DROPLETS
Interstate natural gas pipeline operators and affected landowners must track the case because the ruling will determine whether state attorney fee rules apply to NGA eminent domain proceedings, altering project costs and compensation outcomes.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission to resolve a circuit split over whether NGA section 7 requires pipeline companies exercising federal eminent domain authority to pay landowners’ attorney fees where state law permits such recovery. The Eighth Circuit held landowners were not entitled to $383,300 in fees, conflicting with four other appellate courts. The ruling will turn on whether the Court views NGA section 7 as delegating federal eminent domain power (per 2021’s PennEast decision, which would apply Fifth Amendment “just compensation” rules excluding fees) or leaving a gap to be filled by state law. Parties should monitor briefing and October 2026 Term arguments.
In-house counsel for cross-border consumer product, IoT, and tech hardware manufacturers operating in the U.S. and Chinese markets must act because divergent regulatory requirements create overlapping compliance obligations and elevated cross-border enforcement risk.
The alert compares key requirements of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s product cybersecurity rules and China’s parallel connected product regulatory framework. It highlights overlapping mandates for secure-by-design practices, vulnerability disclosure timelines, and post-market monitoring, as well as jurisdiction-specific requirements such as China’s mandatory local data storage for certain product types. In-house counsel should map their product lines to both sets of rules to identify gaps, update cross-border compliance programs, and align vendor contracts to meet the stricter of overlapping requirements where applicable.
Organizational principals and in-house counsel overseeing AI deployments must review these principles because ungoverned AI-generated actions can create direct legal and financial liability for both leadership and their organizations.
Published in the Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law, the piece outlines core accountability principles for organizational principals overseeing AI deployment, addressing the growing risk that AI-generated decisions, contracts, or other outputs can create enforceable obligations for the organization and its leadership. It clarifies that principals cannot fully delegate AI oversight responsibility to technical teams, and recommends implementing governance guardrails, conducting risk assessments for high-stakes AI use cases, and establishing clear escalation paths for AI-related errors or disputes. In-house counsel should review the principles to align existing AI governance frameworks with emerging liability expectations and reduce organizational risk.
In-house tax counsel and corporate finance leaders must review these 2026 midyear federal tax policy shifts, as they will impact corporate tax compliance, planning, and liability for the remainder of 2026 and into 2027.
Law360’s 2026 midyear federal tax policy report, which includes commentary from tax policy expert Mark Epley, covers the most consequential federal tax developments from the first half of 2026. The report outlines shifts in federal tax rules, enforcement priorities, and proposed regulatory updates that impact corporate and individual tax obligations. In-house tax teams should review the full Law360 report and consult qualified tax counsel to evaluate how these midyear updates affect their organization’s current tax positions, compliance workflows, and long-term tax planning strategies.
Defense contractors and their subcontractors must act because the FY2025 NDAA imposes new contracting prohibitions for entities tied to firms lobbying for listed Chinese military companies, creating material compliance and revenue risk.
The FY2025 National Defense Authorization Act includes a provision barring the Department of Defense from contracting with companies that subcontract with firms conducting lobbying activities for entities on the DOD’s list of Chinese military companies operating in the U.S. This adds a layered compliance requirement for defense contractors, who must now vet not only direct subcontractors but also the lobbying activities of those subcontractors’ partners to avoid losing DOD contract eligibility. Contractors should immediately review their subcontractor relationships and lobbying service vendor agreements to identify and mitigate ties to listed Chinese military companies, and update their compliance protocols as needed.
In-house counsel for maritime insurance providers and holders of pre-designation Russia-related maritime mutual insurance policies must review the amended OFSI general licence to ensure their policy winding down processes comply with updated terms and avoid sanctions violations.
On 6 July 2026, the UK Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) amended General Licence INT/2026/8893924 under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. The update revises permitted terms for winding down insurance policies issued by designated Maritime Mutual entities and their subsidiaries that were written prior to the entities’ sanctions designation. The amended licence clarifies allowed activities for both insurers and policyholders to terminate or modify existing Russia-related maritime coverage without violating UK sanctions rules. Affected in-house counsel should review the full updated licence text to confirm their winding down procedures align with the revised terms, and update internal sanctions compliance protocols as needed.
Interstate natural gas pipeline operators and affected landowners must track the case because the ruling will determine whether state attorney fee rules apply to NGA eminent domain proceedings, altering project costs and compensation outcomes.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission to resolve a circuit split over whether NGA section 7 requires pipeline companies exercising federal eminent domain authority to pay landowners’ attorney fees where state law permits such recovery. The Eighth Circuit held landowners were not entitled to $383,300 in fees, conflicting with four other appellate courts. The ruling will turn on whether the Court views NGA section 7 as delegating federal eminent domain power (per 2021’s PennEast decision, which would apply Fifth Amendment “just compensation” rules excluding fees) or leaving a gap to be filled by state law. Parties should monitor briefing and October 2026 Term arguments.
In-house counsel for cross-border consumer product, IoT, and tech hardware manufacturers operating in the U.S. and Chinese markets must act because divergent regulatory requirements create overlapping compliance obligations and elevated cross-border enforcement risk.
The alert compares key requirements of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s product cybersecurity rules and China’s parallel connected product regulatory framework. It highlights overlapping mandates for secure-by-design practices, vulnerability disclosure timelines, and post-market monitoring, as well as jurisdiction-specific requirements such as China’s mandatory local data storage for certain product types. In-house counsel should map their product lines to both sets of rules to identify gaps, update cross-border compliance programs, and align vendor contracts to meet the stricter of overlapping requirements where applicable.
Interstate natural gas pipeline operators and affected landowners must track the case because the ruling will determine whether state attorney fee rules apply to NGA eminent domain proceedings, altering project costs and compensation outcomes.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission to resolve a circuit split over whether NGA section 7 requires pipeline companies exercising federal eminent domain authority to pay landowners’ attorney fees where state law permits such recovery. The Eighth Circuit held landowners were not entitled to $383,300 in fees, conflicting with four other appellate courts. The ruling will turn on whether the Court views NGA section 7 as delegating federal eminent domain power (per 2021’s PennEast decision, which would apply Fifth Amendment “just compensation” rules excluding fees) or leaving a gap to be filled by state law. Parties should monitor briefing and October 2026 Term arguments.
Defense contractors and their subcontractors must act because the FY2025 NDAA imposes new contracting prohibitions for entities tied to firms lobbying for listed Chinese military companies, creating material compliance and revenue risk.
The FY2025 National Defense Authorization Act includes a provision barring the Department of Defense from contracting with companies that subcontract with firms conducting lobbying activities for entities on the DOD’s list of Chinese military companies operating in the U.S. This adds a layered compliance requirement for defense contractors, who must now vet not only direct subcontractors but also the lobbying activities of those subcontractors’ partners to avoid losing DOD contract eligibility. Contractors should immediately review their subcontractor relationships and lobbying service vendor agreements to identify and mitigate ties to listed Chinese military companies, and update their compliance protocols as needed.
In-house counsel for maritime insurance providers and holders of pre-designation Russia-related maritime mutual insurance policies must review the amended OFSI general licence to ensure their policy winding down processes comply with updated terms and avoid sanctions violations.
On 6 July 2026, the UK Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) amended General Licence INT/2026/8893924 under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. The update revises permitted terms for winding down insurance policies issued by designated Maritime Mutual entities and their subsidiaries that were written prior to the entities’ sanctions designation. The amended licence clarifies allowed activities for both insurers and policyholders to terminate or modify existing Russia-related maritime coverage without violating UK sanctions rules. Affected in-house counsel should review the full updated licence text to confirm their winding down procedures align with the revised terms, and update internal sanctions compliance protocols as needed.
In-house tax counsel and corporate finance leaders must review these 2026 midyear federal tax policy shifts, as they will impact corporate tax compliance, planning, and liability for the remainder of 2026 and into 2027.
Law360’s 2026 midyear federal tax policy report, which includes commentary from tax policy expert Mark Epley, covers the most consequential federal tax developments from the first half of 2026. The report outlines shifts in federal tax rules, enforcement priorities, and proposed regulatory updates that impact corporate and individual tax obligations. In-house tax teams should review the full Law360 report and consult qualified tax counsel to evaluate how these midyear updates affect their organization’s current tax positions, compliance workflows, and long-term tax planning strategies.
Organizational principals and in-house counsel overseeing AI deployments must review these principles because ungoverned AI-generated actions can create direct legal and financial liability for both leadership and their organizations.
Published in the Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law, the piece outlines core accountability principles for organizational principals overseeing AI deployment, addressing the growing risk that AI-generated decisions, contracts, or other outputs can create enforceable obligations for the organization and its leadership. It clarifies that principals cannot fully delegate AI oversight responsibility to technical teams, and recommends implementing governance guardrails, conducting risk assessments for high-stakes AI use cases, and establishing clear escalation paths for AI-related errors or disputes. In-house counsel should review the principles to align existing AI governance frameworks with emerging liability expectations and reduce organizational risk.