Expert Analysis

• Chancery Ruling Holds Authorized Share Takeaways For Cos.

  

  The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent ruling in Salama v. Simon resolved statutory ambiguity in favor of boards seeking authorized share increases, and has important implications for litigators presenting extrinsic evidence in support of contract or statutory interpretation arguments, says Robin Wechkin at Sidley.

• What Trump Actions Mean For Federal Research Funding

  

  New guidance from the National Institutes of Health represents a massive policy shift regarding federal funding for researchers at institutions of higher education, contributing to a perfect storm of significant resource shortfalls in upcoming years, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Opinion

  NFT Bill Needs Refining To Effectively Regulate Digital Assets

  

  A recent bill in the U.S. House proposing to regulate nonfungible tokens as digital assets would leave key concepts undefined until the U.S. comptroller general completes an after-the-fact study of NFTs, showing it needs more work before it is comprehensive enough to meaningfully protect the market, say attorneys at Duane Morris.

• How The AI Antitrust Landscape Might Evolve Under Trump

  

  The Trump administration's early actions around artificial intelligence and antitrust policy, along with statements from competition regulators, suggest that the AI competition landscape may see reduced scrutiny around acquisitions, but not an entirely hands-off enforcement approach, say attorneys at Hogan Lovells.

• Series

  Racing Corvettes Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The skills I use when racing Corvettes have enhanced my legal practice in several ways, because driving, like practicing law, requires precision, awareness and a good set of brakes — complete with the wisdom to know how and when to use them, says Kat Mateo at Olshan Frome.

• A Look At Healthcare Transaction Oversight In Oregon

  

  Understanding Oregon's enforcement authority and its impact on proposed transactions last year provides a road map to the state's plans to strengthen its processes this year, though enforcement could be challenged by ongoing litigation, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• The Political Branches Can't Redefine The Citizenship Clause

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s Wong Kim Ark opinion and subsequent decisions, and the 14th Amendment’s legislative history, establish that the citizenship clause precludes the political branches from narrowing the definition of citizen based on how a parent’s U.S. presence is categorized, says federal public defender Geremy Kamens.

• Questions Remain After Justices' Narrow E-Rate FCA Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Wisconsin Bell, holding that requests for reimbursement from the Federal Communications Commission's E-Rate program are subject to False Claims Act liability, resolves one important question but leaves several others open, says Jason Neal at HWG.

• Bill Would Bring Welcome Clarity To Del. Corporate Law

  

  A recently proposed bill in Delaware that would provide greater predictability for areas including director independence and controlling stockholders reflects prudential adjustments consistent with the state's long history of refining and modernizing its corporate law, say attorneys at Simpson Thacher.

• Opinion

  At 100, Federal Arbitration Act Is Used To Thwart Justice

  

  The centennial of the Federal Arbitration Act, a law intended to streamline dispute resolution in commercial agreements, is an opportunity to reflect on its transformation from a tool of fairness into a corporate shield that impedes the right to a fair trial, says Lori Andrus at the American Association for Justice.

• Opinion

  Attorneys Must Act Now To Protect Judicial Independence

  

  Given the Trump administration's recent moves threatening the independence of the judiciary, including efforts to impeach judges who ruled against executive actions, lawyers must protect the rule of law and resist attempts to dilute the judicial branch’s authority, says attorney Bhavleen Sabharwal.

• Colo. Anti-SLAPP Cases Highlight Dismiss Standard Disparity

  

  A pair of recent decisions from the Colorado Court of Appeals highlights two disparate standards for courts evaluating anti-SLAPP motions: one that requires a court to accept the plaintiff's evidence as true and another that allows the court to assess its merits, says Jacob Hollars at Spencer Fane.

• Short-Term Predictions For The CFPB's Fate Under Trump

  

  Though the Trump administration is unlikely to succeed in abolishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, new leadership will likely moderate enforcement, possibly prompting state attorneys general to step up supervision, say attorneys at Husch Blackwell.

• Ga. Tort Reform Bill May Help Dampen 'Nuclear' Verdicts

  

  Many aspects of the tort reform bill just passed by the Georgia Legislature — including prohibitions on suggesting damage amounts to juries, and limits to recovering phantom damages — face opposition from the plaintiffs bar, but are a key first step toward addressing excessive damage awards in the state, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Rethinking 'No Comment' For Clients Facing Public Crises

  

  “No comment” is no longer a cost-free or even a viable public communications strategy for companies in crisis, and counsel must tailor their guidance based on a variety of competing factors to help clients emerge successfully, says Robert Bowers at Moore & Van Allen.