Administrative Agencies and the Fight over Regulatory Control

The regulatory state has expanded from the time of our founding. After the growth of industry and the expansion of interstate trade, the government understandably sought new ways to address increasingly complex problems. New agencies were created, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Federal Trade Commission (EPA, FDA , and FTC) who were charged with regulating different areas of commerce. This outgrowth was necessary to address changes in American markets. Over recent years, however, this expansion has become overly complex and has given too much authority to administrative agencies. In 2022 the state of West Virginia sought to rein in the regulatory powers of administrative agencies in the landmark Supreme Court case West Virginia v. EPA.  

Regulating Artificial Intelligence in the World of Insurance: Illinois’ Stalled Legislative Effort

The rapidly growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) has resulted in corporations having to find the balance between regulation and efficiency, and the world of insurance is no exception. As part of this transformation, insurance companies such as UnitedHealth Group and Humana have integrated AI into their claims evaluation system as a tool to process claims efficiently. UnitedHealth Group states that AI can better analyze data, process claims, detect fraud and provide more effective customer service. However, critics challenge this assessment, citing bias and privacy concerns. During the 2025 legislative session, Illinois pushed to regulate insurance agencies operating in the state through Illinois House Bill 0035. However, the legislation stalled in the Illinois Senate and did not advance during the 2025 legislative session.

Offer, Acceptance, no Consideration: Mandatory Arbitration Agreements and the Battle for Consumer and Worker Protection

Today, the rapid proliferation of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements (MAAs) in modern U.S. commercial and employment transactions represents a clear and concerning trend: a pervasive and increasingly normalized paradigm shift in which big business exercises an unreasonable amount of legal control over consumers and employees alike. Important high profile examples – such as Disney, Kellog’s, and General Mills – spotlight how seamlessly such contractual clauses are used to preempt the rights of consumers and workers. Ultimately, these clauses effectively ban workers and consumers from bringing otherwise legally sound claims to the courtroom. The increasingly ubiquitous use of MAA’s represents a threat to basic principles of justice and fairness, exacerbating an already corporate friendly regulatory dynamic and commercial legal environment. However, this present reality is not predestined. Legislative proposals like the FAIR Act represent important balancing opportunities for federal regulators to empower consumers and workers by protecting them from unknowingly signing away their legal rights, and potential remedies, often with one simple click.

Worker Safety Compliance in a Remote Work World

Employee safety is a top priority for all employers. However, as the world continues to embrace remote work, employers must navigate employee safety in a new manner. Both state and federal agencies have adapted regulations to ensure remote workers are entitled to a safe working environment, which means expanded responsibility for employers. Employers now need to maintain safe work environments within the employee’s homes or face the consequences like workers’ compensation penalties and violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

Navigating the Shifting Tides of Regulatory Compliance in Climate Policy

The United States finds itself at a regulatory crossroads when it comes to environmental policy. The current administration’s efforts to block state climate regulations through executive action stand in stark contrast to the growing movement of state governments implementing stringent greenhouse gas reporting requirements. This divergence creates a complex compliance landscape where businesses must simultaneously adapt to federal deregulation while meeting expanding state-level environmental mandates. This tension between federal and state approaches to climate regulation presents both challenges and opportunities for corporate compliance programs. As federal agencies scale back environmental oversight, progressive states are filling the regulatory void with ambitious climate policies that often exceed previous federal standards. This blog examines this emerging dichotomy, explores its implications for business operations, and provides strategic guidance for maintaining compliance in this evolving landscape.

Chicago’s Bold New Vision: Green Social Housing for a Sustainable, Equitable Future

Last week, Chicago City Council committees on Housing and Finance convened for negotiations and discussions on a monumental—and markedly contentious—green social housing plan. This comes nearly two months after Mayor Brandon Johnson and the Chicago Department of Housing introduced an enabling ordinance in the Chicago City Council, allowing the City to establish an independent nonprofit with the authority to serve as the Green Social Housing (GSH) developer. The GSH model tackles both housing insecurity and climate change head-on by developing permanently affordable, energy-efficient homes in every community. Spearheaded by the Chicago Department of Housing and the Illinois Green New Deal coalition, this initiative is poised to reshape how housing is built, owned, and lived in across the city.

Dire Wolves Highlight Dire Need for De-extinction Regulation

On April 7, 2025, Colossal Biosciences announced that it had successfully created dire wolves, a species that had been extinct for over 10,000 years, in what is considered a breakthrough in the science of de-extinction. Although it sounds like a work of science fiction, Colossal used dire wolf DNA found in a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old ear bone to make 20 edits to the DNA of modern gray wolves leading to the birth of 3 dire wolf puppies in the fall and winter of 2024. While the science community both celebrates the breakthroughs in genetic engineering, considers the benefits that this technology can have on modern endangered species, and debates the validity of calling genetically modified gray wolves true dire wolves, it is clear that the regulatory framework of the United States is not yet sufficiently prepared to examine the legal and ethical considerations that come with de-extinction technologies. Though dire wolves were the breakthrough, they are not the end goal for Colossal as it now turns its focus to other popular extinct species such as the wooly mammoth, dodo bird, and Tasmanian tiger. To adequately keep up with these changes in genetic and environmental science, the United States must act quickly to develop an agile multi-agency regulatory framework that can guide the country and world as a whole safely into the new age of de-extinction.

Rearming Innovation: The Rise of New Players in U.S. Defense

In recent decades, the U.S. defense sector has undergone a significant transformation with innovative companies such Palantir, Space X, and Anduril pushing for the federal government to reconsider its current procurement process. The goal of these “New Age” companies is to level the playing field in government contracting so that they can continue developing the world’s most advanced and effective defense technologies.

One Size Doesn’t Fit All: OSHA’s PPE Rule For Construction Workers

The construction industry employs workers of diverse shapes and sizes. Despite their diverse sizes, many construction workers have had to make do with Personal Protection Equipment (“PPE”) that fits one standard size. To ensure these construction workers have properly fitting PPE, regardless of their size, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) published their final rule mandating that construction employers provide their employees with “properly fitting” PPE. 

Navigating Data Subject Rights Requests: Balancing Compliance with Mitigating Misuse

In the wake of heightened awareness around data privacy and protection, regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States have emerged as trailblazers. These laws bestow significant rights upon individuals, allowing them to control and protect their personal data. At the heart of these regulations lies the concept of Data Subject Rights Requests (DSRR), also known by a similar name of Data Subject Access Requests (DSAR). This article offers strategies to combat the weaponizing DSRRs while complying with the requirements for legitimate requests.