Model Policies and Other Strategies to Maximize the Impact of Opioid Settlement Funds
Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. ET NAAG will host an informational webinar for members of the attorney general community regarding strategies and policies that could maximize the impact of opioid settlement funds in supporting access to substance use treatment, prevention, and other related activities. This webinar will provide an overview…
DC Court of Appeals Defines Qualifications for Candidates for DC Attorney General
In a rare case addressing the qualifications for the office of attorney general, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that a candidate’s tenure as a city councilmember did not satisfy the D.C. Code’s requirement that the District of Columbia attorney general must have “(5) . . . been actively engaged, for at least…
Review of the 2021 Supreme Court Term
Wednesday, July 27 at 2:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. ET United States Supreme Court decisions directly affect attorney general offices’ ability to enforce state laws and defend government officials’ conduct. In this program, NAAG’s Center for Supreme Court Advocacy will host two of the nation’s leading U.S. Supreme Court practitioners to discuss the Supreme Court’s recently…
NASCIO Perspective: The State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program
The passage and signing into law of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (the Act) provided historic levels of funding to states, territories, tribes and localities to address pressing infrastructure needs. While “traditional” infrastructure priorities that include roads and bridges were a central focus of the bill, broadband expansion and cybersecurity concerns also garnered substantial…
Supreme Court Report: Bittner v. United States, 21-1195
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Case Granted Review: Bittner v. United States, 21-1195 Bittner v. United States, 21-1195. The question presented is whether a violation under the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq., is…
Supreme Court Report: United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., 21-1052
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Case Granted Review: United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., 21-1052 United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., 21-1052. This case addresses “[w]hether the government…
Supreme Court Report: Shoop v. Twyford, 21-511
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Opinion: Shoop v. Twyford, 21-511 Shoop v. Twyford, 21-511. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that a transportation order under the All Writs Act allowing a state prisoner to search…
Supreme Court Report: United States v. Taylor, 20-1459
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Opinion: United States v. Taylor, 20-1459 United States v. Taylor, 20-1459. In a 7-2 decision, the Court held that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a “crime of violence” under 18…
Supreme Court Report: Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan v. DaVita Inc., 20-1641
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Opinion: Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan v. DaVita Inc., 20-1641 Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan v. DaVita Inc., 20-1641. In a 7-2 decision, the Court held that…
Supreme Court Report: United States v. Washington, 21-404
Volume 29, Issue 18 This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 21, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on that date (Part II). Opinion: United States v. Washington, 21-404 United States v. Washington, 21-404. The Court unanimously held that a state workers’ compensation law that applied only to federal workers discriminated against the federal…
