Insights

Washington – August 20, 2026: The Best Lawyers in America® has recognized 57 of the firm's attorneys in its 2027 edition, a testament to the firm's deep bench of legal talent across practices and offices nationwide. In addition, 29 attorneys have been named to the Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® list, recognizing outstanding attorneys earlier in their careers. 

Washington: Crowell & Moring secured a U.S. Supreme Court victory on behalf of the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy (ARAP) and the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) when the Court denied RMS of Georgia’s petition for writ of certiorari in RMS of Georgia v. Environmental Protection Agency. This ruling preserves a favorable decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding implementation of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act (AIM Act). The AIM Act provides for the phasedown of the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) based on their high global warming potential. HFCs are used in many important sectors of the economy including air-conditioning and refrigeration, insulating foams, industrial solvents, aerosol sprays, and laboratory equipment. ARAP and AHRI, as associations representing businesses that produce and use HFCs and their replacements, have a vital interest in the orderly implementation of the AIM Act.

Washington – June 4, 2026: Crowell & Moring earned 92 individual rankings for 81 attorneys, as well as 48 national and statewide practice area rankings, in the Chambers USA 2026 guide. The Chambers guide ranks the country’s top law firms and lawyers through in-depth research, client interviews, and feedback from attorneys at peer firms. 

The U.S. Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026, opinion in Learning Resources. v. Trump (decided with Trump v. V.O.S. Selections), holding that the President lacks authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), is notable for many reasons — including its practical impact on the many U.S. companies who paid steep tariffs on global imports and may now be able to recover by filing suit before the Court of International Trade (CIT). That possibility and the key reasons for the High Court’s decision are discussed in our recent alert on this momentous decision.

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, negating the President’s ability to impose tariffs under IEEPA. The case stemmed from President Trump’s invocation of IEEPA to levy tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries, citing national emergencies. Challengers argued—and the Court agreed—that IEEPA does not delegate tariff authority to the President. The power to tariff is vested in Congress by the Constitution and cannot be delegated to the President absent express authority from Congress.

On January 24, 2025, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that could resolve whether putative Rule 23(b)(3) classes may be certified in the federal courts when some of the class members are uninjured. Or, as the Supreme Court put the certified question in the case, Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, dba Labcorp, v. Luke Davis, et al., No. 22-55873: