are...more
In this special episode, Akin Supreme Court and appellate practice head Pratik Shah and partner Aileen McGrath look back at the tumultuous 2022 Supreme Court Term....more
Rodney Keister was challenging the University of Alabama’s grounds use policy, which requires individuals to obtain a permit before speaking publicly on campus. In his arguments, Keister asserted that the space he was using...more
On April 7, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Porter v. Martinez, which addresses California’s law that prohibits honking a car horn except to warn of a safety hazard. Here, Susan Porter drove...more
A federal judge has held that Pennsylvania’s Rule 8.4(g),1 which subjects lawyers to professional discipline for engaging in discriminatory conduct, violates both the free speech clause of the First Amendment and the due...more
Revisiting jurisprudence touching on the Lanham Act and the First Amendment from the Supreme Court’s decisions in Matal v. Tam and Iancu v. Brunetti, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that applying Sec....more
Activists have standing to challenge a state law that prohibits unauthorized access to businesses for the purpose of sending undercover informants to apply for jobs, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit...more
In a decision of significance for campuses across the country, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upheld a trial court ruling overturning the University of Iowa’s “deregistration” of a campus Christian group,...more
While the topic of vaccines dominates today’s news, the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of constitutional challenges to Missouri’s mandatory form for requesting a religious exemption to the state’s...more
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc., Case No. 19–631 (2020). The federal government cannot exempt itself from the anti-robocall provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 47 U. S. C....more
This seventh edition of Unprecedented, our weekly update on COVID-19-related litigation, sees a continuation of the trend we identified last week: shutdown challenges, workers' compensation claims, and wrongful death lawsuits...more
On April 27, 2020, a group of petitioners asked the Supreme Court of the United States to stay the enforcement of Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s March 19, 2020, executive order that closed many of the Commonwealth’s...more
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a District Court’s decision to strike down a state law that placed severe restrictions on alcohol advertising. For example, under the law, Joe’s Bar could run the ad, “Drink...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has affirmed a victory by a coalition of news organizations that publish in Maryland in their challenge to a state law that would have placed significant burdens on them as...more
On Wednesday, August 7, 2019, Seyfarth partners Robert Milligan and Joseph Escarez reviewed the latest consumer class action law developments affecting companies that do business in California. It is no secret that...more
In a 6–3 opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed a 2017 US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision holding the ban on registration of immoral or scandalous trademarks under the Lanham Act to be an...more
Last month, in Duguid v. Facebook, Inc., 17-15320, 2019 WL 2454853 (9th Cir. June 13, 2019), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”) held that the debt collection exception to the Telephone...more
Last week, on June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act’s “immoral or scandalous” bar to trademark registration constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and thus...more
In permitting the registration of the “vulgar” term FUCT, the Supreme Court recently extended its 2016 ruling from Matal v. Tam, which allowed the registration of the trademark THE SLANTS for an Asian-American rock band...more
The road to permitting the registration of George Carlin's "seven dirty words" began in 2017, with the Supreme Court holding unconstitutional the Trademark Act's prohibition against registration of trademarks which are...more
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court, in Iancu v. Brunetti, reviewing the trademark application for “FUCT”, held that the Lanham’s Act’s provision, prohibiting the registration of “immoral[] or scandalous”...more
In our prior blog entries... we followed the course of Matal v. Tam, the case involving the mark “THE SLANTS.” In that case, the Supreme Court struck down a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), on...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court held that the ban on “immoral or scandalous” trademarks was unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The Court found that, as with the recently struck down ban on “disparaging” marks, the ban...more
The U.S. Supreme Court this week officially pulled the plug on the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of trademarks that comprise “immoral” or “scandalous” matter on First Amendment grounds. The prohibition, found...more
Earlier this week the United States Supreme Court struck down a century-old provision in the Lanham Act that banned the registration of marks deemed “immoral” or “scandalous.” By a 6-3 vote, the Court found in Iancu v....more