Supreme Court Should Curb Abusive Forum Shopping By Plaintiffs’ Bar

Toles v. Mead Johnson & Co. is one of thousands of product liability suits involving lifesaving nutritional products that the nation’s neonatal intensive care units rely upon to care for preterm infants. The core allegation in these suits—despite federal agencies’ scientific and medical consensus to the contrary—is that the nutritional products at issue cause necrotizing […]

Supreme Court Should Curb Abusive Forum Shopping By Plaintiffs’ Bar Read More »

Consent-By-Registration Needs Due Process Guardrails

In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court held in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 600 U.S. 122 (2023), that a Pennsylvania statute explicitly providing notice that registering to do business in that state represents consent to the state’s general “all purpose” jurisdiction does not violate due process. Mallory, however, left unanswered important constitutional

Consent-By-Registration Needs Due Process Guardrails Read More »

ALF Urges California Supreme Court To Enforce Finality of Arbitration Awards

On behalf of ALF, I have submitted an amicus letter supporting a petition for review urging the California Supreme Court to resolve, inter alia, a disagreement among California lower courts about whether the losing party in an arbitration proceeding can challenge the arbitrator’s jurisdiction, for the first time, in the Court of Appeal after the trial

ALF Urges California Supreme Court To Enforce Finality of Arbitration Awards Read More »

Supreme Court Should Hold That Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits

More than 60 state and local governments have filed state-law tort suits in state courts around the United States collectively seeking billions of dollars in damages and other relief from major oil and natural gas producers for the alleged local effects of global climate change. Preclusion of these proliferating climate-change tort suits is crucial not

Supreme Court Should Hold That Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits Read More »

ALF Amicus Briefs Urge Supreme Court To Revisit State Consent-By-Registration Statutes

Under Pennsylvania and Minnesota laws, companies that register to do business in those states are deemed to have consented to the state’s general (“all purpose”) jurisdiction. This means that an out-of-state corporation can be sued by an out-of-state plaintiff for a cause of action that has no connection to Pennsylvania or Minnesota. All states have

ALF Amicus Briefs Urge Supreme Court To Revisit State Consent-By-Registration Statutes Read More »

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate SEC “Gag Rule”

For more than 50 years the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been enforcing a “Gag Rule,” 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(e), whenever a civil enforcement target enters into a judicial or administrative settlement agreement with the Commission. The Gag Rule requires settling enforcement targets to agree that they will not publicly deny any allegation in

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate SEC “Gag Rule” Read More »

Supreme Court Should End Roundup Failure-To-Warn Litigation

On January 16, 2026 the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell (24-1068) to address the question of whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts pesticide label-related failure-to-warn claims where U.S. EPA does not require the warning at issue. The answer to this question will affect state-law personal injury claims alleging that Monsanto

Supreme Court Should End Roundup Failure-To-Warn Litigation Read More »

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate “Drug Price Negotiation Program”

On behalf of the Atlantic Legal Foundation, I have written and filed an amicus brief supporting the pending petitions for a writ of certiorari in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Kennedy (25-749) & Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Kennedy (25-751). Both petitions ask the Supreme Court to hold the Inflation Reduction Act’s misleadingly named “Drug Price Negotiation Program” unconstitutional. Case

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate “Drug Price Negotiation Program” Read More »

ALF Argues That Federal Law Precludes Tort Suits Against U.S. Military “Battlefield Contractors”

The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Hencely v. Fluor Corp. (24-924) to decide whether federal law precludes a state-law personal injury suit arising out of a 2016 suicide-bombing on Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan. The plaintiff, a U.S. service member injured in the bombing, is suing Fluor Corp., a private contractor that provided essential support services to

ALF Argues That Federal Law Precludes Tort Suits Against U.S. Military “Battlefield Contractors” Read More »

Amicus Brief Urges Supreme Court To Decide Whether Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits

Dozens of state and local governments have filed state-law tort suits in state courts around the United States collectively seeking billions of dollars in damages and other relief from major oil and natural gas producers for the alleged local effects of global warming and climate change. The potentially mind-boggling ramifications of allowing these proliferating climate-change

Amicus Brief Urges Supreme Court To Decide Whether Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits Read More »

Scroll to Top