In an opinion filed on Thursday, Judge McMahon granted summary judgment to plaintiffs on their claims that the Government’s April 2025 mass termination of more than 1,400 National Endowment for the Humanities (“NEH”) grants was unconstitutional and ultra vires (see our prior coverage here). The court described a glaring departure from NEH’s established grant‑review process, under which officials affiliated with the Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”) directed that grants issued during the Biden Administration be reviewed for purported connections to subjects such as “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”), “environmental justice,” and “gender ideology.” The court found that DOGE officials “exercised decisive authority over the selection and termination of NEH grants” absent statutory authority.
Continue Reading “The Devil Made Me Do It” Defense Rejected: Judge McMahon Grants Summary Judgment Against Government’s AI‑Driven Mass Termination of NEH Grants
Gilana Keller
Gilana Keller focuses her practice on complex litigation matters with a focus on insurance and reinsurance matters and commercial litigation. Gilana represents companies in insurance and reinsurance disputes, pending in state and federal court and before arbitration panels. These disputes have included representation of a leading life insurance carrier in arbitrations against reinsurers involving yearly renewable term (YRT) life reinsurance agreements and environmental insurance coverage.
Judge Caproni Denies NFL’s Motion To Compel Arbitration Against Coaches on Reconsideration
In an opinion filed on Friday, Judge Caproni denied the National Football League’s renewed attempt to compel arbitration in an employment discrimination action brought by a putative class of current and former NFL coaches (the “Coaches”). Initially filed in 2022, the lawsuit alleged systemic racial discrimination in the hiring, retention and termination of NFL coaches and executives.
Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, the NFL moved to compel arbitration, which was granted as to certain claims and denied as to others. On appeal, the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s refusal to compel arbitration claims against the Giants, Broncos and Texans, while declining to rule on jurisdictional grounds on the claims that had been compelled to arbitration. The Second Circuit explained that “the NFL failed to provide a neutral forum that could even be called an ‘arbitration’ and that [plaintiff] could not effectively vindicate his statutory rights in the forum that the NFL provided, given the designation of the NFL Commissioner as the default arbitrator and the lack of express arbitral procedures.”
In light of the Second Circuit’s ruling, the Coaches moved for reconsideration of the district court’s earlier order compelling arbitration of the remaining claims. “[T]o conform to controlling law,” Judge Caproni granted the Coaches’ motion and denied the NFL’s motion to compel arbitration in full.
Continue Reading Judge Caproni Denies NFL’s Motion To Compel Arbitration Against Coaches on ReconsiderationJudge Castel: Google Barred From Relitigating Issues Decided In DOJ Digital Ad Monopoly Case
In an MDL brought by private plaintiffs challenging Google’s allegedly monopolistic digital advertising practices, Judge Castel ruled on Monday that Google was precluded from relitigating issues decided in an April bench trial ruling in the Eastern District of Virginia. The Virginia case involved similar monopolization allegations, but was brought by DOJ and state attorneys general.
Judge Castel found that the elements for issue preclusion were met — that is, that the Virginia case involved the same issues, that Google had a fair chance to litigate the issues, and that they were necessary to a final judgment — but noted that issue preclusion, as an equitable doctrine, required him to also consider the overall fairness of binding a litigant to adverse findings from another case.
On that point, Judge Castel found “no unfairness to Google” in applying issue preclusion, especially given the “massively high stakes” of the Virginia case:
Continue Reading Judge Castel: Google Barred From Relitigating Issues Decided In DOJ Digital Ad Monopoly Case