Expert Analysis

• How Litigants Are Testing Conversion Therapy Ruling's Scope

  

  Litigants are already using the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Chiles v. Salazar ruling, which applied strict scrutiny to Colorado’s conversion therapy ban, to challenge laws limiting algorithmic rental pricing, artificial intelligence-based discrimination and anti-union employer speech, and courts must soon decide Chiles’ First Amendment limits, say attorneys at O'Melveny.

• Reel Justice: 'Obsession' And The Importance Of Precision

  

  In “Obsession,” the main character’s failure to define the limits of his wish result in an unexpectedly horrifying outcome, highlighting for attorneys why careful word choice is essential not only in briefs, but also in charging decisions, statutory interpretation and all stages of criminal litigation, says Veronica Finkelstein at Widener-Delaware Law.

• How Justices' TPS Ruling Affects Workforce Planning

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent holding in Mullin v. Doe that courts lack jurisdiction to review temporary protected status determinations greenlights the end of TPS for thousands of Syrian and Haitian nationals, and means employers must reevaluate TPS-designees' employability while avoiding discriminatory document practices, says attorney Richard Herman.

• Del. Dispatch: The New 'Director Independence' Definition

  

  The Delaware Court of Chancery's recent decision in Ayers v. Foley, its first interpretation and application of "director independence" as outlined in Section 144 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, suggests that the court will not limit the new section's reach, say attorneys at Fried Frank.

• What To Know Before Justices Rule In Title IX Employee Case

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to decide whether Title IX protections extend to employees alleging sex discrimination in Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, which could have significant implications for higher education institutions and their employees, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Fed. Circ. Ruling Highlights The Cost Of Incorrect Inventorship

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Fortress Iron v. Digger Specialties, affirming that a fencing company's patents were invalid due to a missing co-inventor, is a reminder that confirming correct inventorship should be a critical part of every patent invalidity workup, say attorneys at Neal Gerber.

• Future Of Fed Independence Shaky After Justices' Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Trump v. Cook preserved the Federal Reserve's formal independence but could invite the president to remove board members with just modest protections, leaving the central bank's autonomy uncertain and potentially setting up fresh clashes over other agencies, says Steven Schwinn at the University of Chicago.

• Laptop Farms Highlight Identity Fraud Risks Of Remote Work

  

  Two U.S. nationals' recent sentencing in Massachusetts federal court for a scheme that enabled foreign operatives to obtain remote jobs at U.S. companies using stolen identities is a reminder that employers must recalibrate their remote hiring, onboarding and monitoring practices to mitigate evolving cybersecurity and geopolitical risks, say attorneys at Foley & Lardner.

• Series

  Bass Fishing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Landing a trophy striped bass and closing a big deal both require cultivating the patience to finesse — not force — your way to desired outcomes, changing course when your old approach isn’t working and learning from the ones that got away, says Jon Ruiss at Alston & Bird.

• What To Know If DOL Raises Overtime Salary Floor

  

  With the U.S. Department of Labor recently rescinding a 2024 rule that increased the minimum salary for the Fair Labor Standards Act's overtime exemptions, employers should assess how a future increase would affect their workforce, paying particular attention to job duties requirements and state laws, says James Coleman at Constangy.

• Roundup

  The Most Talked-About Supreme Court Decisions Of 2026

  

  This term, 11 U.S. Supreme Court decisions quickly became hot topics among Law360's guest writers.

• Fighting The Evidentiary Risks Of Deepfakes In Court

  

  Though courts and federal rules are only slowly developing frameworks for assessing digital evidence that could have been created or generated by artificial intelligence, litigators should understand what steps they'll likely need to take to successfully challenge potentially deepfaked exhibits — and fight questions about the authenticity of their own, say attorneys at MoFo.

• Pregnancy Bias Suits Highlight EEOC's Expanding Reach

  

  Recent U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission suits show that enactment of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act has drawn scrutiny to a wider range of employment decisions and an increasing focus on individual decisions as indicators of whether an employer's policies comply with evolving federal requirements, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• Mitigating Employer Risk In Immigration Compliance Visits

  Excerpt from Practical Guidance

  

  As Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate site visits become an increasingly important tool to verify that the details in employment-based immigration petitions match the reality of the workplace, employers can reduce their risk by treating preparedness as part of their immigration compliance program, says Morgan Bailey at Mayer Brown.

• How Montgomery Ruling Will Affect Cos. Across Supply Chain

  

  Since the U.S. Supreme Court's May 14 decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, the immediate focus has been on freight brokers and negligent carrier-selection claims, but the ripple effects may extend to shippers, logistics providers, insurers, transportation managers and other participants in the supply chain, say attorneys at Quintairos Prieto.