Credit card companies have turned rewards and bonuses into flashy marketing showpieces, from generous signup points to promises of skipping airport lines. Yet behind the glossy offers lies a harsher reality in which many cardholders end up paying far more in interest, fees, and forfeited value than they ever receive in rewards. This imbalance raises serious questions about transparency, compliance, and consumer harm.
As the nuclear energy industry pivots toward small modular reactors (SMRs) to meet the growing demand for a clean, efficient, and reliable energy source, developers face a multilayered regulatory landscape. Navigating the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) licensing process, evolving legislation, and supply chain challenges present both legal and operational risks as the United States attempts to achieve energy independence.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is preparing to propose a major shift in how public companies disclose financial results. Under a new rule expected in 2026, issuers could move from the traditional quarterly Form 10-Q filings to a semiannual reporting schedule. SEC Chair Paul Atkins (Atkins) stated that this proposal will allow companies to choose between the two kinds of reporting. The initiative echoes recent calls from the Trump administration, which argues that quarterly disclosure pressures companies to prioritize short-term earnings at the expense of long-term value creation. If adopted, the rule would represent one of the most significant changes to U.S. securities disclosure requirements in over 50 years and could fundamentally reshape how businesses plan, raise capital, and communicate with investors.
On October 1, 2025, 255 days into Donald Trump’s second presidency, the federal government entered a shutdown at midnight. This shutdown was due to congressional failure to pass legislation for the 2026 fiscal year. Almost immediately thereafter, a massive shockwave of ripple effects occurred. Several agencies and personnel have been, and will be, severely impacted for as long as the shutdown stands.
“Slugging”, “glass skin”, and “mineral mixing”, oh my! These are just a few of the current trends present in the skincare scene today. With the boom of social media advertising, non-professionals posting advice to TikTok, and companies’ budgets for trendy skincare campaigns in the millions, where do we draw the line between FDA-regulated skincare and “digital labeling” in this new generation of cosmetic advertising?
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently finalized a rule requiring seat belt alarms for drivers and front seat passengers. The new rule became effective on March 4, 2025, with ongoing expansion in years to come. This is an amendment to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, or “Occupant crash protection” which required seat belt warnings for drivers seats only. FMVSS No. 208 originally went into effect in 1968 and has had major improvements since its enactment. This particular improvement will require manufacturers to install front seat belt warnings in all new vehicles by September 1, 2026, but manufacturers can begin implementing the new rule before September 1, 2026. FMVSS No. 208 will apply to cars, trucks, multipurpose vehicles and certain kinds of buses. The change comes after the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), which required NHTSA to regulate rear seat belt warnings in vehicles.
Corporations and other firms maximize profits. Without profits, the corporation or the firm fails. Thus, regulations imposed by regulatory agencies become a hindrance. Businesses dealing in fossil fuels and other natural resources especially feel the impacts of these regulations. Specifically, environmental regulation that requires detailed reporting and measurement can become awfully cumbersome for these companies. Not surprisingly, these companies tend to take different paths to avoid abiding by these regulations.
High Point University (HPU Law), a private university in North Carolina, opened the Kenneth F. Kahn School of Law with its inaugural Class of 2027 last fall. Founded by former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, Mark Martin, HPU Law strives to create a legal learning community of discussion and debate for students to become ethical lawyer-leaders who serve with civility and grace. HPU Law is not yet accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA), which is a crucial step in producing attorneys of tomorrow. Accreditation is not automatic nor guaranteed. Rather, schools must comply with an extensive process to receive accreditation.
On July 4, 2025, President Donald Trump signed into law The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), or what legislators and the public have deemed as the “Big Beautiful Bill.” OBBBA is a budget reconciliation bill; a bill which utilizes a special process for approval. Instead of the 60 vote supermajority usually required for a bill to pass through the Senate, this process allows for the bill to pass with a simple majority. While the process makes it significantly easier for legislation to pass through Congress, it can only be used for policies that would affect the spending and revenue of the federal government. After months of deliberation, this process allowed OBBBA to pass through the Senate with a 51-50 vote. Days later the bill passed through the House of Representatives, and the following day was signed into law by President Trump. While the president has paraded the spending and revenue bill as “arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed,” some have proposed that its true effects will financially harm Americans and further limit people’s ability to transcend economic classes through higher education.
The Trump administration’s decision to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and National Guard troops in Chicago has sparked nationwide debate over the boundaries of lawful enforcement. Federal officials describe the move as a necessary step to protect agents and restore order. State and local leaders, however, have accused the federal government of ignoring the legal limits that govern both immigration and military authority. Beneath the political clash lies a deeper legal concern: whether federal agencies are operating within the procedural safeguards and statutory frameworks that legitimize their power.