Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) today asked the United States Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision which cancelled out an arbitration agreement on the basis that solely in-state commercial activity qualifies as interstate commerce.

The appellate court required a trial judge to undertake a more fulsome inquiry of expert evidence critical to the “predominance” factor for class certification, an outcome that the authors note will impact defense strategies in three key respects.

Federal healthcare regulators’ mission to disrupt and deter consumer-directed pharmaceutical-product advertising is on a collision course with well-settled commercial-speech protections that safeguard both speakers’ and consumers’ rights.

After recent oral arguments in First Choice v. Platkin, friends of the First Amendment should be cautiously optimistic about the outcome.

Highlights: eight amicus filings – three publications – One new video short

WLF asked the United States Supreme Court to review, and ultimately to reverse, a lower court’s decision that the federal government’s forced reallocation of water does not constitute a physical taking under the Fifth Amendment.

In Chevron USA v. Plaquemines Parish, a case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, the State of Louisiana and Plaquemines Parish sued Chevron and other energy producers in Louisiana state court for damages stemming from production of crude oil for making avgas, or aviation fuel.