Expert Analysis

• Opinion

  Judicial Restraint Anchors Constitutional Order

  

  Contrasting opinions in two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings — Trump v. CASA and Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections — demonstrate how the judiciary’s constitutionally entrusted role can easily be preserved or disrupted, and invite renewed attention to the enduring importance of judicial restraint, says Ninth Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace.

• Resolving The Conflict In 2nd Circ. Foreign Discovery Rulings

  

  The Second Circuit recently issued two seemingly inconsistent decisions regarding the federal statute that permits U.S. discovery for purposes of a foreign proceeding, but the unifying feature appears to be the broad scope for district court discretion under Section 1782, say attorneys at Katsky Korins.

• Series

  Alpine Skiing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Skiing has shaped habits I rely on daily as an attorney — focus, resilience and the ability to remain steady when circumstances shift rapidly — and influences the way I approach legal strategy, client counseling and teamwork, says Isaku Begert at Marshall Gerstein.

• Fair Housing Takeaways From Colony Ridge Settlement

  

  The recent settlement agreement between Colony Ridge Developments, the U.S. government and the state of Texas — perhaps the first settlement involving unfair lending and housing practices during the second Trump administration — reflects current enforcement priorities and sheds light on shifting compliance risks, say attorneys at Weiner Brodsky.

• Ohio Case Reflects States' Aggressive Criminal Antitrust Turn

  

  The Ohio Attorney General's Office’s recent bid-rigging indictment of an online auctioneer is the latest signal that states, through attorneys general pursuing more kickback cases and legislators expanding the reach of antitrust laws, are shedding their historical reluctance to wield their criminal antitrust enforcement powers, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Telehealth Suit May Redraw Rules For Physician Classification

  

  A new class action in California federal court, Cioppettini v. Mochi Medical, alleging a telehealth company misclassified providers as independent contractors, suggests that traditional markers of physician independence may not apply to telehealth, say attorneys at Reed Smith.

• Seeking A Policy Fix As Merger Reporting Fight Continues

  

  A recently announced request by the Federal Trade Commission and U.S. Department of Justice for public comment on the Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger reporting requirements, as litigation challenging the commission's updated requirements continues, suggests the government's willingness to address how best to support modern merger enforcement without unduly burdening filing parties, say attorneys at Baker Botts.

• Axed Trade Secret Award Cautions Against Bundling Damages

  

  The Fifth Circuit's recent ruling in Trinseo v. Harper, vacating a $75 million jury verdict for trade secret misappropriation due to a bundled damages model, offers a strong reminder to apportion damages so a jury can award a nonspeculative figure when it credits only some alleged secrets, say attorneys at Seyfarth.

• PTAB Memo Recenters Discretion On US Manufacturing

  

  Read alongside recent Federal Circuit decisions, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director John Squires' memo on patent denial considerations emphasizes domestic manufacturing in a way that the International Trade Commission does not require, says Brandon Theiss at Volpe Koenig.

• What A Court Doc Audit Reveals About Erroneous Filings

  

  My audit of 1,522 court documents from last month found that over 95% contained at least one verifiable error, with fewer than 1% showing clear indicators of artificial intelligence use — highlighting above all else that lawyers may want to focus most on strengthening their review processes, says Elliott Ash at ETH Zurich.

• Parsing Rule 12(c) Motion Overuse In Securities Class Actions

  

  Defendants in securities class actions have more frequently been filing motions for judgment on the pleadings following the denial of motions to dismiss, but courts have recently demonstrated an increasing willingness to reject these previously rare motions, finding them transparent attempts to relitigate already-decided issues, say attorneys at Labaton Keller.

• Apple Verdict May Inform Jury Instruction In Patent Suits

  

  A Texas federal jury's recent verdict in Optis v. Apple provides an important example of how juries must be instructed when Step 2 of the Alice framework is submitted to them, with important implications for both litigators and courts in patent cases, says Joshua Reisberg at Blank Rome.

• Series

  Ultramarathons Make Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Completing a 100-mile ultramarathon was tougher, more humbling and more rewarding than I ever imagined, and the experience highlighted how long-distance running has sharpened my ability to adapt to the evolving nature of antitrust law and strengthened my resolve to handle demanding, unforeseen challenges, says Dan Oakes at Axinn.

• State FARA Laws Pose Unique Constitutional Challenges

  

  Several states have recently enacted foreign agent registration and disclosure regimes that were modeled after the Foreign Agents Registration Act, but these state laws raise several constitutional questions, including concerns about preemption, speech and petition, and vagueness, says Alexandra Langton at Covington.

• Series

  Pa. Banking Brief: All The Notable Legal Updates In Q1

  

  The first quarter of 2026 brought several consequential developments for Pennsylvania financial institutions, including the state banking department's first assessment overhaul in 10 years, a bill prohibiting interchange fees on card transaction sales taxes and a federal appeals court's upholding of a $52 million enforcement action, say attorneys at Gross McGinley.