: In Trump v. CASA, Inc., the Supreme Court held that federal courts may not issue “universal injunctions” unless “necessary to provide complete relief to... The post CASA’s Complete Relief Paradox appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: Bankruptcy courts occupy an odd place in the judicial system. In Stern v. Marshall, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution guarantees parties in... The post Excluded Lenders v. Serta Simmons Bedding, L.L.C. appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: The Supreme Court has consistently confirmed that nonobscene sexually explicit content is First Amendment–protected expression. It has treated this sexually explicit content the same... The post Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: The Supreme Court has long declared itself “supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution.” But that does not leave the state... The post People v. Thompson appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: One of the early lessons we learn in life is that things seek balance. When a parent pushes their child on a swing set,... The post Federalism Rebalancing and the Roberts Court: A Departure from Historical Patterns appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), a state law that prohibits transgender minors from accessing gender-affirming care. The post Skrmetti Beyond Scrutiny appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, made two bold immunity claims: that state court judges possess sovereign immunity... The post Hunt v. Richmond Police Department appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: Can habeas corpus cases proceed as class actions? The Supreme Court has never squarely answered that question, even in cases where lower courts certified habeas classes. But the Trump Administration’s wholesale push to expel noncitizens has forced the question to the center of modern civil rights litigation. The post Habeas Class Actions appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: In recent years, the Supreme Court has developed the “major questions doctrine,” an interpretive presumption that Congress must speak clearly before delegating to an... The post The Compatibility of Substantive Canons and Originalism appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: The Supreme Court promises that government action is illegitimate if it “lack[s] any purpose other than a ‘bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group.’”... The post Presidential Speech and the Discrimination Paradox appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: Prison law is characterized by judicial deference to penal administrators. Despite the well-documented horrors that occur behind prison walls, federal and state courts often decline to intervene, asserting, among other things, that prisoners’ rights are limited and that the judicial branch lacks the power and expertise to get involved in the inner workings of detention facilities. Moreover, jurists often assume that the nation’s firstcourts largely stayed out of prisons and jails, and contemporary judicial deference is therefore historically rooted. The post The Forgotten History of Prison Law: Judicial Oversight of Detention Facilities in the Nation’s Early Years appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: If the Warren Court reflected nearly twenty years of jurisprudence dismantling ugly systems of oppression and institutional injustice that embedded invidious practices and policies into American law and society... The post Medina v. Planned Parenthood: The Supreme Court’s Making of the New Jane Crow appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. (SFFA), the Supreme Court invalidated the race-based affirmative action programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC) under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The SFFA majority held that the programs could not survive strict scrutiny: The universities’ interests in their affirmative action programs were not sufficiently compelling... The post SFFA and the Wrongs of Race-Based Statistical Discrimination appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. (SFFA), the Supreme Court invalidated the race-based affirmative action programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC) under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The SFFA majority held that the programs could not survive strict scrutiny: The universities’ interests in their affirmative action programs were not sufficiently compelling... The post SFFA and the Wrong of Race-Based Statistical Discrimination appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: A longstanding choice-of-law rule known as the internal affairs doctrine has predominated over corporate law matters in the United States since at least the 1860s. Acknowledged by the Supreme Court and generally followed by the states, the doctrine holds that the internal affairs of a corporation are governed by the law of the state where it is incorporated, notwithstanding where it may be headquartered. The post Dormancy and Delaware: An Emerging Threat to the Internal Affairs Doctrine appeared first on Harvard Law Review
: How an “invention promotion” outfit demoted the truth lfair September 13, 2017 | 11:15AM How an “invention promotion” outfit demoted the truth By Lesley Fair It sounds like there was some “inventing” going on at Florida-based invention promotion firm World Patent Marketing, but a Preliminary Injunction in a case brought by the FTC suggests it wasn’t the kind that unsuspecting consumers bargained for when they forked over millions of dollars based on the defendants’ misleading promises about patenting and promoting their products. For FTC watchers, the opinion is a page-turner from start to finish. We’ll focus on just a few of the claims the company “invented.” The defendants’ initial business model involved online ads that induced people to submit their product ideas. Salespeople responded, telling interested consumers that World Patent Marketing’s “review team” was researching the proposal because “the company is so selective with the ideas they choose to work with.” After a bit of a wait, salespeople calle[...]
: By: Susannah Tredwell , Manager of Library Services at DLA Piper (Canada) LLP and James Bachmann , Instructional Librarian, Law Library, University of British Columbia Since 1988, when CALL/ACBD’s Copyright Committee was first set up, CALL/ACBD has advocated for its members' interests in the area of copyright. While the primary focus of CALL/ACBD’s copyright advocacy over the last few years has been on Crown copyright and primary law, CALL/ACBD has also made submissions about such areas as fair dealing and licencing. CALL/ACBD sees this work as not only supporting the needs of its members but also as serving the interests of access to justice as a whole. Continuing this work, on January 18, 2022 CALL/ACBD, along with Library Futures Institute, will act as an intervener in the Supreme Court of Canada case Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada, et al. v. Entertainment Software Association, et al. Kim Nayyer, CALL/ACBD’s President, and Robert Janes of JFK Law will be representing CALL[...]
: Today, the FTC granted early termination of its review of Mars, Incorporated’s proposed acquisition of Kellanova. Mars is a global manufacturer of pet care, snacking, and food products. Kellanova owns legacy Kellogg brands, including in snacks, crackers, and frozen breakfasts, after spinning off its North American cereals business in 2023 as WK Kellogg Co. “The Commission cares deeply about any competition concerns that affect American consumers, including in food products,” said Daniel Guarnera, Director of the Bureau of Competition. “Commission staff closely reviewed every aspect of this transaction, including both specific product markets and potential portfolio effects from the acquisition. They turned over every stone needed to arrive at a robust assessment of the likely competitive effects of this transaction. After nearly a year of investigation, dozens upon dozens of interviews with non-parties at all levels of the supply chain (including large chains and small, independent businesses), extensive dat[...]
: Case number: AC-2026-LON-002515 In the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division Administrative Court In the matter of an application for judicial review 17 July 2026 Before: The Hon. Mr Justice Sheldon Between: The King on the application of (1) RDS (2) Bayswater Support Group (Claimants) -v- Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Defendant) and NHS England (Interested Party) Order Notification of the Judge’s Decision (CPR 54.11, 54.12) Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant, the Defendant’s Summary Grounds of Defence and the Claimant’s Reply ORDER BY THE HON. Mr Justice Sheldon (1) Anonymity a. Pursuant to CPR 39.2(4) and s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998: i. the names of the First Claimant, his children and his former spouse are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in public; ii. the name of the chair of the Second Claimant, her children and any partner are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings [...]
: $88 million back for AT&T customers: An inside look at a refund program lfair December 8, 2016 | 11:15AM $88 million back for AT&T customers: An inside look at a refund program By Lesley Fair Chances are that you or someone you know will be among 2.7 million AT&T Mobility customers who will be getting a refund soon. The FTC is returning a total of $88 million to people who were billed for premium text message services they didn’t authorize. But even if the settlement doesn’t directly benefit you as a consumer, it offers insights for business people about the steps the FTC takes to get refunds back to consumers – and the seriousness with which we approach that stewardship role. The FTC settlement was part of a joint action with the FCC and Attorneys General from all 50 states and the District of Columbia to crack down on mobile cramming. The FTC alleged that third parties placed unauthorized charges for trivia, horoscopes, celebrity tidbits, etc., on the phone bills of AT&T customers with AT&T pocketing a siz[...]