LITIGATION TRENDS 2025 | 25 T O C E M P E S G A N T I I P C A P R O W C S P O R T C O N T A C T I N T A P P P A T C C L S E C immediately invalidate any existing regulations, and the Supreme Court narrowed its holding by stating that prior decisions applying Chevron remain good law. But in the months following the Court’s decision, a number of lower courts have already invoked Loper Bright to rule against agency action. And the case’s greatest impact may be in its disciplining effect on agencies, who will likely hesitate to advance aggressive interpretations of statutory language and may be inclined to adopt a more cabined view of the scope of agency authority. Third and finally, the Supreme Court’s decision in Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, No. 22-1008, has received somewhat less attention than either Jarkesy or Loper Bright, but it is nonetheless significant since it expands the availability of potential challenges to agency action. In Corner Post, the Supreme Court held 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Barrett, that the six-year statute of limitations for challenges to agency rules under the Administrative Procedure Act does not begin to run until the date the plaintiff is first injured by the rule, even if that occurs long after the rule’s promulgation. As Justice Barrett explained, the Administrative Procedure Act “embodies the plaintiff-centric traditional rule that a statute of limitation begins to run only when the plaintiff has a complete and present cause of action.” Especially when coupled with Loper Bright, Corner Post is likely to expand the number of agency rules that are litigated and increase challengers’ success rate in such challenges. Now, rules may be challenged long after they are promulgated, including by newly-incorporated entities funded or supported by other regulated entities whose own claims to a particular rule would otherwise be time barred. While the full scope of the impact of these three decisions remains to be seen, they are likely to limit the scope of agency oversight over regulated entities and expand the aperture for industry challenges to agency action. And there is little indication that the Supreme Court’s role in this area is likely to diminish any time soon, as actions by the Trump Administration are already raising novel administrative law issues that the Court will likely address before long. The End of Third-Party Releases in Bankruptcy? The Supreme Court in its 2023-2024 Term did not limit its blockbuster rulings to the area of administrative law; it also issued a generationally significant bankruptcy ruling in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma LP. Nonconsensual third-party releases have become a common feature of mass tort bankruptcy cases. Such releases, which release claims against non-debtors without the express consent of affected claimants, have commonly been included in proposed plans of reorganization and have facilitated global resolutions of a number of complex bankruptcies. In Purdue Pharma, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Bankruptcy Court does not authorize bankruptcy courts to confirm a Chapter 11 plan that includes nonconsensual CROSS-PRACTICE FOCUS Appeals and Strategic Counseling ANOTHER BANNER SCOTUS TERM FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Case SEC v. Jarkesy Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Holding SEC cannot pursue civil penalties for securities fraud claims in in-house tribunals A regulatory agency’s interpretation of a statute is not entitled to deference in court The six-year statute of limitations for challenges to agency rules under the APA begins after plaintiff is first injured by that rule 24 | Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTI5NDgyMg==