New Process Steel – The Supreme Court Sends The NLRB Back To The Drawing Board
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.17.10
The Supreme Court invalidated today almost 600 decisions issued by the two members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) who served for a 27-month period beginning in December, 2007. The Court, in a 5-4 opinion, ruled that the two member panel did not constitute a "quorum" authorized to decide cases under Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act. Section 3(b) is the statutory provision that sets forth the familiar three member panel quorum provisions used by the NLRB in deciding cases. The majority opinion was authored by Justice Stevens, and joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Associate Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito. Justice Kennedy, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayer, dissented, agreeing with the government's proposed reading of the statutory provision.
The practical effect of New Process Steel will be significant. The NLRB now has four members, as a result of two recess appointments made by President Obama in March of this year. Those appointments, which include Craig Becker, a former lawyer for the SEIU and the AFL-CIO, are widely expected to change the ideological make-up of the NLRB. The almost 600 decisions vacated by the Court's decision in New Process Steel are now fair game for reconsideration by the new Democratic-controlled majority of the NLRB.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26
FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know
On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.19.26
CMS’s Final Rule Bans Federal Medicaid Funding for Youth Gender-Affirming Care
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.19.26


