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
A team of BakerHostetler lawyers, led by Partners Andrew Grossman and Jeff Paravano, represented clients Charles and Kathleen Moore at the Supreme Court, arguing that realization is required for federal taxation of income...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 20, 2024, ruled 7-2 that Section 965 of the Internal Revenue Code, as revised by the law known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, is constitutional. The issue presented to the Court in Moore v....more
Almost exactly a year after it shook the tax world by granting certiorari, on June 20, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Moore v. United States, No. 22-800. By a vote of 7-2, the Court upheld the constitutionality...more
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 amended the law to introduce a new, one-time, mandatory repatriation tax on trillions of dollars of accumulations held abroad by American-controlled foreign entities. The tax is imposed on...more
On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Moore v. United States, No. 22-800, holding that the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (MRT) — a provision in a 2017 tax reform law — could constitutionally impose a one-time...more
On December 5, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Moore v. United States, which is potentially the next landmark tax case on the meaning of income under the Sixteenth Amendment....more
On December 5, 2023, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. United States, addressing the constitutionality of the section 965 transition tax, which was enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Section 965...more
Unless you have been living under a rock—as we tax lawyers are wont to do—you have probably been following Moore v. United States, which we last discussed. On December 5, the tax community stepped into the spotlight...more