To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC, No. 19-508: Petitioner Scott Tucker controlled a number of companies offering short-term payday loans. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) brought suit, claiming that Tucker and his companies were violating the Federal Trade Commission Act by engaging in “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” – namely, that the companies’ explanation of its loan terms to customers were misleading compared to the fine print the companies enforced. The FTC sought a permanent injunction, as well as restitution and disgorgement, relying upon §13(b) of the Act, which authorizes the FTC to obtain a “permanent injunction” against “any person, partnership, or corporation” that “is violating or is about to violate, any provision of law” that the FTC enforces. The District Court found for the FTC, granting both an injunction and ordering $1.27 billion in restitution and disgorgement. Th
Progressives desperately need massive structural court reform and they need it now. This is not a theoretical problem. Donald Trump’s takeover of the federal bench, coupled with conservative lower court judges emboldened to work quickly without need for any existing legal precedent, plus a looming clock ticking down to 2022 and the potential loss of Democratic control of the Senate, means that anyone interested in meaningful voting rights, LGBTQ rights, worker protections, the environment, or racial justice understands that unless big reforms come on short timelines even bold Biden initiatives do not survive the decade. It’s no wonder progressive court reformers were maddened both by Biden’s commission to study the court which will take six months to report on legal questions some of its members have already been studying for decades and again by last week’s legislative effort to expand the court, which was strangled on arrival by Nancy Pelosi the same day it was introduced.
What comes next?
On March 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court broadened the reach of specific personal jurisdiction by finding that Ford Motor Co. can be sued in Montana and Minnesota for vehicles that were “designed, manufactured, and first sold” out of state. The Supreme Court held that “[w]hen a company … serves a market for a product in a State and that product causes injury in the State to one of its residents, the State’s courts may entertain the resulting suit.” The decision could mark the beginning of new cases where the underlying claims only “relate to” a defendant’s activities in the state, or the decision could further confuse lower courts that try to determine what activity relates to the underlying claims.
Bad news in Supreme Court s ruling on behalf of religious liberty christianpost.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from christianpost.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.