Supreme Court Gives Businesses a Win in Mandatory Arbitration Dispute
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.25.19
On April 24, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its widely-anticipated decision in Lamps Plus v. Varela. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court held that a mandatory arbitration dispute resolution provision in a form contract cannot be read to permit class or collective arbitration unless the agreement explicitly provides for such procedure. The Court reversed a decision by the Ninth Circuit that had reasoned that an ambiguous arbitration agreement should be construed to implicitly permit a party to a form contract to seek class arbitration.
The decision is an important victory for the business community, which increasingly favors using agreements that channel disputes to individual arbitration. The logic of the Court’s ruling applies to many types of form contracts, including agreements with employees, independent contractors, consumers, and vendors. The opinion reinforces last year’s decision in Epic Systems v. Lewis, in which a 5-4 majority of the Court held that mandatory arbitration agreements can be enforced with respect to claims brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, rejecting arguments that this outcome violates Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. These two decisions continue the trend of narrow Court majorities siding with businesses seeking to expand the use of mandatory arbitration as a preferred form of dispute resolution.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
