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.

• Illinois Audit Law Will Make AI Clauses Actually Enforceable

  

  A law recently enacted in Illinois creates a first-in-the-nation requirement for artificial intelligence developers to undergo annual audits, providing objective standards that can be incorporated into private contracts and addressing the problem of defining responsible AI use, says William Tanenbaum at Moses & Singer.

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

  

  In “Obsession,” the main character’s failure to define the limits of his wish results 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.

• $100M Clean Air Act Ruling Transforms Parent Co. Liability

  

  A Michigan federal court's recent decision in U.S. v. EES Coke Battery, holding a company liable for Clean Air Act violations at a plant owned by its subsidiary, weakens the legal shield between businesses and their corporate parents, and has started a legal battle that may last for years, say attorneys at Haynes Boone.

• Justices' Ruling Alters Playing Field For State Subpoena Suits

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Davenport will spark more federal court challenges to state subpoenas, but procedural defenses will block some merits decisions, so plaintiffs must carefully time and manage parallel federal and state proceedings, say attorneys at Troutman.

• Looking At Drake's Diss Track Appeal Through An IP Lens

  

  Though Drake's pending Second Circuit appeal over UMG's promotion of Kendrick Lamar's "Not Like Us" is formally about defamation, it shows that IP considerations can help identify records showing how a work traveled, which may guide courts when deciding context, says attorney Abdul Abdullahi.

• 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.

• PacifiCorp Ruling Shows Limits Of Aggregate Wildfire Loss Models

  

  An Oregon appeals court's recent decision in James v. PacifiCorp illustrates that in litigation involving multiple wildfires, materially different causation theories, and evidence tied to particular fires and locations, a single undifferentiated damages model is vulnerable to attack, say Paige Van Oosten and Jason Kim at Hunton and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• 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.

• What Durnell Ruling Means For Mo. Roundup Settlement

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Monsanto v. Durnell forecloses the failure-to-warn theory that carried most of the claims against Monsanto in a pending class action in Missouri state court, it leaves untouched the question of whether the class was assembled merely to contain the defendant's liability, says attorney Gregg Goldfarb.

• Generative AI Is Reshaping The Defense Of Complex Litigation

  

  Generative artificial intelligence is lowering the barriers to filing new cases, meaning that the defense bar must respond to an increased wave of litigation — but generative AI is also helping defense teams with legal research and drafting, fact witness development, and expert witness strategy, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Justices Stand On Statutory Specifics In Cisco And Landor

  

  With its June 23 decisions in Cisco Systems Inc. v. Doe and Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, the U.S. Supreme Court doubled down on the critical point that the statute invoked in a federal claim must authorize a private lawsuit and the remedy sought, says Patrick Judd at Phelps Dunbar.

• 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.

• After Durnell, Connecting Science And Causation Will Be Key

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's June 25 decision in Monsanto v. Durnell narrowed label-based failure-to-warn claims — meaning that going forward, viable theories will depend even more on whether experts can reliably connect scientific evidence to the causal proposition the law requires, says Alex Smolak at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.