When choosing U.S. data center locations, developers must carefully consider the patchwork of state and regional carbon emission pricing regimes that are layered on top of the federal permitting framework, creating compliance cost differentials that could add up to billions of dollars, say attorneys at Davis Graham.

Recent actions by the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Food and Drug Administration suggest that federal healthcare enforcement efforts are moving away from traditional program-based fraud and toward cases centered on product integrity, regulatory transparency and telehealth marketing, effectively widening the government's enforcement playbook, say attorneys at MoFo.

For restructuring and turnaround professionals, seeking refunds following the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision invalidating tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act raises several questions about how to capture legitimate recoveries while protecting an enterprise from the consequences of its own history, says Jonny Frank and Laura Greenman at StoneTurn, and Andrew Popescu at Province.

A New York federal court's recent decision in Flores v. NFL, declining to compel arbitration in a class action alleging racial discrimination in the league's hiring practices, reflects courts' increasing reluctance to allow private dispute resolution for systemic discrimination claims, says Masood Ali at Segal McCambridge.

Angwin v. Superhuman Platform, filed recently in New York federal court against the parent company of Grammarly, highlights an overlooked question for any company using artificial intelligence — whether someone's identity has been used for commercial purposes without consent, possibly violating rapidly shifting state right-of-publicity laws, says Nicholas Schneider at Eckert Seamans.

Certain aerospace, defense and national security M&A transactions will require a concurrent Hart-Scott-Rodino Act filing to the U.S. Department of Defense, and practice tips for navigating this extra filing include early analysis of competitive implications of sector deals and planning for concurrent filings, say attorneys at White & Case.

Understanding the differences of scope, time frame and stakes between liability forecasts drawn up for financial reports versus those used in bankruptcy litigation is crucial for attorneys seeking to leverage economic analysis to ask the right questions, and strengthen their compliance and courtroom strategies, says Jorge Gallardo-García at Bates White.

With pricing reform initiatives, national security legislation and evolving trade policy currently contributing to meaningful uncertainty for life sciences companies, it is important to proactively structure deals to avoid downstream complications, say attorneys at Cooley.

A recent New York state court decision in a closely watched real estate dispute in WWP Mezz LLC v. WWP Mezz Investment Co. is a reminder to lenders, and a warning to borrowers, of the Uniform Commercial Code foreclosure's immense power as a lender remedy, says Joshua Wurtzel at Schlam Stone.

A New York federal court's recent ruling in In re: Tether and Bitfinex highlights that crypto companies should expect courts to apply conventional class action principles to novel digital asset markets, albeit with careful attention paid to the unique features of crypto trading, say attorneys at Duane Morris.

I realize you may be judging me for watching, and actually enjoying, Hallmark Channel movies, but the escapism and storylines actually demonstrate qualities and actions that lead to an efficient, productive and positive legal practice, says Karen Ross at Tucker Ellis.

The near-future depicted in the film “Mercy” reminds attorneys that private surveillance networks are becoming central to the evidentiary ecosystem, shaping what prosecutors can obtain, what defendants must explain and what jurors may interpret as objective truth, says Veronica Finkelstein at Wilmington University.

The Federal Circuit's decision in Netflix v. DivX last month highlights the challenge of interpreting potentially misplaced modifiers in complicated technological patents, and the potential for grammatical rules to provide a default interpretation for unclear claim language, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.

Recent statements from the White House and state governors about making data centers pay for their own power infrastructure have underlined the importance of choosing locations, generation technologies and deal structures to optimize carbon, permitting and compliance costs, say attorneys at Davis Graham.

New York's proposed CRYPTO Act would expose unlicensed digital asset operators to criminal penalties ranging from state misdemeanor charges to felony convictions, potentially marking a significant shift in how New York — already among the most aggressive crypto regulators — oversees virtual currency businesses, say attorneys at Crowell & Moring.

Over the past several months, New York Attorney General Letitia James has brought a rapid succession of enforcement actions targeting rent stabilization abuse, unsafe housing conditions and fraudulent securities practices, signaling that the office views these problems as systemic issues warranting aggressive intervention, say attorneys at Quinn Emanuel.

With the recent influx of Florida construction defect lawsuits putting builder’s insurance carriers in the crosshairs, parties must actively seek new methods tailored to the state to compel as many subcontractors, carriers and co-insurers as possible to share the expense and risk of their defense, says Nick Richardson at Segal McCambridge.

Amid the downturn in the private credit markets spurred by multiple high-profile bankruptcies, a New York lawsuit stemming from the collapse of First Brands provides an important case study for investors to help minimize future losses and maximize any potential recovery in the event of a private credit default, say attorneys at Bleichmar Fonti.

A recent California federal court decision dismissing challenges to Nippon Steel's purchase of U.S. Steel underscores the longtime antitrust precedent that while the limitations of injury are critical for defendants sued under U.S. antitrust laws, showing that the harm is real is the key, says Cameron Regnery at Freeman Mathis.