Expert Analysis

• 5 Takeaways From Justices' Subpoena Fight Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in First Choice v. Davenport fortifies a line of First Amendment associational privacy cases stretching back nearly 70 years, and ensures that organizations subject to government demands for donor information have a meaningful federal forum in which to defend their constitutional rights, say attorneys at DLA Piper.

• Mass. Draft Regs Signal Nationwide Scrutiny Of Junk Fees

  

  Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell's new draft regulations for assisted living facilities is only her latest move in the war on junk fees — and part of a national reordering of consumer protection enforcement in which states are aggressively and creatively asserting authority, says Steve Provazza at Arnall Golden.

• 4 Emerging Approaches To AI Protective Order Language

  

  Over the last year, at least five federal district courts have issued or analyzed specific protective order provisions restricting the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms with protected materials, establishing that proactive AI-specific provisions are now standard practice and demonstrating that no single model works for every case, says Joel Bush at Kilpatrick.

• What Justices Are Focusing On In 'Skinny Label' Patent Case

  

  Though Hikma v. Amarin appears to be a patent dispute that could reshape inducement doctrine in the pharmaceutical context, oral argument suggests the U.S. Supreme Court may treat this as primarily a pleading-stage dispute, with important unresolved questions lurking beneath the surface, says Shashank Upadhye at Upadhye Tang.

• Accelerated Psychedelic Therapy Pathways Require Caution

  

  President Donald Trump's new executive order aiming to accelerate the approval of psychedelic drugs for the treatment of mental health disorders will likely bolster investigational psychedelic therapies, but parties within the psychedelic product supply chain will still need to prepare for potentially burdensome compliance requirements, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Heppner Ruling Left AI Privilege Risk For Lawyers Unresolved

  

  While a New York federal judge’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner resolved a privilege question surrounding client-side artificial intelligence use, it did not address how to mitigate the risks that can arise when confidential information enters the operative context of an AI system used by an attorney, says Jianfei Chen at Quarles & Brady​​​​​​​.

• The Ethics And Practicalities Of Representing AI Agents

  

  With autonomous artificial intelligence agents now able to take action without explicit instructions from — or the awareness of — their human owners, the bar must confront whether existing frameworks like informed consent and client privilege will be sufficient on the day an AI agent calls seeking counsel, say attorneys at Morrison Cohen.

• Health Cos. Must Act Quickly To Secure Digital Front Doors

  

  A fast-approaching deadline will require health providers to implement digital accessibility standards to their websites, necessitating important compliance steps that will help to ensure equal access to online health services, say attorneys at Holland & Knight.

• Series

  Speed Jigsaw Puzzling Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My passion for speed puzzling — I can complete a 500-piece jigsaw puzzle in under 50 minutes — has sharpened my legal skills in more ways than one, with both disciplines requiring patience, precision and the ability to keep the bigger picture in mind while working through the details, says Tazia Statucki at Proskauer.

• Documenting Business Purpose After IRS' 10th Circ. Win

  

  Following the Tenth Circuit’s recent Liberty Global v. U.S. decision, which held the economic substance doctrine does not require a threshold relevancy determination, taxpayers can prepare for potential audits by maintaining contemporaneous documentation and taking other steps that demonstrate the business purpose of transactions, say attorneys at Crowell & Moring.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• Calif. Case Raises Questions For Medical Practice Investors

  

  The California attorney general's amicus brief in Art Center v. WCE and the California Medical Association's response highlight how the California appeals court's ruling could significantly affect the structure and enforceability of succession arrangements in medical practice ownership, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.