Expert Analysis

• 5 Takeaways From Justices' Subpoena Fight Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in First Choice v. Davenport fortifies a line of First Amendment associational privacy cases stretching back nearly 70 years, and ensures that organizations subject to government demands for donor information have a meaningful federal forum in which to defend their constitutional rights, say attorneys at DLA Piper.

• 4 Emerging Approaches To AI Protective Order Language

  

  Over the last year, at least five federal district courts have issued or analyzed specific protective order provisions restricting the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms with protected materials, establishing that proactive AI-specific provisions are now standard practice and demonstrating that no single model works for every case, says Joel Bush at Kilpatrick.

• Binance Win Shows Constraints On Anti-Terrorism Act Claims

  

  The Southern District of New York's recent ruling in Troell v. Binance illustrates that the Second Circuit's earlier decision in Ashley v. Deutsche Bank is holding weight with courts, and companies facing aiding and abetting risk should thus monitor evolving case law and assess exposure based on nexus allegations, say attorneys at Freshfields.

• Heppner Ruling Left AI Privilege Risk For Lawyers Unresolved

  

  While a New York federal judge’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner resolved a privilege question surrounding client-side artificial intelligence use, it did not address how to mitigate the risks that can arise when confidential information enters the operative context of an AI system used by an attorney, says Jianfei Chen at Quarles & Brady​​​​​​​.

• The Ethics And Practicalities Of Representing AI Agents

  

  With autonomous artificial intelligence agents now able to take action without explicit instructions from — or the awareness of — their human owners, the bar must confront whether existing frameworks like informed consent and client privilege will be sufficient on the day an AI agent calls seeking counsel, say attorneys at Morrison Cohen.

• Series

  Speed Jigsaw Puzzling Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My passion for speed puzzling — I can complete a 500-piece jigsaw puzzle in under 50 minutes — has sharpened my legal skills in more ways than one, with both disciplines requiring patience, precision and the ability to keep the bigger picture in mind while working through the details, says Tazia Statucki at Proskauer.

• AI Data Center Boom May Spur Wave Of Toxic Tort Suits

  

  Nascent litigation matters against data center operators, set against limited government regulation and a growing body of public health research, suggests we may be on the cusp of an era of mass toxic tort claims, with a liability framework firmly rooted in precedent from other industries, says Benjamin Heller at RFZ Law.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.

• Previewing FDA Preapproval Access In Psychedelics EO

  

  The second of two pathways for psychedelic drug access outlined in President Donald Trump's recent executive order constitutes an unprecedented expansion of the Right to Try Act, which could fundamentally alter the psychedelic access landscape while presenting significant regulatory, operational and legal challenges, say attorneys at Husch Blackwell.

• Series

  Playing Magic: The Gathering Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The competitive card game Magic: The Gathering offers me a training ground for the strategic thinking skills crucial to litigation, challenging me to adapt to oft-updated rules, analyze text as complicated as any statute and anticipate my opponent’s next moves, says Christopher Smith at Lash Goldberg.

• State Of Insurance: Q1 Notes From Illinois

  

  Matthew Fortin at BatesCarey discusses notable insurance developments in Illinois, including the state Supreme Court's highly anticipated Griffith Foods v. National Union Fire Insurance ruling, two bulletins from the Department of Insurance directed at public adjusters and a Seventh Circuit decision precluding a "super excess" tier of coverage.

• Improving Well-Being In Law, 10 Years After Landmark Study

  

  An important 2016 study revealed significant substance abuse and mental health issues among lawyers, and while the findings helped normalize the conversation around these topics, a decade later, structural change is still needed, says Denise Robinson at PLI.

• Managing Tort Risk After Justices' War Zone Immunity Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hencely v. Fluor changes the tort landscape for battlefield contractors, whose liability for employee injury will now turn on compliance with battlefield directives — a question that will require discovery into highly sensitive details of combat operations and military decision-making, says Warren Bianchi at Fluet.

• What Mass. Ruling Clarifies About Whistleblower Protections

  

  A Massachusetts appellate court's recent decision in Galvin v. Roxbury Community College, finding that an employee retained whistleblower protections despite his reporting responsibilities and possible contribution to the compliance failure, requires employers to distinguish between performance-based decisions and their response to protected reporting, say attorneys at Smith Kane.

• AG Watch: Texas Charts A Course On Investigative Authority

  

  The Texas Supreme Court's recent decision in Texas v. PFLAG affirmed, and arguably expanded, the Texas attorney general's civil investigative demand authority, providing a road map that other courts evaluating state attorney general CIDs may find instructive, amid a lack of precedent, say attorneys at Kelley Drye.