Expert Analysis

• FTC Focus: Ad Deal Signals Viewpoint Suppression Is A Risk

  

  The Federal Trade Commission's recent settlement of an antitrust case accusing major ad agency holding companies of colluding on brand safety standards underscores the risk of industry coordination on politically or socially sensitive issues and signals heightened viewpoint suppression scrutiny for companies and antitrust practitioners, say attorneys at Proskauer.

• Navigating The Annulment Of NY Wetlands Permitting Rules

  

  A New York state court's recent unprecedented annulment of the state's wetlands regulations brings uncertainty about the standards for determining and classifying wetlands jurisdiction and assessing compliance with permitting requirements as next steps are determined, say attorneys at Foley Hoag.

• Banks Face Cloudy Rate Horizons As Opt-Outs Spread

  

  Banks and fintechs are grappling with a fragmented, fast-changing consumer lending landscape as more states consider opting out of preemption under the Depository Institutions and Monetary Control Act, which may ultimately lead to a decrease in interstate lending and access to credit, says Marc Franson at Chapman and Cutler.

• How Oregon Ruling Affects Federal Gender Care Crackdown

  

  In a favorable development for healthcare providers, an Oregon federal court recently vacated certain U.S. Department of Health and Human Services restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors, but the government's broader campaign against this care, including proposed rulemaking and agency investigations, leaves significant uncertainty, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• 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.

• A Core Weakness In The Challenge To Birthright Citizenship

  

  The government’s recent oral arguments against birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara would have the Supreme Court use modern immigration classifications as markers for a constitutional boundary that is not expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment, making the theory easier to administer but weaker as a matter of text and history, says attorney Tara Kennedy.

• Bet On Prediction Market Regulation To Accelerate

  

  Watershed developments concerning prediction markets — such as the first insider trading charges, major speeches from U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission leadership, and the introduction of rulemaking and legislation — dominated the first quarter of 2026, a trend that will likely continue throughout the rest of the year, say attorneys at K&L Gates.

• Opinion

  Financial Meltdown Fears Don't Warrant Private Credit Regs

  

  Recent withdrawals from business development companies have resurfaced theories that private credit growth poses a crisis-level risk to the financial system, but arguments that more regulation is needed should be viewed with beady and careful eyes, says James Deeken at Akin.

• New Risks Emerge As States Push Proxy Voting Legislation

  

  Recent state proxy voting laws have increasingly emphasized financial returns while intensifying scrutiny of proxy advisory firms and stewardship practices, creating new compliance challenges and risks, according to attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Suit's Dismissal Would Not Settle Gold Card Visa's Legality

  

  The government’s recent assertion that the plaintiffs in American Association of University Professors v. Department of Homeland Security lack standing to challenge the Trump administration’s pay-to-play immigration program does not address whether an agency can deem a million-dollar gift evidence of eligibility for immigration benefits carefully defined by Congress, says Jun Li at Reid & Wise.

• Enviro Ruling And A New Law Signal Shift In La. Legacy Cases

  

  Together, a Louisiana state court decision in WMH Farms v. Apache Corp. and an incoming statutory regime signal a sea change for legacy litigation in Louisiana, as courts make it harder to establish proof of contamination, and lawmakers narrow available remedies once contamination is proven, says Philip Wood at Jones Walker.

• DOJ's Stance On Antitrust And Patent Law Reflects Balance

  

  Recent statements of interest in patent litigation and a speech from a key U.S. Department of Justice official communicate the view that strong patent rights and competition policy are complementary, and offer important guidance for intellectual property practitioners and businesses navigating patent enforcement, standard‑setting and licensing, say attorneys at Wiley.

• Ruling Shows How Texas Law Altered Derivative Suit Outlook

  

  In the first test of S.B. 29's new ownership threshold requirement for shareholder actions, a Texas federal court recently dismissed Gusinsky v. Reynolds, a derivative action brought by a minority Southwest Airlines shareholder, offering key guidance for navigating the new Texas corporate litigation landscape, say attorneys at DLA Piper.

• 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.

• NY Opioid Antagonist Mandate Leaves Employers Guessing

  

  A recently enacted New York law will require employers that are federally mandated to maintain first-aid supplies to now include an opioid antagonist, but being that it is subject to a complicated Occupational Safety and Health Administration analysis, employers face several unanswered compliance questions, say attorneys at Conn Maciel.