Reviews
These are some articles I have chosen to review and talk about.
Please note that these are not opinion topics, but more of a chance to talk with and engage with the ideas that are in these articles. After a short summary, I like to post some questions about the implications and potential outcomes of some of these rulings.
Such examples are:
Why would this be important?
Who benefits from this?
Will the outcome of this trial affect future litigation?
I hope this page grows as time passes, and if you have any ideas on good topics or articles to discuss, please contact me!
August 8, 2026:
The Senate narrowly confirmed Todd Blanche, President Trump’s former personal lawyer and current Deputy Attorney General, as the new U.S. Attorney General in a 50-49 vote, overcoming opposition from all Democrats and two Republicans. To secure crucial final votes from hesitant Republican senators, Blanche provided written assurances promising to scrap a controversial $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" and to strictly limit the scope of tax audit exemptions for Trump and his immediate family. However, his confirmation remains deeply polarizing; legal experts question whether these written promises are legally bindingFacing tens of thousands of claims alleging that its talc-based baby powder causes ovarian cancer, Johnson & Johnson has filed a motion to dismiss a multidistrict litigation involving 67,000 cases, capitalizing on the recent withdrawal of two key causation experts. Plaintiffs' attorneys have forcefully opposed the maneuver as a desperate and meritless tactic designed to avoid jury trials, pointing to a string of recent multi-million- and multi-billion-dollar verdicts against the company..
How will this affect the relationship between the white house and the Department of Justice?
What will be the first high-profile case that the Department of Justice will seek?
How will the written promises offered during the confirmation hearing truly play out? Are they even enforceable?
August 6, 2026:
The Washington Supreme Court has granted "diploma privilege" to hundreds of first-time law school graduates after a widespread technology failure forced the cancellation of the state's two-day bar exam in July. Under the order, eligible first-time applicants who were prevented from taking the test can either sit for a makeup exam in September or opt to waive the bar requirement and be admitted to practice law immediately. The ruling comes after significant disruption to graduates' finances, travel, and job prospects, and follows urging from all three of the state's law school deans.
Will this affect employment outcomes for the law students who sat for this bar?
How will the state of washington respond to this issue and ensure that future students do not have the same mistake happen to them?
How does this affect students regarding the Uniform Bar Exam?
July 17, 2026:
Facing tens of thousands of claims alleging its talc-based baby powder causes ovarian cancer, Johnson & Johnson has filed a motion to dismiss a 67,000-case multidistrict litigation by capitalizing on the recent withdrawal of two key causation experts. Plaintiffs' attorneys have forcefully opposed the maneuver as a desperate and meritless tactic designed to avoid jury trials, pointing to a string of recent multi-million and multi-billion dollar verdicts against the company.
If the federal judge grants J&J's motion to dismiss the multidistrict litigation, will plaintiffs be able to individually refile their claims in state courts?
If Johnson and Johnson’s dismissal does not go through, will they opt for a financial settlement?
Will Johnson and Johnson go after the other causation experts if this motion does not succeed?
July 12, 2026:
Following a multistate cyclosporiasis outbreak that has sickened thousands of consumers, Taco Bell and its supplier, Taylor Farms, have been hit with multiple federal lawsuits in Ohio and Michigan. Plaintiffs are accusing the fast-food chain and its franchisees of negligence, breach of warranty, and deceptive trade practices after they allegedly contracted severe gastrointestinal illnesses from tainted shredded iceberg lettuce.
Could this lead to Taco Bell and its associates changing their logistics and supply chain models?
How will Taylor Farms' documented history of previous foodborne illness outbreaks impact its legal defense?
Could this widespread outbreak prompt regulators to impose stricter testing for imported produce?
How might the reputational damage from these lawsuits affect Taco Bell's sales and consumer trust?
June 26, 2026:
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) prevents states from imposing cancer warning labels on Bayer's Roundup that differ from EPA requirements. The landmark ruling effectively guts thousands of pending lawsuits against the company and closes the door on future failure-to-warn claims regarding glyphosate.
With failure-to-warn claims now largely preempted by federal law, what alternative legal strategies might plaintiffs and consumer advocates develop?
How will this definitive Supreme Court precedent impact future state-level attempts to regulate, label, or ban other widely used industrial chemicals?
Will this ruling put pressure on Congress to alter corporate liability shields?
June 23, 2026:
In Cisco Systems v. Doe, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1789 Alien Tort Statute (ATS) only permits lawsuits for the tiny handful of international crimes originally envisioned by the Framers, ending the ability of foreign plaintiffs to sue corporations in U.S. courts for modern human rights violations. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett also declared that the 1991 Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) does not encompass aiding-and-abetting liability, dismissing a lawsuit by Falun Gong practitioners who accused Cisco Systems of customizing surveillance technology for the Chinese government.
If U.S. courts are no longer a viable venue for ATS and TVPA aiding-and-abetting claims, what alternative international or domestic legal forums might human rights advocates utilize?
To what extent does this ruling create a permanent legal shield for other U.S. corporations?
Will this affect how Cisco Systems operates?
May 26, 2026:
Mount Sinai Hospital, the University of Kansas Hospital Authority, and the University of Michigan Hospitals and Health Centers have filed separate federal lawsuits accusing CVS Health and its subsidiaries (including Caremark and WellPartner) of illegally retaining savings generated by the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The hospitals allege that CVS initially processed 340B specialty drug claims at standard reimbursement rates, but later secretly reduced the payments passed on to the hospitals once the claims were flagged as 340B-eligible.
How might a ruling against CVS Health trigger a wave of similar lawsuits from other safety-net hospitals seeking to recover diverted 340B funds?
What legal precedents might this case set regarding the legality of "spread pricing" tactics?
Could this litigation affect how the 340B program works? Would this suit enact change?
May 8, 2026:
Following a Supreme Court defeat over its initial global tariff strategy under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Trump administration attempted to use a never-before-used provision, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, to impose 10% tariffs on most worldwide products. The court ruled that a standard trade deficit does not meet the strict statutory requirement, declaring the president's tariff proclamation unauthorized by law and providing relief to consumers and businesses burdened by the increased costs.
Was there any business that paid the 10% already, and will they be issued refunds for already paying the previous tariffs?
Will this coalition of states go after any more federal issues?
Will President Trump go after other tools to enforce his trade policies?
May 7, 2026:
The NAACP's Tennessee chapter filed an emergency lawsuit to halt a newly enacted congressional map that fractures Memphis and Shelby County into three separate districts, effectively eliminating the state's sole majority-Black voting district. This strategy directly capitalizes on the Supreme Court's recent Louisiana v. Callais decision, which significantly raised the burden of proof for racial discrimination by requiring "smoking gun" evidence of discriminatory intent. The NAACP argues that the new map intentionally dilutes Black voting power and violates state constitutional rules that prohibit mid-decade redistricting.
Will the NAACP be able to uncover "smoking gun" evidence of discriminatory intent, or will the defense of "partisan advantage" successfully shield the redrawn map?
Will these state-level arguments hold up in attacking the federal courts?
If the NAACP is successful in Tennessee, will it trigger a new wave of suits?
April 27, 2026:
The Supreme Court recently allowed fossil fuel companies to move a Louisiana coastal erosion lawsuit to federal court, but Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion explicitly distinguished the case from climate lawsuits based on deceptive advertising. Plaintiffs are now using this distinction to argue their climate
How will these cases differ from previous ones?
Will other companies other than oil and gas be affected by the outcome of this case?
If the Supreme Court ultimately rules against the fossil fuel industry's preemption defense, will it trigger a nationwide avalanche of local municipalities suing oil companies for climate-related financial damages?
April 2, 2026:
The 2026 Wolters Kluwer Future Ready Lawyer Report reveals that over 90% of legal professionals now integrate AI into their daily workflows, leading to significant time savings and a noticeable boost in revenue. While this technology is helping practitioners manage complex global regulations and driving a shift away from traditional billable hours, widespread adoption still faces critical barriers, including data privacy risks, ethical concerns, and a widespread need for better training.
How might clients feel about their data being shared with artificial intelligence systems?
How will the anticipated decline of the billable hour fundamentally restructure the business models and client relationships?
How will legal firms treat cybersecurity and the growing risk of data theft?
March 27, 2026:
Bank of America has agreed to pay $72.5 million to victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
A woman filed a lawsuit claiming that the bank helped Epstein run his sex-trafficking operation by providing him and his wealthy associates with banking services while ignoring major warning signs.
To end the legal fight, the bank agreed to a class-action settlement; this is a large legal agreement where a company pays money to resolve a lawsuit on behalf of a whole group of people who suffered similar harm, rather than fighting each person's case individually.
The money will go to women who were abused by Epstein between 2008 and 2019.
Even though Bank of America is paying out millions, the settlement allows the bank to avoid officially admitting that it did anything wrong.
This is now the fourth time a major bank (following JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank) has paid millions of dollars to settle lawsuits accusing it of turning a blind eye to Epstein's crimes.
Is it morally right for a company to settle without admitting fault for such a case as this?
Will there be another major bank named later on as more information comes to light?
what level of responsibility should banks and other financial institutions have when monitoring customers’ account activities?
March 4, 2026:
A newly released UN Women report reveals that women globally possess only 64 percent of the legal rights of men, exposing them to systemic discrimination and violence. While some progress has been made with domestic violence laws, severe issues still remain.
How might the findings of this UN report influence domestic policy reforms and legal protections in countries with the most severe legal gaps?
What specific accountability mechanisms will the United Nations and other international bodies look to enforce against nations that fail to protect women's rights?
Will nations with differing cultural standards be expected to adopt the exact same legal definitions?
How can the world come together and fight for equality when so many countries seem to have uneven policies?
February 20, 2026:
A recent move by the EPA to repeal the "endangerment finding" aims to strip the agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gases, but it may inadvertently expose major polluters to severe legal blowback. Legal experts warn that removing federal oversight could eliminate the "preemption" defense that has historically shielded large emitters, opening the door for states to impose their own patchwork of emissions rules and liability lawsuits.
Will states impose a standardized set of emissions regulations?
What other companies will the court look to hold liable?
How might the loss of federal preemption defenses affect the numerous climate damage lawsuits already filed against major oil and gas companies?
February 11, 2026:
A landmark Los Angeles trial is underway to determine whether Meta and YouTube can be held responsible for allegedly designing addictive features that harmed a young user’s mental health. The companies deny the addiction claims, arguing that scientific evidence is disputed and that the plaintiff’s struggles stem from other personal and family issues.
How might the outcome of this bellwether trial affect the thousands of similar lawsuits filed against social media companies?
What other companies will the court look to hold liabile?
Will some companies be treated different than others, or all they are all held to the same standard throughout the proceedings?
To what extent should personal and family circumstances factor into determining whether social media was a substantial cause of the plaintiff’s mental health struggles?
February 10, 2026:
Georgia lawmakers have revived a bill that would limit lawsuits against the state’s carpet and textile industry over their use of PFAS, often called “forever chemicals.” The House Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 211, known as the PFAS Receiver Shield Act, to the full House after a short discussion.
Will other states soon begin to follow Georgia and make their own state sponsored bills?
What role should public input play when lawmakers introduce a significantly revised version of a previously controversial bill?
If manufacturers knew about the environmental risks but continued disposal practices, should that meet the “gross negligence” standard?
January 29, 2026:
Thousands of patients have filed lawsuits against major GLP-1 drugmakers, including Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, alleging that popular weight loss medications such as Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound caused severe and sometimes permanent health complications.
What will the judge rule when taking into account the European label compared to the label offered in America?
75% of plaintiffs have beeb left with gastroparesis, a condition that delays stomach emptying, with another 8% reporting extreme gastrointestinal injured, what do the other portion of plaintiff's claim?
Will the companies named in the initial lawsuit expand as more generic labeling come out, I even think “Him’s” has a GLP-1 now.
Could these cases set a precedent for how pharmaceutical companies communicate risks for rapidly popularized medications, such as GLP-1’s?
January 28, 2026:
The Court’s ruling could determine when and how a Fed board member may be removed “for cause,” potentially reshaping the independence of the central bank.
How could a Supreme Court ruling allowing or restricting the firing of a Fed governor affect the Federal Reserve’s independence from political influence?
Should the Fed chair’s presence at Supreme Court arguments be viewed as appropriate?
Are there any other court decisions since the Fed’s founding that could influence the courts decision?
What will the courts view as “Cause”
January 15, 2026:
Illinois, Texas, and Colorado are each set to implement laws governing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the workforce in 2026, all while the federal government has signaled its intent to eliminate state-level regulations on AI.
What challenges might arise because of the tension between the State and Federal governments stance on Artificial Intelligence.
Could these law effect others states? Will other states follow in passing legislation related to AI?
Will the Federal government take issue with Illinois’s Under H.B. 3773 law, even though it modified an existing law?
Will Colorado’s S.B. 24-205 law use of the Attorney General’s power cause any issues?