Slack app on an iPhone. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM Attorneys were split over the U.S. Supreme Court's reaction to a securities-related lawsuit heard by the justices Monday morning, but given traditional disclosure expectations, a ruling favoring shareholders appeared most likely.
Starting January 1, 2026, all archived content will be exclusively available through a subscription to Law.com NewsVault.
For information about Law.com NewsVault, please email [email protected] or click here to learn more.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
The justices may limit the ability of courts to take race into account when trying to remedy under-representation by minority voters.
"The Fourth Circuit is in line with the three liberals on the [Supreme] Court," said University of Pittsburgh law professor Arthur Hellman. "It's out of line with the conservative majority. But you do have to dig a little more into [the cases].”
Kim Davis’ appeal to the justices comes after a jury said she would have to pay $100,000 in damages to a gay couple she had turned away from her clerk’s office multiple times in the weeks after the Obergefell decision.
Maxwell’s lawyer says a 2007 non-prosecution agreement between federal prosecutors and Jeffrey Epstein should have provided her immunity as well.
The precedential value of the Supreme Court's emergency orders has emerged as a key question during President Donald Trump's second term.
