SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " supreme " 1,589 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Political parties see high stakes in NC Supreme Court election
Anita Earls and Sarah Stevens compete for voters’ attention and make case for why people should back them in race for NC Supreme Court seat.
Supreme Court's Roberts allows work on Trump’s White House ballroom to continue
The temporary order comes hours before lower-court rulings would have forced a halt to aboveground construction
Supreme Court's Roberts allows work on Trump’s White House ballroom to continue
The temporary order comes hours before lower-court rulings would have forced a halt to aboveground construction
Supreme Court chief justice allows work on Trump’s $400M White House ballroom to continue for now
The temporary order comes hours before lower-court rulings would have forced a halt to aboveground construction.
Abortion could return to Supreme Court, this time with a focus on women's health
A federal court ruling out of Idaho has potential implications for exceptions in abortion bans nationwide and could eventually end up before the U.S. Supreme Court to decide.
Nebraska GOP, Dems appeal to state Supreme Court to stop other political parties
Nebraska’s two major political parties have asked the state Supreme Court to overrule a decision allowing two new political parties to form.
Republicans notch win in Missouri congressional redistricting fight
A judge allowed Republicans to use their new congressional map this fall, but the state Supreme Court may weigh in.
Missouri court allows new Trump-backed U.S. House districts to be used in November election
The ruling Wednesday by Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green is a victory for Republicans seeking to hold onto their slim majority in the U.S. House. But the case is likely to end up in the state Supreme Court.
Dems propose term limits to 'restore fairness' in Supreme Court
A group of Democratic senators are spearheading an effort to establish 18 year term limits for justices, a restriction that would allow presidents to nominate a new justice every two years.
Business groups again endorse Republicans for Ohio Supreme Court, but say it's not partisan
Leaders of Ohio's main business organizations insist their endorsements of the Republican candidates for Ohio Supreme Court is not just a political decision.
Supreme Court asked to review law requiring Ten Commandments in public schools
The case could set a new national standard for the limits of state-sponsored religious expression in classrooms
Supreme Court asked to review law requiring Ten Commandments in public schools
The case could set a new national standard for the limits of state-sponsored religious expression in classrooms
Supreme Court asked to review law requiring Ten Commandments in public schools
The case could set a new national standard for the limits of state-sponsored religious expression in classrooms
Supreme Court rebuffs Trump’s bid to overturn $5 million verdict in Carroll case
The president was found liable of sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll in the high-profile civil case.
Supreme Court again denies Trump's push to toss out $5 million verdict in E. Jean Carroll case
Trump and the Justice Department are also asking the high court to toss out a second Carroll verdict totaling $83 million.
Supreme Court again rebuffs Trump on E. Jean Carroll case
Carroll, 82, first talked about the attack publicly in 2019 in a memoir while Trump was president.
Angry at the Supreme Court, liberals push a slew of plans for overhauling it
As the midterms near, Democrats are proposing adding more justices, limiting their terms and more.
The Legal Paths to Hoarding Political and Economic Power
At the same time that the Supreme Court is making the political landscape less competitive, a series of corporate law developments are concentrating power within the commanding heights of the data economy.
SJC delays ruling on Boston’s White Stadium lawsuit, putting $325M plan at risk: ‘Political disaster’
Boston’s $325 million rebuild of White Stadium for a pro soccer team was dealt another blow this week, when the Supreme Judicial Court opted to take more time to consider an appeal from a community group seeking to kill the project.
Trump asks Supreme Court to let White House resume ballroom construction during appeal
President Donald Trump's administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the White House to resume construction on its $400 million ballroom project while it appeals a lower court's order to halt the work.
Trump asks Supreme Court to let White House resume ballroom construction
An appeals court ruled last week Trump must stop the White House ballroom's construction because Congress has not approved the project
Trump administration asks US supreme court to allow construction of White House ballroom
Administration asks justices to keep appeals court decision to halt work on hold while it prepares a full appeal
Trump asks Supreme Court to intervene in fight over White House ballroom
President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to step into a dispute over the legality of a massive new ballroom he’s building at the White House.
Small Businesses Despise Trump’s Tariffs
Mere hours after the Trump administration's latest tariff scheme launched on July 24, the government was sued again by the same small businesses that had already defeated prior White House tariff shenanigans, most notably at the Supreme Court. As Bloomberg Law reported, these companies are part of an “increasingly vocal cohort of business owners who emerged as the face of mom-and-pop tariff resistance.” What about Walmart Inc., Ford Motor Co. and the other titans of corporate America paying many
Judge orders businesses out of Rochester warehouse over fire safety concerns
A Monroe County Supreme Court judge has ordered businesses inside a massive warehouse on Buffalo Road to temporarily stop operations after the city raised concerns about a serious fire safety risk.
'Look at me!' Justice fires back at critics who dare question his Blackness
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas reveals how Thomas Sowell's work freed him from isolation and gave him confidence to challenge Black political norms.
Russia: Why is the Yabloko party barred from the elections?
Russia's supreme court has banned the anti-war opposition party Yabloko from September's parliamentary elections. What does this mean for the election campaign, opponents of the war and for the political mood in Russia?
How The Global Business Community Is Responding To Tariffs & The Strait Of Hormuz Impasse: Expert
When the Supreme Court blocked a large swath of his tariffs, Trump said his administration had "very powerful alternatives." Now we know what those alternatives are.
Trump cheers Alito staying for another Supreme Court term: 'One of the greatest of all time'
President Donald Trump praised Associate Justice Samuel Alito's decision to stay on the U.S. Supreme Court in a social media post on Truth Social.
Iran airs rare clip of supreme leader -- but here's why it does nothing to dispel dire health rumors
Amid Questions Over Mojtaba Khamenei's Health, An Iran President-Supreme Leader Meet
Pezeshkian, who took office in July 2024, had said in early May that he met with Khamenei, also without specifying the date, but the supreme leader's office did not issue any statements at the time.
Justice Samuel Alito says he’s not retiring ‘for another term’
(CNN) — Justice Samuel Alito, one of the Supreme Court’s staunchest conservatives, does not plan to retire before the court finishes its upcoming session, he said in an interview with
Trump’s White House ballroom foes face ‘very tough argument’ at Supreme Court, legal experts say
Legal experts say the National Trust for Historic Preservation faces a tough standing hurdle at the Supreme Court over Trump's White House ballroom.
Haiti and the politics of persecution
Haiti is not an abstraction. Haiti is a nation whose pain has too often been treated as policy collateral, a people whose labor is welcomed when needed and whose lives are discounted when convenient. Now, with the Supreme Court allowing the Trump administration to terminate Temporary Protected Status for Haitians and Syrians, more than 350,000 […]
What to know about Trump's new attempt to limit birthright citizenship
A Supreme Court decision in June struck down a previous attempt at restricting birthright citizenship, but Thursday’s orders were made with “adjustments” keeping the decision in mind, President Donald Trump said.
A Legitimate Regime In Iran? The Politics of the Supreme Leader's Funeral
Supreme Leader's funeral in Iran: "Ceremonies were directed less towards remembering Khamenei than towards stabilizing post-Khamenei order"
Justice Samuel Alito says he’s not retiring ‘for another term’
Justice Samuel Alito, one of the Supreme Court’s staunchest conservatives, does not plan to retire before the court finishes its upcoming session, he said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal published Friday.
Trump won’t let the Supreme Court have the last word
The president moved this week to counter legal defeats on ending birthright citizenship and firing a Fed governor, while seeking the justices’ help with his ballroom.
Trump administration proceeds with efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook
The Trump administration is moving ahead with its efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, two months after the Supreme Court allowed her to retain her job while she fights the president’s effort to terminate her over mortgage fraud allegations that she has denied.
Trump administration pursues efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook
Two months ago, the Supreme Court allowed her to retain her job
Trump administration pursues efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook
Two months ago, the Supreme Court allowed her to retain her job
Trump administration pursues efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook
Two months ago, the Supreme Court allowed her to retain her job
Trump administration pursues efforts to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook
Two months ago, the Supreme Court allowed her to retain her job
Appeals court rules Trump can't build White House ballroom without congressional approval
Trump said in a post on social media that he would be appealing what he called an “unjust decision” to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump must halt ballroom construction, appeals court says
The order will take effect in two weeks, allowing the White House to appeal to the Supreme Court
Appeals court says Trump is unlawfully constructing White House ballroom
A divided federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump is unlawfully constructing a massive new ballroom at the White House, possibly teeing up a high-stakes showdown over the issue before the Supreme Court.
Business Restructuring Review Vol. 25 No. 4 July-August 2026
In This Issue New York Bankruptcy Court: Premature Allegations of Creditor Mistreatment Insufficient to Deny Chapter 15 Recognition of Foreign Restructuring Proceeding In In re ARD Finance, S.A., No. 25-12794 (MG), 2026 WL 817458 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Mar. 25, 2026), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York was presented with a petition seeking chapter 15 recognition of Luxembourg's recently enacted bankruptcy law governing judicial reorganization proceedings. The court granted the petition, turning aside challenges to recognition voiced by a creditor group arguing that recognition should be denied based upon allegations of unfairness to creditors in the Luxembourg proceeding that would make recognition manifestly contrary to U.S. public policy. According to the bankruptcy court, recognition was warranted because: (i) the rules and procedures governing the proceeding under Luxembourg law were fundamentally fair; (ii) the petition otherwise satisfied chapter 15's recognition requirements; and (iii) the creditor group's allegations were premature, given the fact that the Luxembourg court presiding over the debtor's restructuring proceeding had not confirmed a restructuring plan, and all creditors had the right to participate fully and voice their objections in the proceeding (including the right to appeal an order approving a plan). [read more …] Florida Bankruptcy Court Examines Scope of Discovery in Chapter 15 Cases In In re Banco Master, S.A., No. 25-24568-SMG, 2026 WL 931729 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2026), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida granted in part and denied in part post-recognition motions filed by an insider of a foreign debtor seeking to bar or limit discovery sought by the debtor's foreign representative concerning allegedly voidable transfers involving the debtors' U.S. real property. According to the court: (i) although chapter 15 includes its own discovery provisions among the relief that may be granted to a foreign representative, the expansive discovery available in cases under other chapters of the Bankruptcy Code is also available in chapter 15 cases; (ii) the discovery sought by the foreign representative was permissible; (iii) discovery regarding matters that were the subject of a pending adversary proceeding had to be undertaken under the more restrictive rules applicable to such proceedings; and (iv) a discovery request would be barred to the extent that it sought production of documents or testimony from a subpoenaed entity that exceeded the geographic limitations specified in such rules. [read more …] Delaware District Court Affirms Chapter 15 Recognition Order Enforcing Nonconsensual Third-Party Releases In U.S. Int'l Dev. Fin. Corp. v. Credito Real S.A.B. de C.V. SOFOM, E.N.R. (In re Credito Real S.A.B. de C.V. SOFOM, E.N.R.), 677 B.R. 192 (D. Del. 2026), appeal filed, No. 26-2356 (3d Cir. June 5, 2026), the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware affirmed a bankruptcy court order granting chapter 15 recognition to a Mexican "concurso mercantile" proceeding and enforcing nonconsensual third-party releases approved by the Mexican court. Agreeing with the bankruptcy court that the releases were not manifestly contrary to U.S. public policy, the district court concluded: "It is well settled that U.S. bankruptcy courts can give effect to foreign orders in recognized foreign proceedings pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 15, even when those orders contain relief unavailable under U.S. law. [The appellant's] arguments misconstrue the Supreme Court's narrow holding in Purdue, applicable in Chapter 11 cases, as well as the statutory framework of Chapter 15 and its core policy objectives. Accordingly, I will affirm the Enforcement Order." The ruling has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. [read more …] Fifth Circuit: Bankruptcy Court, Not State Court, Had Jurisdiction to Allow or Disallow Administrative Expense Claim In Storey Minerals Ltd. v. EP Energy E&P Co., LP (Matter of EP Energy E&P Co., LP), 169 F.4th 609 (5th Cir. 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed lower courts' rulings disallowing a creditor's administrative expense claim. It also rejected the creditor's argument that, because the claims were predicated on state law, a state court should adjudicate the merits of the state law causes of action before the bankruptcy court could allow or disallow the claim as an administrative expense. According to the Fifth Circuit, even though the causes of action were based on state law, the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to determine whether the creditor's claims should be conferred with administrative expense priority in the debtors' chapter 11 case. [read more …] New York Bankruptcy Court: Dismissal of Involuntary Chapter 11 Case Filed Prior to Commencement of Foreign Restructuring Proceeding Unwarranted In In re Xinyuan Real Estate Co. Ltd., No. 25-10745 (PB), 2026 WL 592250 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Mar. 3. 2026), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York considered the bona fides of an involuntary chapter 11 petition filed by certain holders of U.S. dollar-denominated notes against a holding company for a group of Chinese property development companies that filed a restructuring proceeding in the Cayman Islands after the noteholders filed the involuntary chapter 11 petition. The court denied the debtor's motion to dismiss the chapter 11 case. Given the timing of the filing of the Cayman Islands restructuring proceeding, the absence of any progress in the proceeding for seven months, the debtor's need to restructure notes governed by U.S. law, and the debtor's lack of any meaningful contacts to the Cayman Islands, dismissal of the chapter 11 case was unwarranted under the applicable provision of the Bankruptcy Code, international comity, or the doctrine of forum non conveniens. [read more …] Bankruptcy Court Evaluates Trustee's Authority to Sell Avoidance Actions and Right of Target Defendants to Object In In re Law Enf't Officers Sec. Union, No. 24-70277-JAD, 2026 WL 560452 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. Feb. 27, 2026), a chapter 7 trustee sought court approval to sell certain avoidance actions to a creditor of the debtor's estate. Potential targets of the subject avoidance actions objected, arguing that such claims were nontransferable powers of the trustee rather than saleable estate property and urging the court to approve their competing settlement with the trustee. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania disagreed with the potential defendants, holding that they lacked standing to object to the proposed sale, that avoidance actions are indeed estate property, and that the sale—rather than the settlement—best served the estate's interests. [read more …] U.S. Supreme Court Bankruptcy Roundup in Brief In Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction Inc., No. 25-6, 2026 WL 1686028 (U.S. June 11, 2026), the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Fifth Circuit decision judicially estopping a chapter 13 debtor from asserting a personal injury claim against a construction company because the debtor failed to disclose the claim during his bankruptcy case. In so ruling, the Court held that "[t]he Fifth Circuit erred by artificially narrowing its inquiry to whether the debtor had knowledge of the underlying facts or a potential motive to conceal the claim." It represents the first time that the Court has applied judicial estoppel in the bankruptcy context, although it has suggested in other contexts that it may be inappropriate where an inconsistent legal position resulted from "inadvertence or mistake." Also in June, the Court denied petitions for certiorari in a few notable bankruptcy cases. [read more …] Newsworthy Heather Lennox (Cleveland/New York) (Star Individual), Bruce Bennett (Los Angeles) (Senior Statesperson), Kevyn D. Orr (Washington) (Eminent Practitioner), Gregory M. Gordon (Dallas) (Band 1), Carl E. Black (Cleveland), Corinne Ball (New York) (Senior Statesperson), Brad B. Erens (Chicago), Jeffrey B. Ellman (Atlanta), T. Daniel Reynolds (Cleveland), and Dan T. Moss (Washington/New York) were recognized as leading lawyers in the practice area Bankruptcy/Restructuring in the 2026 edition of Chambers USA: The World's Leading Lawyers for Business. The 2026 edition of Lawdragon 500 Leading Bankruptcy and Restructuring Lawyers ranked the following lawyers: Corinne Ball (New York) (Hall of Fame), Bruce Bennett (Los Angeles), Carl E. Black (Cleveland), Jeffrey B. Ellman (Atlanta), Brad B. Erens (Chicago), Gregory M. Gordon (Dallas), Heather Lennox (Cleveland/New York), Joshua M. Mester (Los Angeles), and Kevyn D. Orr (Washington). Fabienne Beuzit (Paris) and Jasper Berkenbosch (Amsterdam) were among the "Leading Individuals" ranked in the 2026 edition of The Legal 500 EMEA guide in the field of Restructuring and Insolvency or Insolvency. Rodolphe Carrière (Paris) was named a "Next Generation Partner" in the practice area Insolvency. Sid Pepels (Amsterdam) was selected by Global Restructuring Review's 40 under 40 2026. He was identified as a Rising Star within the global cross-border restructuring community. Global Restructuring Review is a leading digital subscription service, news outlet, and information platform dedicated exclusively to cross-border insolvency and corporate restructuring law. Fabienne Beuzit (Paris), Rodolphe Carrière (Paris), and Isabelle Maury (Paris) were recognized in the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in France™ in the practice area Insolvency and Reorganization Law. An article written by Corinne Ball (New York) titled "Comity and Fairness are Critical to Granting Additional Assistance under Chapter 15: A Canadian Reverse Vesting Order and Related Releases in Proceedings Involving Canadian and U.S.-Affiliated Companies Are Approved" was published in the June 24, 2026, edition of the New York Law Journal. An article written by Caitlin K. Cahow (Detroit) titled "New York Bankruptcy Court Weighs In on Adequate Assurance of Future Performance under Assigned Leases and Chapter 11 Plan Exculpation Provisions" was published on June 8, 2026, in Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Trisha L. Mowbray (Real Estate; Chicago) and Ryan Sims (Washington) titled "Chapter 11 Plan that Abridged Non-Debtor Lessee's Rights to Remain in Possession After Rejection Unconfirmable as Having Been Proposed in Bad Faith" was published on June 16, 2026, in the Harvard Law School Bankruptcy Roundtable. An article written by Dan T. Moss (Washington/New York), Corinne Ball (New York), Isel M. Perez (Miami), and David S. Torborg (Washington) titled "Texas Bankruptcy Court Adopts Barnet Rule Requiring Foreign Debtor to Have U.S. Assets to Be Eligible for Chapter 15 Relief" was published on June 10, 2026, in Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Daniel J. Merrett (Atlanta) and Nathaniel Parr (Atlanta) titled "Southern District of Texas Clarifies Post-Purdue Course for Consensual Third-Party Releases and Gatekeeping Provisions" was published on June 11, 2026, in Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Corinne Ball (New York) titled "LMEs, Sophisticated Investors and Equitable Mootness: The Fifth and Third Circuits Warn Against Testing the Limits of Chapter 11" was published in the June 2026 issue of the American Bankruptcy Institute Journal. Nicholas J. Morin (New York) was quoted in an article titled "Serta Ruling Offers Damages Road Map in Lender-on-Lender Disputes," published by Bloomberg Law on July 7, 2026. The article discussed U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez's July 7, 2026, ruling that participating lenders in Serta Simmons Bedding's 2020 non-pro rata uptier exchange breached the credit agreement's ratable-sharing provision, and awarding excluded lenders more than $261 million in damages. The opinion resolves six years of litigation related to Serta's 2020 transaction, where it raised $200 million in new financing and exchanged $1.2 billion of term loans for $875 million in superpriority debt. Judge Lopez found that the debt-for-debt exchange constituted a "payment" under the credit agreement, requiring proportional sharing among lenders, and dismissed various defenses raised by the participating lenders. The case is Serta Simmons Bedding LLC v. AG Centre Street Partnership (In re Serta Simmons Bedding LLC), 2026 WL 1968535 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Jul. 7, 2026). The New York Law Journal has recognized Andrew M. Butler (New York) as a 2026 "Rising Star" in Restructuring/Bankruptcy as part of the New York Legal Awards. The Rising Star category recognizes New York's most promising lawyers age 40 and under who have distinguished themselves through exceptional legal work, leadership, and contributions to the profession. Lawyer Spotlight: Daniel J. Merrett Dan Merrett, a partner in the Atlanta Office, has spent nearly 20 years representing all manner of stakeholders in complex corporate restructurings and chapter 11 reorganizations. His practice extends to related transactions and disputes involving acquisitions; divestitures; credit facilities; securities; environmental obligations; and vendor, employee, and governance matters. Dan has substantial experience managing mass tort liabilities, including the restructurings and related chapter 11 cases of affiliates of Georgia Pacific and Johnson & Johnson, implemented to resolve asbestos and talc liabilities. He also represents key parties in energy and infrastructure matters, including facility owners, EPC contractors, and joint-venture parties. Dan was a key player in the restructuring teams in the historic bankruptcies of the City of Detroit and Chrysler. His other significant representations in chapter 11 cases include AFA Foods, Alpha Natural Resources, Dana Corporation, M&G Chemicals, McDermott International, Monster/CareerBuilder, Transtar Industries, and Westinghouse. He is licensed in both the United States and England & Wales and recognized in restructuring by Chambers USA and Best Lawyers.
Michigan Supreme Court is asked to block money-out-of-politics question
A business-backed group is asking the Michigan Supreme Court to invalidate a campaign finance petition over a dispute about signature certification.
Trump tries new tack against birthright citizenship after Supreme Court snub
President Donald Trump signed two executive orders targeting children born to foreign lobbyists and tourists. The orders are certain to face legal challenges.
Trump again tries to curb birthright citizenship and ‘birth tourism’ through executive action
President Donald Trump is taking another swing at so-called birth tourism and birthright citizenship, citing a “very unfortunate decision” in the Supreme Court this year.
WATCH: Trump signs executive orders imposing new limits on birthright citizenship
President Donald Trump said Thursday that he is once more trying to limit the number of people who are born in the country who can become American citizens, in a sign that even after his first attempt at limiting birthright citizenship was rejected by the Supreme Court, he's ready to try again.
Michigan Supreme Court asked to block 'money out of politics' proposal
A group fighting a petition initiative that would bar state-regulated corporations from political spending has asked the high court to block it
Former Attorneys General, Business Associations, and Former Department of Labor Leaders Support Family Farm’s Supreme Court Case
ARLINGTON, Va.—In its fall term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Department of Labor’s agency court system. New […]
Maryland’s youth turning over a new leaf? Survey shows positive trends.
Children used less alcohol and drugs in 2024 and reported less depression in the Maryland Department of Health’s 2024-2025 youth risk behavior survey.
Supreme Court won't halt $656 million judgment against the PLO and Palestinian Authority
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor refused Monday to halt a $656 million judgment against Palestinian authorities in a long-running lawsuit filed by Americans killed or wounded in attacks in Israel.
25 states sue over Trump administration's latest tariffs, citing Supreme Court ruling
The United States last month imposed double-digit tariffs on 59 countries and the European Union, charging that they had not done enough to crack down on imports produced by forced labor.
Democratic states urge Supreme Court to block Trump's new limits on mail ballots
President Trump's executive order required the U.S. Postal Service to use state-by-state lists of eligible voters who may send a ballot by mail.
Acoustirats and Jordan Lauterbach to Perform at LI Music & Entertainment Hall of Fame on Aug 23rd
As part of the Long Island Music and Entertainment Hall of Fame Soundtrack to Summer Series, the band Acoustirats will perform LIVE music and Comedian Jordan Lauterbach will open with comedy set at the Long Island Music and Entertainment Hall of Fame in Stony Brook Village (97 Main Street, Stony Brook, NY) on Aug. 23th from 3-4pm. The event is free for members or with general admission ticket purchase or $10 at the door concert ticket purchase. For details on this and upcoming events please visit https://www.limusichalloffame.... About AcoustiRats AcoustiRats is an acoustic duo dedicated to stripping Good Rats classics down to their raw, essential form. Fronted by Stefan Marchello, lead singer and 36-year veteran of the Good Rats, alongside guitarist Matt McCarthy, who also did a run on guitar with the band. Between them, they've got decades of Good Rats DNA in their blood. After years of playing these songs loud and electric, Stefan and Matt are thrilled to break them down to the bare bones. No frills, no amps cranked to 11 — just voice, acoustic guitar, and the songwriting that made the Good Rats legendary. It's the same attitude and stories fans know, delivered in a raw, intimate format. For diehard Good Rats fans, it's a new way to hear the classics. For first-timers, it's proof that great songwriting doesn't need to be loud to hit hard. About Jordan Lauterbach Jordan Lauterbach is a fast-rising comedian who features prominently in clubs around the country. His autobiographical style and supreme wit keep audiences laughing for hours after they leave the club. Lauterbach is likable, relatable, and tremendously funny. He has opened for some of comedy's best and is quickly carving out an audience of his own.
Just admit it: The Supreme Court is political
Let’s face it, the Supreme Court has dug itself into a hole, and it just keeps digging.
Trump’s mail voting appeal tests Supreme Court’s anti-chaos election rule
President Donald Trump’s emergency appeal aimed at limiting the use of mail ballots is poised to test a controversial, 20-year-old Supreme Court principle that was intended to avoid chaos before elections.
She Voted for a Justice Who Overturned Roe. Now it Haunts Her on the Trail.
Senator Susan Collins, who supports abortion rights, endorsed Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination for the Supreme Court. It has emerged as a major issue in her campaign for re-election.
Kamala Harris backs major changes to the Supreme Court, Electoral College ahead of possible 2028 campaign
Former Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed Supreme Court expansion and abolishing the Electoral College at the National Urban League Conference while weighing a 2028 run.
Is 'Let's Go Brandon' lewd? Students ask Supreme Court to decide
A middle school said brothers couldn't wear the \
The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift
This edition of PN is made possible by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️ 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps. Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) [ Harmeet Dhillon demonstrates danger of posting through it ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Liz Dye · Jul 29 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.” Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies. While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements. Science for dummies Part of how you can tell this isn’t a document about science is that you are immediately faced with an absolute wall of business-speak of the worst sort. Did you know we must “tightly couple our science and technology enterprises to ensure that groundbreaking ideas invented in the United States are rapidly prototyped, tested, manufactured, and scaled domestically”? You do now! That tone isn’t surprising, because Kratsios has no background in science or research. He has a bachelor’s in political science and spent most of his career working for Peter Thiel at Thiel Capital. After a stint in the first Trump administration as Chief Technology Officer, where he also did not do any science, Kratsios was tasked in 2020 with overseeing the Pentagon’s research budget for a brief time, a position that, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “carries a great deal of power in terms of dictating investment allocations.” He spent the Biden years at Scale AI as “head of strategy,” which you will also note is neither a science nor a research job. But Scale AI has contracts with the Department of Defense and, as the Washington Post wrote in 2023, “has been aggressively pitching itself as the company that will help the US military in its existential battle with China.” And now you have the necessary background for our new golden age, which is going to be a golden age of taking money away from scientists and universities and giving it to companies like Scale AI. A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like Lisa takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please become one to support our work. 👇 Subscribe In a genuinely galling move, Katsios spends a lot of time slamming universities because of “administrative burdens on researchers” and the “well-documented inefficiencies” in academia, the message being that those damn universities waste the time of amazing researchers with paperwork. Except it’s the administration that is attempting to impose inefficient, unnecessary burdens on those researchers with a proposed Office of Management and Budget rule that would require senior political appointees to approve every science grant and ensure it aligns with Trump’s personal priorities. Researchers would also have to seek prior government approval to attend conferences or publicize their research. And political appointees could terminate any grant at any time if they feel like it. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) [ The murder of expertise ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) Lisa Needham · Jun 11 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) But when it comes to AI, we’re going to “restore permissionless innovation.” The report proposes to give lucky ducky innovators a pile of cash up front for grants lasting five years or longer, saying “awards should be fully-funded in year one, with all resources earmarked upfront, to minimize administrative burdens and reduce pressure for researchers to generate intermediate results to secure continued funding.” Yeah, wouldn’t want to have to make the Very Special Tech Bros show results or get money parceled out year by year like the plebes at universities. The report also proposes that we should have “fast grants” with “simplified applications requiring just a few pages of writing” because that is definitely how science works, just writing a bit off the dome and getting some cash. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) [ Tech elites are turning AI into ChatGPTrump ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Paul Waldman · July 29, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Oh, and we should have prizes and challenges, where multiple teams compete. The proposed prizes include incentives like “advance procurement commitments,” which means the federal government agrees to buy whatever is being developed. There’s also “regulatory fast-tracking,” making sure all those great AI thingies don’t have to wait too long to be unleashed on a market. These aren’t incentives to do science. These are incentives to develop things with tax dollars that you can then sell to the government for more tax dollars. In the suggestion that might be the most unhinged, the most very opposite of how both government and research work, our new age will include “golden tickets.” That’s where an individual reviewer in an agency — yes, just one person — can “recommend unconventional proposals that may not pass consensus-driven review panels” because somehow this will “surface valuable ideas too divisive for committees and attract higher quality reviewers by empowering them to exercise independent scientific judgment.” Yes, that’s saying that a random person in an agency should be able to shovel money at some idea even if it can’t pass a review panel, and that the opportunity to do so will attract better employees because apparently all the best minds in science are chomping at the bit to be allowed to unilaterally fund AI research based on their personal vibes. But that isn’t at all how actual science works, and actual scientists aren’t unhappy about review panels. They work collaboratively, not siloed in some secret race to create the next AI chatbot. A 2020 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research examined whether peer review panels succeed in helping agencies predict which research ideas will best advance science. Peer review was better at finding “diamond in the rough” applicants than a single government program official. How about that. Trump always wants a taste It’s painfully clear that what Katsios is trying to do here is turn the whole of government science research and funding into the sort of “move fast and break things” paradigm that is the hallmark of big tech. That method works to line the pockets of tech executives, but it isn’t science. There’s a reason the government funds different kinds of research than private tech companies do. What Katsios either fails to understand or deliberately ignores is that the federal government is the main funder of basic research precisely because it can take a long time for it to bear fruit and is not intended to be profitable as such. “Basic” here does not mean rudimentary or simple, but rather research that is designed to advance scientific knowledge instead of achieving a specific outcome or product. Big tech companies don’t widely fund that sort of research, because it doesn’t make them money. Industry dollars account for only about 20 percent of basic research funding, while the government contributes around 60 percent. Big tech companies and startups do, however, rely on and benefit from that basic research. A 2019 study found that 35 percent of all patents obtained by venture-backed startups from 1976 to 2016 cited federally supported research. Basic research funded by the NIH contributed to every single drug the FDA approved from 2010 to 2016. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) [ The Saudi nuclear farce and governance by whim and meme ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Noah Berlatsky · Jul 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Unlike inventing the next ChatGPT, actual science is slow and iterative. Government funding of research that, on its face, would not appear to lead to any big new invention is actually what underpins those big new inventions. If the government hadn’t funded research into desert lizard venom, we wouldn’t know about semaglutide, and we wouldn’t have Ozempic. If research scientists hadn’t studied how bees optimize nectar foraging within a colony, we wouldn’t have the algorithm that assigns internet traffic across computer servers. The report assiduously ignores that a symbiotic, profitable relationship between the federal government, universities, and private companies already exists. Each federal research dollar generates about $1.50 to $3.00 in long-term economic benefits. The $36 billion the government awarded in NIH research funding in fiscal year 2025 generated $94 billion in new economic activity. Trump’s proposed new golden age is intended to strip those billions from universities, resulting in the dismantling of departments and the shuttering of labs. But Katsios has a plan for that: Universities should just become trade schools to churn out no-show STEM degrees! “Require universities and community colleges to embed practical technical training and externships into STEM curricula. Let hands-on experience and industry credentials count toward degrees.” It’s quite the feat to, on the one hand, strip schools of funding for scientific research while simultaneously demanding to control what is taught and, oh, also, colleges need to give degrees to employees at big tech companies just for being employees at big tech companies. The new golden age would also exacerbate the brain drain Trump’s policies have already caused. Nature found that in the first quarter of 2025, US scientists submitted 32 percent more job applications abroad than in 2024. A March 2025 poll by Nature of roughly 1,600 scientists found that over 1,200 said they were considering leaving the country. Europe is investing $565 million to make it a “magnet for researchers” and provide funding for scientists who relocate. The new golden age is also about embedding Trump’s xenophobia into the fabric of American science. The report complains of an “over-reliance on foreign students” that “creates a security challenge our institutions are ill-equipped to address” and that a “reliance on foreign talent sidelines American students.” This is, to put it mildly, nonsense. International students pay far higher tuition and often receive no financial aid. Their tuition dollars are what make it possible for American students to get financial aid. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Those 1.1 million international students accounted for only six percent of the total number of students in higher education that year, but were such an economic engine that for every three international students, one job was created or supported. It’s impossible not to wonder whether part of Trump’s loathing for universities and their leading role in scientific research is that there is no way for him to corrupt the process and make money off it in the same way he can by giving millions and billions to Silicon Valley types who, in turn, give him millions in cash. There’s no way for his children to invest in universities that the government then gives no-bid contracts to, fattening the family’s bottom line, which is pretty much the Trump sons’ current venture capital practice. Trump and Katsios’s view of science is narrow, cramped, and wrong. We’re not in a crisis, we’re not a failed state. We’ve been a science superpower for decades, and the only thing that threatens that is Donald Trump. Tech bros are already living high off the hog in this administration. They don’t need any more of our tax dollars. Hopefully this new golden age never comes to pass. Thanks for reading Public Notice. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription. 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 Thanks for reading, and for your support.
Supreme Court decision could help Whatley financially in Senate race
The court struck down federal limits on how much money political parties can spend in coordination with federal candidates, eliminating limits.
Federal appeals court hears Maine test case on regulating super PACs
The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision that struck down limits on independent political spending does not need to be overturned to rein in Big Money in politics, Neal Katyal argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston on Wednesday in defense of Maine’s 2024 referendum regulating political spending.
Trump wants the Supreme Court to give him the unilateral power to rewrite election law
Trump threatened to arrest state election officials who distribute mailed ballots. Then, the courts got involved.
Trump, DOJ ask Supreme Court to toss $83M verdict in E. Jean Carroll case
Trump is arguing he can't be sued for comments he made while he was president
Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn $83 million verdict in E. Jean Carroll case
Trump’s attorneys asserted a 2024 high court decision granting presidents sweeping immunity for actions taken in office shields him from liability in the case.
Politics News | Breaking Political News, Video & Analysis-ABC News
ABC News is your trusted source on political news stories and videos. Get the latest coverage and analysis on everything from the Trump presidency, Senate, House and Supreme Court.
Trump administration urges Supreme Court to allow mail-in voting order
Trump's March executive order directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on a government-created list of eligible voters
Trump administration urges Supreme Court to allow mail-in voting order
Trump's March executive order directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on a government-created list of eligible voters
Trump asks Supreme Court to let him curtail mail voting
President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court to allow the administration to move forward with implementing a sweeping executive order aimed at mail voting — setting up a major elections dispute at the high court months before the midterms.
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow new limits on mail ballots
The appeal to the justices is part of a high-stakes push by President Donald Trump and his allies to put fresh limits on voting ahead of pivotal elections where control of the House and the Senate is at stake.
Trump administration urges Supreme Court to allow order targeting mail-in voting before midterms
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to clear the way for an executive order from President Donald Trump that could dramatically change mail-in voting.
Supreme Court tees up new test of FERC’s political independence
A recent ruling could spell trouble for the agency that oversees gas pipelines and the nation’s grid.
Appeals Court Upholds Blocks on Trump Order Restricting Mail Voting
The ruling on Saturday was the latest rebuke to President Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting. The government says it may take the case to the Supreme Court.
South Michigan News: Walberg applauds Supreme Court decision on women's sports protections
Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg said on June 30 that he supports the Supreme Court’s decision regarding protections for women’s sports
Small businesses sue Trump to stop latest wave of tariffs
The Liberty Justice Center challenged Trump’s emergency tariffs last year before the Supreme Court and won a key ruling.
DNC committee sets up South Carolina to vote first in Democrats’ 2028 presidential primaries
Key Democrats had pushed for the state as a signal of Black voters’ importance, especially after the Supreme Court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act.
Trump’s Trade Wars Are Back—Despite the Supreme Court
The president’s proposed use of an obscure Depression-era law shows courts and Congress haven’t curbed Trump’s ambition to impose tariffs at will.
Trump imposes double-digit tariffs on dozens of countries as stopgap 10% levies expire Friday
President Donald Trump is going ahead with new double-digit tariffs on dozens of U.S. trading partners just as the clock runs out Friday on stopgap levies he imposed after a stinging defeat at the Supreme Court.
Colorado justices to hear embryonic donation dispute
The Colorado Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will decide whether lower court judges properly applied its framework for adjudicating disputes over the fate of pre-embryos, in which one person wants to use them to become a parent and the other wishes to donate them. At least three of the court’s seven members must […]
WATCH: Brandon Gill corners law school gatekeeper with DEI question she won't answer
Rep. Brandon Gill pressed ABA president on whether diversity principles would justify rejecting a third Black Supreme Court justice nomination.
IAM Union Thanks Deirdre Hamilton for Distinguished Service, Warns Against Political Interference in Labor Boards
WASHINGTON, July 22, 2026 — The IAM Union (International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers), which represents more than 100,000 workers across the airline and railroad industries, is thanking former National Mediation Board (NMB) Member Deirdre Hamilton for her service following her dismissal by the Trump Administration, a move made possible by a recent Supreme Court
Fines for slow pretrial mental healthcare upheld against MD Health Department
The Maryland Supreme Court upheld fines against the state health department for failing to provide prompt psychiatric care to criminal defendants deemed incompetent to stand trial.
Bessent says Treasury tracked down ayatollah's 'money man,' plans to expose linked properties
Scott Bessent says Treasury has found the ayatollah's "money man" and is tracking over $100 million in properties linked to Iran's supreme leader.
Nintendo says it has no legal duty to pass its U.S. tariff refunds on to consumers
Nintendo is asking a court to dismiss a proposed class action suit that was filed this past spring by gamers who say the Mario maker is breaking the law if it doesn’t pass on its U.S. tariff refunds to consumers. Those consumers “received exactly what they bargained and paid for” when buying price-hiked Nintendo goods last year, the company said in a filing on Monday in the case of Hoffert et al v. Nintendo. “Plaintiffs are not entitled to a rebate simply because of intervening legal developments related to tariffs.” Nintendo increased the price of Switch 2 controllers and the original Switch last year, following the imposition of globe-spanning U.S. tariffs (tariffs described by Nintendo’s lawyers on Monday as “sweeping” and “constantly changing”). This past February, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the tariffs were illegal. A month later, Nintendo sued the U.S. government to get a refund. And in April, gamers filed the class action claim against Nintendo in Washington, saying it would be illegally double-dipping if it made money from tariff-hiked sales and then from a refund. The gamers sought relief for anyone in the U.S. who bought price-hiked Nintendo items between February 2025 and February 2026. “The common thread among Plaintiffs’ claims is that it is somehow ‘unfair; that Nintendo has not retroactively adjusted its prices for completed sales in response to the outcome of the tariff litigation,” the company’s lawyers wrote in today’s motion to dismiss. “But that is now how commercial transactions work.
Bonta says Paramount litigation isn’t ‘anti-Trump’
The California attorney general insisted in an interview with POLITICO that his antitrust litigation is about competition, not politics.
Almost half say Supreme Court rulings on Trump agenda based on politics: Survey
Nearly half of Americans say they believe the Supreme Court is ruling on President Trump’s policies based on ideology instead of the law, according to a new poll. The Washington Post/Ipsos survey, …
Does Monsanto v. Durnell bar Maine from adding differing health warnings to pesticide labels?
The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturned a Missouri jury's decision to award $1.25 million to a farmer who alleged that he developed cancer after using Roundup.
Almost Half of Americans View SCOTUS as Political
Plus, Trump’s ban on transgender troops will likely return to the Supreme Court.
Nearly half of Americans in poll say Supreme Court bases rulings on politics
A majority of Americans disapprove of the job the court is doing, a Washington Post-Ipsos survey finds. Still, it fares better than the president or Congress.
WATCH: House Dems dodge questions on socialist agenda that threatens to abolish key institutions
House Democrats dodged questions about the DSA's new platform calling to abolish the Senate, presidency, and Supreme Court for a parliamentary system.
Trump administration races to rebuild tariff wall knocked down by Supreme Court
The U.S. Treasury last year swelled with revenue from President Donald Trump’s double-digit taxes on imports from almost every country on earth. But the money dried up after the Supreme Court struck down the biggest and boldest of Trump’s tariffs in February. The question now is: Can the president’s trade team make good on its promise to replace the lost revenue?
Transgender girls who challenged Trump sports order drop lawsuit after Supreme Court ruling
Two transgender girls who were the first to challenge President Donald Trump’s executive order have withdrawn their lawsuit in New Hampshire.
The States Try to Topple WarnerMount…Thus Begins the Local Antitrust Era
(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.) Well, it looks like it’s time for another strategy column. Can I finally avoid writing about M&A? No, it seems I cannot. Admittedly, I’m a week early with this column, since I usually put it out every other week. But this news couldn’t wait. This will make three “Most Important Stories” in a row with a merger or acquisition as its centerpiece. First, Roku-Fox (an acquisition), then Comcast-NBCUniversal (a divestment!), and now the State AGs and the WGA’s lawsuits against Paramount’s pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery (antitrust). M&A is usually the “most important” topic any given week, simply because a giant company merging or breaking up (or preventing those outcomes) can have the biggest impact on the streaming board. If you think about these companies as players in a game, changing the number of players is one of the biggest changes you can make. I shouldn’t really complain, either, since this lawsuit is very good news for customers and suppliers (econ speak for talent, workers and indie studios in Hollywood). So let me answer some questions about this potential trial, along with (shudder) making some heavily caveated predictions. I’ll also look at whether Hollywood must consolidate, whether or not the states can win, trouble at X-Box, Netflix’s YouTube binge, and more. Plus, I have five images that visualize this merger and the harm, including three brand new data looks you’ve never seen before. Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - Can The States and the WGA Stop Hollywood’s Consolidation (Crisis)? If every other newsletter and news outlet is writing about the same story, I try to avoid writing about it as well, but I can’t ignore a story this consequential. The story of the last year was the fate of Warner Bros. Discovery, and this development potentially extends that saga into 2027. As I tried to figure out my angle, I realized, like my last column, I’m again faced with a series of questions. These questions, though, are much more forward-looking. Will the states win? Will the WGA win? If so, what happens to Warner Bros. Discovery? Either way, will this chill the market for future mergers? So you know what that means: predictions. About the future, no less, the hardest thing to predict.1 Just remember: nothing here comes with a guarantee. And the more confident someone is in their predictions, the less you should trust them. This situation is incredibly fluid, nuanced, uncertain and tenuous. So let’s try to explain what may happen. Question: Why File this Lawsuit? I’ll admit, a few months back, I was fairly pessimistic about the fate of this lawsuit. Rumors had started bubbling up that the state Attorneys General (in particular California) wanted to settle with either some minor divestments (usually CNN) or behavioral remedies. And that tracked for me: the states usually settle lawsuits, like the recent John Deere right-to-repair suit. Yet, they plan to fight this. (As they did the LiveNation-Ticketmaster monopolization trial and the Nexstar-Tegna merger.) Honestly, that also makes a ton of sense. Frankly, this move is just good politics for these State AGs. Most are still running for higher and higher office in blue states—some folks have emphasized that only Democratic AGs joined this suit, but given the Ellison/Trump ties, and fears of retribution, that tracks—and a high profile case like this will help them move up the electoral ladder, especially since Paramount and its leadership (the Ellisons, father and heir) have sided with the other side of the political aisle. That makes them unsympathetic to Democratic voters and Hollywood workers in particular. Why did this lawsuit happen? In addition to the very real concerns about industry consolidation, this is why. That said, I don’t think we would have seen this lawsuit for Netflix and Warner Bros., simply because they’re more sympathetic and aligned with Democrats. But those consolidation concerns are real. The “town”—meaning Hollywood and such—really is seeing the damage of mergers on this industry. That’s why the WGA also filed its own lawsuit in defense of workers as well. (Wildcard: What about Europe? Will they try to stop the deal, too? There have been some rumors out of the UK they may try to fight the deal, and UK enforcers just stopped a Getty Images-Shutterstock tie up, so there is precedence. This argument could go either way, though. On one hand, the EU doesn’t need to step in, cause they states are handling it. On the other hand, this could make the EU’s case easier. Just imagine if both sides coordinated. I’ll simply say, “We’ll see!”) Question: Will The State AGs or the WGA Win? Can the state AGs play David to Paramount-Skydance’s Goliath here? That’s really the whole thing, isn’t it? If you know this result, you could make a lot of money. When things are uncertain, it’s tempting to shrug and say, “Eh” meaning it’s a 50/50 proposition. I wouldn’t, though. When in doubt, you should expect that the merging parties succeed. AT&T did successfully buy Warner Bros., after all, and Disney bought Fox without any challenges. Many judges are extremely sympathetic to mergers, and I’d bet the state AGs get a judge who will allow the merger. (Even Obama-appointed judges often allow mergers.) As I understand it, we’ll see two main attacks. First, theatrical films. The AGs are arguing that, when it comes to share of box office and the number of both “wide releases” and blockbuster (or “tentpole”) films, the merging parties will have over 27% market share. Now, the Supreme Court once ruled from on high that any merger that exceeds 30% is presumptively illegal, but that’s guidance, not an ironclad bar. Still, the states will have to argue that this is close to having too much power, and with that power, this will likely further worsen the theater/studio splits in particular. Indeed, as Matthew Stoller pointed out, “just five studios are responsible for 95% of all blockbusters; if this merger goes through, then Paramount and Disney will control 60% of that.” So yes, movie studios will be very concentrated after this merger. Want me to visualize some of that? Well, here’s the share of films that grossed over $200 million at the domestic box office since 2022. (Note: this isn’t all films released in over 3,000 screens, but it is a good look at market power.) First, here are the 43 films by studio: Notice all the blue (Disney), orange (Universal), and purple (Warner Bros)? Yeah, those studios are powerful, and this combines Paramount with one of them. Here’s the look by studio and share of the films that grossed over $200 million: Now, if you look at that and also think, “Huh, should we break up Disney?” I’m with you. I’ve seen some folks poo-poo this idea that this is a real category, but it is! For an upcoming article, I’ve been pulling data on the share of top 100 films at the box office as a share of total box office, and it’s massive. Here’s the chart: (This analysis looks at The-Number’s top 100 films and total domestic box office each year.) To be clear, tentpoles make up 80.7% of the box office each year, so I do think it’s a genuine market. (To be clear, films grossing over $50 million make up 80% of the domestic box office, and films grossing over $100 million make up 64.1%.) I mean, the top 100 films at the box office make up 95% of each year’s grosses. Worse, the combined studios will likely cut output to flex that market power. Everyone can just look at what happened to Disney and Fox to see the precedent. (With fewer films, the remaining theaters have to give more for those few films that remain.) Here’s an image I’ve used a lot, the share of wide-release films from Disney and Fox over time: The AGs will also argue that this consolidation will also impact the cable industry. In this case, the consolidation is actually worse, but that environment is…complicated. Paramount will argue that the cable industry is shrinking. That said, predictions that cable will “go to zero” also don’t look very well supported by the data, as the declines are shrinking, meaning “cable” or “vMVPDs” will likely stabilize at some point. Can the state Attorneys General win on those two main arguments? I honestly don’t know. Again, I’d bet no, since history in general supports that, but it depends on the judge/jury and how they interpret the arguments. Notably, Paramount won’t face accusations about monopoly power in other areas, like streaming, news, sports rights, or vertical integration. I tend to disagree with leaving out sports rights, but I also see the appeal for a simpler case. The states also aren’t really pushing novel theories about labor harm either, which should help. (By the way, Sean McNulty at The Ankler wrote a great run through of potential options, and Capitol Forum also wrote a great paper on theatrical consolidation. Both these pieces predated the lawsuit. Matthew Stoller is also out with his analysis of the pros and cons of the case too.) In some ways, the WGA’s case is even stronger. Quoting Sean McNulty’s summary: “The WGA is citing WARNAMOUNT as crossing a 30% market share in multiple sectors, a number that the Supreme Court has precedent for deeming “presumptively anticompetitive” in a market. According to the WGA numbers, WARNAMOUNT would have represented: - 35% of film writing jobs between 2021 and 2024 - 36% of TV writing projects between 2022 and 2025 - 38% of overall deals between 2021 and 2024” Notably, antitrust enforcers did win recently in the Penguin-Simon & Schuster merger by focusing on labor impact, so don’t count this thinking out. (Wildcard: Will the states try to get a jury trial? Most likely no, they’ll let a judge handle it. If I’m them, though, I’d try to put this in front of a jury. Juries tend to understand monopoly power in a more realistic way than judges faced with legions of economists.) Question: What if They Win? What if They Lose?
Wolford v. Lopez rightly arms permit holders, business owners
t Last week, I wrote about the birthright citizenship case, one of several major Supreme Court decisions handed down over the past few weeks. Today, I want to look at what is probably the second most controversial decision, and one surrounded by a great deal of confusion and misinformation.