Commentary

Home > Commentary

Posted 15 Jan 2026 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Erich Eiselt

Case v. Montana, no. 24-624 (U.S. Jan. 14, 2026). In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Kagan with concurrences by Justices Sotomayor and Gorsuch, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Montana Supreme Court in rejecting the petitioner’s argument that a probable cause standard is needed to justify warrantless entry in emergency aid scenarios. Law enforcement made a visit to the home of William Case based on a call from his girlfriend expressing concern that Case was suicidal.  They entered though...

Posted 27 Jun 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today, in Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court held that the Judiciary Act of 1789 does not confer the equitable authority on federal courts to issue universal injunctions, calling such injunctions “conspicuously nonexistent for most of our Nation’s history.”  The practical implications of the Court’s decision are significant for local governments, particularly in the context of current federal grant litigation.  Though the use of universal injunctions will now be prohibited, there are nuances to the decision that did not completely...

Posted 23 Jun 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Last week, the Supreme Court held in Stanley v. City of Sanford that to prevail under Title I of the ADA, “a plaintiff must plead and prove that she held or desired a job, and could perform its essential functions with or without reasonable accommodation, at the time of an employer’s alleged act of disability-based discrimination.”  This case involved a retiree and post-retirement health benefits and could have presented significant financial challenges for local governments had the Supreme Court issued...

Posted 16 May 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Yesterday, the Supreme Court decided Barnes v. Felix, an important Fourth Amendment case for law enforcement involving the Fifth Circuit’s “moment of threat” doctrine, which only analyzes the reasonableness of the use of force at the moment the officer deploys deadly force.  In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court rejected the Fifth Circuit’s narrow formulation, concluding the proper test is the “totality of circumstances” test and underscoring that a court “cannot review the totality of the circumstances if it has...

Posted 27 Mar 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Yesterday, in a win for local governments in Bondi v. VanDerStok, the Supreme Court held that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)’s regulation of so-called “ghost guns” did not violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as the firearm part kits could be considered firearms under the statutory definitions of the GCA.  This case has significant implications for public safety as before the ATF’s rule, local governments around the country had seen an exponential increase in untraceable ghost...

Posted 05 Mar 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Yesterday, in San Francisco v. EPA, in a win for local governments, the Supreme Court held that the EPA is not authorized to impose “end result” provisions in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and instead it is the EPA’s responsibility to “determin[e] what steps a permittee must take to ensure that water quality standards are met.”  This case helps ensure local governments understand their obligations under the Clean Water Act (CWA).  It will also allow them take advantage...

Posted 28 Feb 2025 in Commentary Written by: Deanna Shahnami

IMLA celebrates Black History Month! For every month of the year, IMLA continues to advocate and support racial equity programs and inclusive legislation that protect and support BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ communities across the United States and Canada. February is a month of celebration and recognition of the achievements of our own members in their legal careers and are exemplary local government attorneys and individuals in their own communities.  Nominated by their peers, we would like to recognize the following individuals and...

Posted 25 Feb 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today, in Lackey v. Stinnie, the Supreme Court held that a party does not “prevail” under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for the purposes of attorney’s fees based on obtaining a preliminary injunction, even if the defendant’s conduct later moots the case.  This case was a win for local governments as attorney’s fees awards can be significant and a contrary result would undermine the public fisc. In this case, a group of Virginia drivers whose licenses were suspended due to their failure...

Posted 15 Jan 2025 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

In a victory for local governments, the Supreme Court held that to prove that an exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) minimum wage and overtime requirements apply, an employer need only do so by a preponderance of the evidence rather than a more demanding clear and convincing evidence standard. Generally, the FLSA provides that employers must pay minimum wage and overtime pay at a rate of time and a half for work done above 40 hours per week.   There...

Posted 09 Jul 2024 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) in a case that will have far-reaching implications for the federal administrative state.  In doing so, the majority invoked Marbury v. Madison’s pronouncement that it is “emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”  As far as the rationale, the Court concluded that Chevron violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and...