Clarence Thomas's Abundant "Personal Hospitality" - Supreme Court Overrules Chevron - ABA Issues Formal Guidance to Lawyers Using AI

• Pages: 10-10
• Date: 01 October 2024
• Author: Hon. Oran F. Whiting (Ret.)
• Subject Matter: Civil Law

Clarence Thomas’s Abundant “Personal Hospitality”

Supreme Court Overrules Chevron

ABA Issues Formal Guidance to Lawyers Using AI

U.S. SUP REME COUR T

Presidential Immunity

In a landmark 6–3 decision, the

Supreme Court ruled that Donald

Trump cannot be prosecuted for actions

that were within his constitutional pow-

ers as president and is presumptively

immune from criminal liability for his

ocial acts as president. Chief Justice

John Roberts, writing for the majority,

stated immunity for former presidents

is “absolute” with respect to their “core

constitutional powers,” and a former

president has “at least a presumptive

immunity” for “acts within the outer

perimeter of his ocial responsibility.”

Trump v. United States,No. 23-939.

Ethics

Associate U.S. Supreme Court Justice

Clarence Thomas failed to disclose

additional travel paid for by a billion-

aire benefactor. Thomas, who has been

under constant criticism for failing to

disclose gifts and travel, and who ini-

tially defended his actions by stating he

sought counsel on the matter, omitted

benefactor-funded luxury trips from his

disclosure forms because he believed

they were “personal hospitality” and

thus exempt from disclosure require-

ments. He called his failure to disclose

previous gifts and transactions as inad-

vertent.

Administrative Law

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6–3 deci-

sion,overruledtheChevrondoctrine,

a 40-year-old precedent adopted by

the Court in 1984, requiring courts to

give deference to a reasonable inter-

pretation of an ambiguous statute by

a government agency. The Court held

that thatChevrondeference “def‌ies

the command” of the Administrative

Procedure Act which requires courts to

exercise their independent judgment

in deciding whether an agency has

acted within its statutory authority, and

courts may not defer to an agency’s

AND MORE . . . BY HO N. ORAN F. WHITI NG (RET.), LITIGATION NEWS ASSOCIATE EDITOR

interpretation of the law just because

a statute is ambiguous. Loper Bright

Enterprisesv. Raimondo, No. 22-451.

Regulatory Law

SCOTUS unanimously held that doctors

and medical associations lack stand-

ing to challenge the Food and Drug

Administration’s approval process for

the medication abortion drug mife-

pristone and remanded the case to the

Fifth Circuit. In 2000, the FDA approved

mifepristone using a regulation permit-

ting accelerated approval for new drugs

that have been “studied for their safety

and eectiveness in treating serious or

life-threatening illnesses and that pro-

vide meaningful therapeutic benef‌it

to patients over existing treatments.”

The agency denied a 2002 petition

submitted by two of the doctors in the

litigation requesting it to withdraw its

approval in 2016. Food & Drug Admin. v.

All. for Hippocratic Med., No. 23-235.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

An ABA Ethics and Professional

Responsibility Committee opinion

advises lawyers using generative arti-

f‌icial intelligence technology in their

work to “fully consider” their ethical

obligations, including duties related to

client protection, lawyer competence,

conf‌identiality of client data, com-

munication, and fees. Noting lawyers’

increased use of AI tools for multiple

aspects of legal practice, the opinion

warned that though AI tools can help

lawyers increase eciency, these tools

also carry risks, including generating

inaccurate output. The opinion notes

that use of AI has led to lawyers citing

nonexistent cases or inaccurate analysis

and warns lawyers to review all output

for accuracy. ABA Formal Opinion 512.

CYBERSECURITY

Though denying wrongdoing, Meta

Platforms agreed to pay $1.4 billion to

resolve Texas’s2022 lawsuitaccusing

Meta of illegally using facial-recognition

technology to collect biometric data

of millions of Texans without their con-

sent from uploads to the platform’s

now discontinued “Tag Suggestions”

feature. Texas brought this case of f‌irst

impression in 2022 under its 2009 bio-

metric privacy law which provides dam-

ages of up to $25,000 per violation. A

Meta spokesperson said the company

is pleased to have resolved the matter

and looks forward to “exploring future

opportunities to deepen [Meta’s] busi-

ness investments in Texas,” with Texas’

Attorney General Ken Paxton stating

the settlement marks the state’s “com-

mitment to standing up to the world’s

biggest technology companies and

holding them accountable for breaking

the law and violating Texans’ privacy

rights.” Texas v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No.

22-0121.

TITLE IX / LGBTQ

U.S. District Judge Danny C. Reeves

granted a preliminary injunction tem-

porarily blocking theBiden adminis-

tration’s new Title IX ruleexpanding

protections for LGBTQ+ students for

being “arbitrary in the truest sense

of the word.” Noting that Title IX was

intended to “level the playing f‌ield”

between genders in education, Reeves

opined the department’s new policy

seeks to “derail deeply rooted law.”

Kentucky’s attorney general praised

the ruling stating the regulation would

undermine equal opportunities for

women. Tennessee v. Cardona, No. 2:24-

072-DCR.

FALL 2024 • VOL. 5 0 NO. 1

10 | ABA LITIGATION SECTIO N

KEEPING WATCH EMERGING DEV ELOPMENTS FOR LITIGATORS

Published in Lit igation News Volume 5 0, Number 1, Fall 2024. © 2 024 by the America n Bar Associati on. Reproduced wi th permission. A ll rights reserv ed. This informati on or any portion t hereof may not be copi ed or

disseminated in an y form or by any means or s tored in an electro nic database or re trieval system wi thout the express w ritten consen t of the American B ar Associatio n.