DROPLETS
The Ninth Circuit ruled that California’s SB 253 Scope 1 & 2 disclosures can proceed, but Scope 3 provisions and SB 261 are likely unconstitutional, reshaping corporate climate reporting in the Golden State.
The Ninth Circuit’s opinion on November 9 2026 marked a pivotal moment for corporate climate reporting in California. While the court affirmed that disclosures of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions under Senate Bill 253 can continue, it declared the bill’s Scope 3 provisions—and the related SB 261 climate reporting requirements—likely unconstitutional. The decision hinges on First Amendment and due process arguments, setting a potentially influential precedent for state‑level environmental disclosures nationwide. For firms operating in or listing on California markets, the ruling underscores immediate compliance with Scope 1 and 2 disclosure standards, or face enforcement and reputational risk. Conversely, the invalidation of Scope 3 mandates may delay broader disclosure ambitions until legislative gaps are clarified. Practitioners should reassess internal ESG monitoring frameworks, adjust disclosure timelines, and anticipate regulatory responses from the California Office of Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) and the Attorney General’s enforcement arm. Watching the California legisla
…
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation has petitioned FERC to mandate reliability standards for large computational sites, expanding the regulatory net over the sector.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) formally petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 21 2026 to extend mandatory reliability standards to owners and operators of large data‑center sites that generate significant computational loads. Under NERC’s reliability standards, facilities must meet stringent requirements for generation, dispatch, and grid interconnection, designed to ensure a continuous and dependable electricity supply. The petition signals a broadening of the reliability framework beyond traditional power generators and transmission operators to include the burgeoning tech‑infrastructure sector. For major‑firm clients that operate or provide services to data‑center operators, this development raises the prospect of compliance obligations—ranging from load‑management protocols to real‑time monitoring and reporting—to meet FERC‑endorsed guidelines. Judges in the electric reliability context will likely scrutinize the petition to determine whether the proposed registration criteria are consistent with existing NERC rules, the
…
Artificial intelligence is prompting regulators worldwide to rethink how they apply antitrust laws.
AI’s rapid integration into business models is reshaping competitive dynamics, leading antitrust and competition authorities across the globe to question whether their existing enforcement frameworks are adequate. A November 2026 briefing by Perkins Coie highlights how regulators in the U.S., EU, U.K., and other jurisdictions are exploring new policy tools, such as AI‑specific metrics for market dominance and real‑time monitoring of algorithmic collusion. The guidance stresses that traditional merger review criteria and digital marketplace oversight may no longer capture the speed and opacity of AI‑driven transactions. For law firms advising clients in tech, fintech, and platform industries, understanding these evolving toolkits is critical. Firms should advise clients to review current AI governance practices, assess potential antitrust risks, and engage proactively with regulators to align AI strategy with emerging enforcement expectations. The next development to watch is the release of jurisdictional white papers and regulatory frameworks that may codify these new enforcement mec
…
The new regulations streamline outbound direct investment approvals but intensify ODI, technology‑export and data‑transfer scrutiny for foreign counterparties.
China has rolled out a revamped set of outbound direct investment (ODI) rules that aim to reduce approval burdens for foreign counterparts while tightening scrutiny over key facets of cross‑border transactions. Under the new framework, not every China‑linked arrangement requires prior approval; however, companies—both Chinese and foreign—must conduct detailed ODI, technology‑export, and data‑transfer analyses as part of their transaction planning. For multinational firms with Chinese subsidiaries, the shift means a recalibration of due‑diligence checklists to capture emerging risks. Likewise, Chinese firms eyeing investment abroad will need to address stricter export‑control and data‑transfer obligations that could delay or block deals. The rules signal China’s intent to retain control over technology and information flow while liberalizing capital movement, prompting clients to reassess existing agreements and anticipate regulatory filings or additional compliance work.
The UK government expands its sanctions list, tightening controls on entities and individuals linked to Iran and raising compliance stakes for UK‑based firms.
The UK announced a sweeping expansion of its Iran sanctions regime, adding new categories of entities and individuals to its list and reportedly tightening restrictions on sectors such as finance, shipping, and technology. While the official brief does not detail every new target, the move signals a more rigorous approach to enforcement and triggers a need for UK‑based counsel and their global clients to reassess existing cross‑border transactions. Firms should audit counterparties for any new sanctions exposure, update sanctions‑screening tools, and review ongoing contracts for clause materialization. The expansion also invites scrutiny from other common‑law jurisdictions and the EU, meaning coordinated monitoring of potential reciprocal actions will become essential. Keep an eye on forthcoming guidance from UK HM Treasury and the EU’s sanctions desk, as alignment or divergence could materially affect clients’ global supply chains.
The Ninth Circuit ruled that California’s SB 253 Scope 1 & 2 disclosures can proceed, but Scope 3 provisions and SB 261 are likely unconstitutional, reshaping corporate climate reporting in the Golden State.
The Ninth Circuit’s opinion on November 9 2026 marked a pivotal moment for corporate climate reporting in California. While the court affirmed that disclosures of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions under Senate Bill 253 can continue, it declared the bill’s Scope 3 provisions—and the related SB 261 climate reporting requirements—likely unconstitutional. The decision hinges on First Amendment and due process arguments, setting a potentially influential precedent for state‑level environmental disclosures nationwide. For firms operating in or listing on California markets, the ruling underscores immediate compliance with Scope 1 and 2 disclosure standards, or face enforcement and reputational risk. Conversely, the invalidation of Scope 3 mandates may delay broader disclosure ambitions until legislative gaps are clarified. Practitioners should reassess internal ESG monitoring frameworks, adjust disclosure timelines, and anticipate regulatory responses from the California Office of Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) and the Attorney General’s enforcement arm. Watching the California legisla
…
Artificial intelligence is prompting regulators worldwide to rethink how they apply antitrust laws.
AI’s rapid integration into business models is reshaping competitive dynamics, leading antitrust and competition authorities across the globe to question whether their existing enforcement frameworks are adequate. A November 2026 briefing by Perkins Coie highlights how regulators in the U.S., EU, U.K., and other jurisdictions are exploring new policy tools, such as AI‑specific metrics for market dominance and real‑time monitoring of algorithmic collusion. The guidance stresses that traditional merger review criteria and digital marketplace oversight may no longer capture the speed and opacity of AI‑driven transactions. For law firms advising clients in tech, fintech, and platform industries, understanding these evolving toolkits is critical. Firms should advise clients to review current AI governance practices, assess potential antitrust risks, and engage proactively with regulators to align AI strategy with emerging enforcement expectations. The next development to watch is the release of jurisdictional white papers and regulatory frameworks that may codify these new enforcement mec
…
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation has petitioned FERC to mandate reliability standards for large computational sites, expanding the regulatory net over the sector.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) formally petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 21 2026 to extend mandatory reliability standards to owners and operators of large data‑center sites that generate significant computational loads. Under NERC’s reliability standards, facilities must meet stringent requirements for generation, dispatch, and grid interconnection, designed to ensure a continuous and dependable electricity supply. The petition signals a broadening of the reliability framework beyond traditional power generators and transmission operators to include the burgeoning tech‑infrastructure sector. For major‑firm clients that operate or provide services to data‑center operators, this development raises the prospect of compliance obligations—ranging from load‑management protocols to real‑time monitoring and reporting—to meet FERC‑endorsed guidelines. Judges in the electric reliability context will likely scrutinize the petition to determine whether the proposed registration criteria are consistent with existing NERC rules, the
…
The Ninth Circuit ruled that California’s SB 253 Scope 1 & 2 disclosures can proceed, but Scope 3 provisions and SB 261 are likely unconstitutional, reshaping corporate climate reporting in the Golden State.
The Ninth Circuit’s opinion on November 9 2026 marked a pivotal moment for corporate climate reporting in California. While the court affirmed that disclosures of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions under Senate Bill 253 can continue, it declared the bill’s Scope 3 provisions—and the related SB 261 climate reporting requirements—likely unconstitutional. The decision hinges on First Amendment and due process arguments, setting a potentially influential precedent for state‑level environmental disclosures nationwide. For firms operating in or listing on California markets, the ruling underscores immediate compliance with Scope 1 and 2 disclosure standards, or face enforcement and reputational risk. Conversely, the invalidation of Scope 3 mandates may delay broader disclosure ambitions until legislative gaps are clarified. Practitioners should reassess internal ESG monitoring frameworks, adjust disclosure timelines, and anticipate regulatory responses from the California Office of Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) and the Attorney General’s enforcement arm. Watching the California legisla
…
The new regulations streamline outbound direct investment approvals but intensify ODI, technology‑export and data‑transfer scrutiny for foreign counterparties.
China has rolled out a revamped set of outbound direct investment (ODI) rules that aim to reduce approval burdens for foreign counterparts while tightening scrutiny over key facets of cross‑border transactions. Under the new framework, not every China‑linked arrangement requires prior approval; however, companies—both Chinese and foreign—must conduct detailed ODI, technology‑export, and data‑transfer analyses as part of their transaction planning. For multinational firms with Chinese subsidiaries, the shift means a recalibration of due‑diligence checklists to capture emerging risks. Likewise, Chinese firms eyeing investment abroad will need to address stricter export‑control and data‑transfer obligations that could delay or block deals. The rules signal China’s intent to retain control over technology and information flow while liberalizing capital movement, prompting clients to reassess existing agreements and anticipate regulatory filings or additional compliance work.
The UK government expands its sanctions list, tightening controls on entities and individuals linked to Iran and raising compliance stakes for UK‑based firms.
The UK announced a sweeping expansion of its Iran sanctions regime, adding new categories of entities and individuals to its list and reportedly tightening restrictions on sectors such as finance, shipping, and technology. While the official brief does not detail every new target, the move signals a more rigorous approach to enforcement and triggers a need for UK‑based counsel and their global clients to reassess existing cross‑border transactions. Firms should audit counterparties for any new sanctions exposure, update sanctions‑screening tools, and review ongoing contracts for clause materialization. The expansion also invites scrutiny from other common‑law jurisdictions and the EU, meaning coordinated monitoring of potential reciprocal actions will become essential. Keep an eye on forthcoming guidance from UK HM Treasury and the EU’s sanctions desk, as alignment or divergence could materially affect clients’ global supply chains.
Grade 3 — worth a glance, not the full analysis.
- CMS Revisions Conditions for OPO Coverage
Medicare’s new final rule adds details to the Conditions for Coverage for Organ Procurement Organizations, shaping eligibility and oversight.
- Federal IDR Guidance on Batched and Bundled Disputes
The Departments issue new Federal IDR guidance clarifying how disputes can be batched or bundled to streamline resolution.
- GPU Financing: Five Structural Issues Every Dealmaker Must Address
Financiers tackling AI data‑center GPU purchases must navigate five critical structural hurdles to ensure compliant and profitable deals.
- French Tax Authority Issues Updated Comments on Management Packages
The French Administration released updated guidance on the tax treatment of management packages under Article 163 bis H of the CGI on October 15 and 26 2026.
- How Alcohol Brands Can Build Buzz Responsibly on Social Media
A practical guide on navigating alcohol ads to avoid regulatory pitfalls while leveraging paid and organic opportunities.
- IRS Clarifies 2026 Amendment Deadlines for Qualified Retirement Plans
Employers must review plan documents by Dec. 31, 2026, to meet new SECURE and SECURE 2.0 policy requirements.