Expert Analysis

• Section 122 Tariffs Show Shift In Strategy, Not Trade Policy

  

  By imposing temporary tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act as a stopgap measure while it pivots to less transitory statutory authorities, the Trump administration sent a clear message that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources v. Trump, invalidating duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, will not precipitate a change in policy direction, say attorneys at Snell & Wilmer.

• What New Animal Welfare Enforcement Push Means For Cos.

  

  The Trump administration's recently announced multiagency focus on violations of the Animal Welfare Act and related laws will likely lead to broader enforcement actions across industries, heightened scrutiny of compliance standards and a need for businesses to adopt effective risk management practices, says Shennie Patel at Crowell & Moring.

• The Practical Implications Of New FDIC Stablecoin Measures

  

  The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s recent proposal to create a formal process for issuing payment stablecoins arrives with several practical implications for FDIC‑supervised banks pursuing digital asset strategies, including a safe harbor for early applicants and a focus on ownership and governance, say attorneys at Troutman.

• Antitrust Crime Enforcement May Escalate Under New Chief

  

  While the recent departure of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division chief created uncertainty about enforcement priorities, the debut speech from the new acting division head revealed that companies can only expect the division’s focus on vigorous criminal prosecution and offender deterrence to grow, say attorneys at Sidley.

• 5 Takeaways From OCC's 'Appealing' Exam Challenge Revamp

  

  The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's recent proposed overhaul of its bank appeals framework introduces several attractive, high-level changes that OCC-supervised banks and their counsel should note, and may lead to an increase in successful exam challenges, says James Williams at Venable.

• Opinion

  It's Time To Clarify California's Elder Abuse Act

  

  As California's elderly population soars, the Golden State's high court and Legislature must provide needed clarification about the scope of the Elder Abuse Act, to resolve the inconsistencies and ambiguities that have impeded the law's ability to remedy elder abuse, neglect and abandonment, say attorneys at Horvitz & Levy.

• What The CFTC's Event Contracts Amicus Brief Is Missing

  

  The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission's recent amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit's North American Derivatives Exchange v. Nevada case declines to define the boundary between swaps and wagers, leaving market participants, exchanges and intermediaries operating within a regulatory framework whose boundaries remain undrawn, says Tamara de Silva at De Silva Law Offices.

• Series

  Podcasting Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Podcasting has changed how I ask questions and connect with people, sharpening my ability to listen without interrupting or prejudging, and bringing me closer to what law is meant to be: a human profession grounded in understanding, judgment and trust, says Donna DiMaggio Berger at Becker.

• Structuring Water Agreements For Data Center Development

  

  For developers of artificial intelligence data centers, water use is now a threshold feasibility and financing variable amid a regulatory landscape with a state-driven push for transparency and federal push to streamline pathways for AI-related infrastructure, say attorneys at Pillsbury.

• AG Watch: Ohio Targets DEI Policies

  

  As Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost seeks to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs in both public education institutions and private companies, Ohio entities must carefully navigate this constantly evolving, highly contentious topic to avoid litigation while also not forfeiting their core principles, say attorneys at BakerHostetler.

• High Court's Recess Talks Ruling Raises Practical Challenges

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Villarreal v. Texas decision, permitting some limits on attorney-client discussions during overnight midtestimony recesses, resolves certain ambiguities, it also implicitly exposes the structural impracticalities of attempting to police narrower consultation limits, says Ryan Magee at McCarter & English.

• Takeaways From Calif. High Court's Public Records Decision

  

  The California Supreme Court’s recent City of Gilroy v. Superior Court decision — clarifying the relief available under, and the duties imposed by, the California Public Records Act — expands the strategic significance of CPRA actions and demands greater foresight in public records practice, say attorneys at Hanson Bridgett.

• Why The NCUA's Stablecoin Moment Matters

  

  The National Credit Union Administration, a historically conservative federal agency, recently proposed a detailed stablecoin licensing framework, confirming that the proposition of building a regulatory architecture within the banking industry has moved well past "whether" and firmly into "how," says Stephen Aschettino at Fox Rothschild.

• Ill. Swipe Fee Ruling Sets Stage For A High-Stakes Appeal

  

  In Illinois Bankers Association v. Raoul, an Illinois federal court upheld the state's ban on credit and debit card swipe fees on tax and tip payments, while permanently enjoining the statute's data usage limitation, but an imminent appeal could significantly influence the trajectory of state-level payments regulation, say attorneys at Latham.

• How NY Stay-Or-Pay Law Shifts Leverage Dynamics

  

  The recent passage of New York's Trapped at Work Act reflects increasing scrutiny of stay-or-pay arrangements, but its lack of a private right of action represents a meaningful departure from other employment laws, dramatically shifting leverage from the courtroom to a state agency, says James Valentino at Clayman Rosenberg.