Legal Partners
DashboardActivate Briefly
Legal Intelligence · United States

United States legal & regulatory news

Briefly tracks court rulings, legislation, gazette notices, and regulatory developments across United States — curated daily from United States's courts, regulators, and leading legal publications. 112 updates tracked in the past 30 days, last updated 11 Aug.

Get United States updates in your inbox
Regulatory News
press_release

FTC Abandons Disparate Impact Theory: Policy Statement Issued

U.S. Federal Trade Commission · 7 Aug

action_required

US FDA: CLiK Extra Screwworm EUA for New World Myiasis Prevention

U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 7 Aug

Legal News
United States
Case Law

LPP Mortgage Ltd v Underwood Towers Ltd Partnership: US Post-Opinion Motions Deadline

The operative date in a US court opinion marks the beginning of time periods for filing post-opinion motions and petitions for certification. This date is often overlooked, but it can have significant implications for lawyers and their clients.

11 Aug
United States
Case Law

Lake Mead Historic Low Water Level: Colorado River Crisis Deepens

Lake Mead's water level has hit a record low of 1,040.5 feet above sea level, recorded on August 7, 2026. The Colorado River system is facing severe drought and rising temperatures, exacerbating concerns about hydropower production and water supply.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

Todd Blanche Confirmed as US Attorney General Amid Concerns Over Independence

The Senate narrowly confirmed Todd Blanche to lead the Justice Department under President Donald Trump in a vote early Saturday morning, with 50 votes in favor and 49 against. This confirmation is significant for practitioners as it cements President Trump's former personal attorney at the helm of the Justice Department, which has raised concerns about the agency's independence from the White House. The confirmation also frees Blanche to pursue the Trump administration's agenda more aggressively, potentially impacting various legal developments and investigations. The relevant statutes and regulations involved in this matter are likely to be those related to the appointment and confirmation of federal officials, including the Federal Vacancies Reform Act and the Department of Justice's organizational structure. The Senate's vote also highlights the ongoing debate about the role of politics in the Justice Department and the importance of maintaining its independence. The key parties involved in this matter include President Donald Trump, who nominated Blanche for the position, and the Senate, which voted on his confirmation. Todd Blanche himself is a central figure, having already been leading the department in an acting capacity and now confirmed as attorney general. Practitioners should monitor the impact of Blanche's confirmation on various legal developments and investigations, particularly those related to the Trump administration's agenda. They should also be aware of any potential changes to the Justice Department's organizational structure or policies under Blanche's leadership.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

Senate Passes Stopgap Spending Measure Funding Federal Agencies Through December

The Senate passed a stopgap spending measure to fund federal agencies through December, avoiding a potential government shutdown. The bill includes exceptions negotiated with the White House, including preventing money from being transferred to the Border Patrol and rejecting $1 billion for a new 'T

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

California Fines Content Creators for Failing to Disclose Paid Political Posts

California may fine content creators for failing to disclose paid political posts on social media. The state's campaign finance watchdog is investigating several instances where influencers did not clearly disclose they were paid by a political campaign.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

US District Court: Shofner v Shenyang Dadong District People's Court Ruling

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia has issued a memorandum opinion and order in Shofner v. Shenyang Dadong District People's Court, a case brought by Kelly and Joseph Shofner against the Shenyang Dadong District People's Court. The legal significance of this matter lies in its potential implications for international investment projects and the role of foreign courts in resolving disputes related to such projects. The Shofners' action arises from an early-education investment project, and their complaint alleges that the defendants have engaged in various forms of misconduct, including breach of contract and misrepresentation. The relevant legal context involves the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which governs the jurisdictional immunity of foreign states and their instrumentalities. The FSIA provides a framework for determining when a foreign state or its instrumentality may be sued in U.S. courts, and it is likely that this case will turn on the application of the FSIA's provisions. The key parties involved in this matter are the Shofners, who are proceeding pro se, and the defendants, which include the Shenyang Dadong District People's Court and other Chinese entities. The outcome of this matter is not yet reported, but it is likely that the court will need to consider a range of issues related to jurisdiction, venue, and the applicability of the FSIA. Practitioners should monitor this case for its potential implications for international investment projects and the role of foreign courts in resolving disputes related to such projects. The outcome of this matter may also provide guidance on the application of the FSIA's provisions in similar cases.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

US District Court: Once Doe v Islamic Republic of Iran Ruling

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia has issued a memorandum opinion and order in Doe v. the Islamic Republic of Iran, a case brought by Once Doe against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The legal significance of this matter lies in its potential implications for the enforcement of judgments against foreign states and their instrumentalities. The plaintiff, Once Doe, was born in Iran but moved to the United States in 2020 and has since become a naturalized citizen. Her complaint alleges that she is entitled to compensation for injuries suffered as a result of the defendants' actions. The relevant legal context involves the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which governs the jurisdictional immunity of foreign states and their instrumentalities. The FSIA provides a framework for determining when a foreign state or its instrumentality may be sued in U.S. courts, and it is likely that this case will turn on the application of the FSIA's provisions. The key parties involved in this matter are Once Doe, who is proceeding pro se, and the defendants, which include the Islamic Republic of Iran and other Iranian entities. The outcome of this matter is not yet reported, but it is likely that the court will need to consider a range of issues related to jurisdiction, venue, and the applicability of the FSIA. Practitioners should monitor this case for its potential implications for the enforcement of judgments against foreign states and their instrumentalities. The outcome of this matter may also provide guidance on the application of the FSIA's provisions in similar cases.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

Hawaii Supreme Court: Booking.com Has Standing to Challenge Online Rental Tax

The Hawaii Supreme Court is reviewing whether booking.com has standing to challenge a state law taxing online rental bookings. The decision allows an out-of-state defendant to contest a Hawaii law, which could have implications for other companies operating in the state.

8 Aug
United States
Case Law

Hawaii Supreme Court: No Reduction for Smoker's Own Negligence in $2M Philip Morris Award

Hawaii's Supreme Court has restored a $2 million award to Ramona Ricapor-Hall against Philip Morris, ruling that a plaintiff's own negligence cannot reduce damages for a defendant's intentional fraud. The court's decision settles a question of first impression in the state's courts: whether a smoker's own negligence can be weighed against a tobacco company's deliberate fraud. The outcome is significant for practitioners and businesses involved in product liability cases, as it clarifies the application of comparative negligence law in Hawaii. The relevant statutes and regulations include Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 663-9, which governs comparative negligence, and the state's Uniform Products Liability Act. The court's decision also has implications for the hierarchy of courts in Hawaii, as it establishes a clear precedent for the application of comparative negligence law in intentional tort cases. The key parties involved include Ramona Ricapor-Hall, the plaintiff, Philip Morris, the defendant, and the Hawaii Supreme Court. Practitioners should monitor this decision and consider its implications for their own product liability cases, particularly those involving tobacco companies. They may also want to review the relevant statutes and regulations to ensure compliance with Hawaii's comparative negligence law.

8 Aug

Topics covered

Litigation & Dispute ResolutionGeneral PracticeCompliance & RegulatoryEnvironmental LawEmployment & LaborImmigrationTechnology & DigitalHealthcare & PharmaFinancial ServicesTrade & Logistics

Other jurisdictions

African UnionKenyaSouth AfricaNigeriaGhanaTanzaniaUgandaRwandaEthiopiaZambiaZimbabweMalawiBotswanaLesothoNamibiaCameroonSierra LeoneGambiaLiberiaSenegalMozambiqueMauritiusGuineaBurundiDjiboutiSomaliaMadagascarSeychellesAngolaRepublic of CongoDR CongoSouth SudanSudanCôte d'IvoireNigerMaliBurkina FasoTogoBeninEgyptMoroccoUnited KingdomIndiaCanadaEuropean Union