Category: Administrative & Regulatory

Virginia is for… Cannabis Lovers… in 2024?

While adult-use cannabis legalization has been gaining popular support across the country, many state legislatures have been slow to translate that support into legislative action.  That is changing in Virginia.  In 2020, Virginia decriminalized the simple possession (up to an ounce) of cannabis while providing a civil penalty up to $25.  On February 5, 2021, the Virginia House and Senate took another significant step further when both passed bills approving adult-use cannabis legalization in Virginia.  Senate Bill 1406 passed on a 23-15 vote.  House Bill 2312 passed on a 55-42 vote.

There are differences in the bills that must be resolved in a conference committee.  However, an adult-use legalization bill is likely to pass through conference and be sent for Governor Ralph Northam’s signature.  Governor Northam has already stated his support for legalizing adult-use cannabis.  With passage, Virginia would become the 16th state to legalize recreational cannabis, but only the 3rd state to do so solely through the legislative process.

Key Rules and Penalties Found in Both Bills:

  • Adults who are 21 or older can possess up to one ounce of cannabis or an equivalent amount of cannabis product.
  • A household can cultivate up to two mature and two immature cannabis plants at their primary residence.
  • Possessing more than an ounce of cannabis remains punishable by a civil fine up to $25.
  • Possessing more than five pounds could result in up to 10 years in prison.
  • Possession on school grounds could result in up to 6 months in jail.
  • Bringing any cannabis into Virginia would be punishable by up to 1 year in jail.

Regulatory and Licensing Framework Found in Both Bills:

  • A Cannabis Control Authority, governed by a five-member board of directors, will be created to regulate the adult-use cannabis market.
  • Licensing priority will be given to social equity applicants.
  • A Cannabis Business Equity and Diversity Support Team will be created.
  • A Cannabis Public Health Advisory Council will be created to make public health recommendations.
  • Requirements for seed-to-sale tracking, packaging, and labeling, including state-created risk information and warning labels, are included.
  • A state tax of 21% would be levied at the point of sale.  Localities could impose their own tax up to 3%.
  • Portions of the tax revenue would be earmarked for pre-K education for at-risk children and substance abuse treatment and prevention, among other things.

Both bills also provide automatic expungement of misdemeanor marijuana–related offenses and allow for petitions for expungement of marijuana-related felonies under certain circumstances.

The House and Senate bills differ in the role and scope of local government involvement.  The Senate bill allows localities to ban cannabis stores by voter referenda.

Both bills set January 1, 2024 as the earliest date for beginning the retail sale of cannabis.  As Virginia moves forward toward 2024, the regulatory framework will continue to grow in size and complexity at both the state and local levels.

Copyright © 2020 Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP All Rights Reserved.
ARTICLE BY Morgan E. Persinger of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
For more, visit the NLR Biotech, Food, Drug section.

COVID-à manger: COVID-19 Takes a Bite out of French Lunch Traditions

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed dining habits across the world, as governments have shut down and restricted indoor and outdoor dining.  Even where restrictions have eased, many avoid sit-down dining out of concern for COVID-19 exposure and rely on take-away for their restaurant meals.  Clearly, the COVID-19 pandemic has limited dining options.

France, however, has decided to provide workers with a new, previously forbidden, dining option, although it remains to be seen how palatable it will be to French employees.  The Labor Ministry has decreed that to contain the spread of COVID-19, French workers now may eat lunch at their desks, which prior to the pandemic, Article R.4428-19 of the French Labor Code prohibited.

Gathering around a table for lunch with friends and colleagues has been long-standing French tradition, reflecting the country’s customs, habits and tastes.  The decree is intended to allow workers to return to the workplace and still limit the spread of COVID-19, by permitting them to lunch alone at their own workspace.  Until now, employers that allowed employees to eat lunch at their desks were subject to a fine, if caught, and employees who ate at their desks faced unspecified disciplinary action.

The French government has long been active in imposing regulations to prevent employers from exploiting their workers and in protecting workers’ rights, such as by imposing a 35-hour workweek, implementing the “right to disconnect” and mandating lunch hours.  Workers have become accustomed to dining out for lunch, and traditionally consider this time away from their work stations as an opportunity to refresh their bodies and minds prior to returning to work for the afternoon.  This simply is part of the French concept of maintaining a proper work-life balance.

While the French government continues to encourage remote work wherever possible, the new measure reflects the government’s effort to encourage businesses to reopen, where they can, with measures in place that will protect employees’ workplace health and safety.  Allowing workers to eat lunch at their desks offers workers and their employers a safer dining option, though arguably at the expense of traditional French cultural norms.  It is yet another example of how the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged, and changed, customary workplace standards.

©2020 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights reserved.

ARTICLE BY Erika C. Collins and Ryan H. Hutzler of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.
For more, visit the NLR Global law section.

Snowy Owls and Constituted Authorities

On January 27, 2021, a snowy owl was seen in New York City’s Central Park for the first time in 130 years.  Nine days later, on February 5, 2021, something almost as rare occurred – the Internal Revenue Service released a private letter ruling dealing with Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code.[1]  In PLR 202105007, the IRS determined that a nonprofit corporation that amended its articles of incorporation to change its purposes and come under the control of a city became a “constituted authority,” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. 1.103-1(b), of the city that could issue tax-exempt bonds on behalf of the city.

The coincidence of these infrequent events involving ornithology and quasi-governmental entities calls to mind the field guide Johnny Hutchinson prepared on the tax classifications of various species of the latter, which was an homage to Roger Tory Peterson’s Field Guide to Birds, a seminal work in the canon of the former.  February is a good time to brush up on both.      

[1] of 1986, as amended.

© Copyright 2020 Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP

ARTICLE BY Michael A. Cullers of Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
For more, visit the NLR Tax section.

President Biden Revokes ‘Buy American and Hire American’ Executive Order

On January 25, 2021, President Joe Biden signed Executive Order (EO) 14005 entitled “Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers,” which directs federal government agencies to “maximize the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.” While this order directs all agencies to follow this policy via the federal procurement and budgetary process, it also revoked the “Buy American and Hire American” executive order (EO 13788), which President Trump signed on April 18, 2017. Otherwise known as BAHA, EO 13788 had a stated goal of protecting U.S. workers, promoting job growth, and protecting the integrity of the U.S. immigration system.

The BAHA executive order prompted several federal agencies to issue numerous policy memos, with the net result being substantial changes to adjudication standards for applications for various immigration benefits. In October 2017, following the directives of BAHA, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued an updated policy memo that altered the longstanding policy of deferring to prior adjudications where the petitioner, beneficiary, and underlying facts remained unchanged from a previously approved petition for the same employee. USCIS issued the updated policy to “help advance policies that protect the interests of U.S. workers.” The updated policy created additional challenges for employers to get routine extension of stay petitions approved for workers who were already in the United States and where there had been no significant changes in the job details subsequent to the last petition’s approval.

The BAHA executive order has resulted in an overall increase in the rates of requests for evidence (RFE) and case denials. As recently as fiscal year (FY) 2020, H-1B RFE rates reached almost 30 percent, down from slightly more than 40 percent in FY 2019. Furthermore, H-1B visa petition denial rates exceeded 26 percent in FY 2020 and 34 percent in FY 2019 for cases where an RFE had been issued. For L-1 visa petitions, RFE rates had reached slightly more than 54 percent in both FY 2020 and FY 2019. Petitions for L-1 visas saw denial rates exceeding 43 percent in FY 2020 and 49 percent in FY 2019 for cases where an RFE was issued. In contrast, pre-BAHA RFE rates hovered around 21 percent for H-1B petitions and just over 30 percent for L-1 petitions. Denial rates before BAHA were generally about 20 percent for H-1B petitions post-RFE, and L-1 visa petitions were denied at about a 33 percent rate after receiving an RFE.

It remains to be seen how USCIS visa petition adjudication standards will change in the coming years, and particularly whether RFE and denial rates will drop following the end of the Trump administration and the revocation of BAHA. However, employers can expect that there will be a shift in immigration policy under the Biden administration with a more favorable view towards high-skilled business immigration.

ARTICLE BY Brian D. Bumgardner and
Andrew G. Drozdowski of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
For more, visit the NLR Government Contracts, Maritime & Military Law section.

Biden Directs Review of Immigration Policies, Seeks to Reduce Unnecessary Barriers

On the same day his nominee for Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Alejandro Mayorkas, was confirmed, President Joe Biden signed several Executive Orders regarding immigration, including one that directs complete review of policies.

The first, “Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans,” is of particular interest to the business community.  It sets up a task force to conduct a top-to-bottom review of recent changes that have created barriers to legal immigration, including employment based. This will include a review of the public charge rule, fee increases, and streamlining of the naturalization process, among others. Recognizing the difficulties created over the past four years by the many unpublicized rule, policy, and guidance changes, this Executive Order directs a comprehensive agency review of all immigration-related regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and other similar agency actions that impede access to fair and efficient adjudications. It likely will include a review of the policies that led to a 21% denial rate and a 47% Request for Evidence (RFE) rate for H-1B petitions in FY 2020.

The second looks to roll back damaging asylum policies and develop an effective strategy to manage asylum cases across the region.

The third creates a task force to reunify families that were separated at the border.

These latest Executive Orders build on changes already made since January 20, 2021, including:

These Executive Orders and policy announcements are consistent with the administration’s stated goal of creating an immigration system that is more welcoming to immigrants and to the employers who rely on them. President Biden recognizes that “new Americans fuel our economy, as innovators and job creators, working in every American industry and contributing to our arts, culture, and government.”

Jackson Lewis P.C. © 2020
For more, visit the National Law Review Immigration section.

 

DOL Ends PAID Program: Creating a Catch-22 for Employers; Cross Your Fingers or Come Clean?

Following the anticipated agenda of the new Biden administration, on January 29, 2021, the Department of Labor immediately ended the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program (the “PAID Program”) first launched in 2018 by the Department’s Wage and Hour Division. Ending the PAID Program signals that, under the new administration, the Wage and Hour Division will be increasingly focused on payroll policies and practices and will seek to penalize employers without first providing an opportunity to self-report and remedy mistakes.

Employers who fail to comply with the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) expose themselves to liability for payment of any back wages owed, which are then doubled as liquidated damages, plus certain costs and fees, including attorney fees an employee incurs in pursuing an action against the employer. The PAID Program provided employers potential relief from the significant penalties resulting from a minimum wage or overtime violation, which often happens without any intent or malice on the employer’s part. Under the program, employers could audit their minimum wage and overtime payroll practices, and if such an audit uncovered any FLSA violations, the employer could self-report the same and work with the Department of Labor to ensure all back wage payments were made. Upon doing so, the employer would obtain a release of any FLSA claims relating to the error and avoid potential liability for liquidated damages, other civil penalties, and employees’ attorney fees.

With the PAID Program cancelled, employers who discover minimum wage and overtime violations are left with difficult choices as to remedying such violations. This cancellation, in fact, creates a catch-22 situation for employers—does the employer cross its fingers and hope the violation is never uncovered, or does it come clean and pay its employees back wages, only to signal the violation and open the door for a lawsuit and the associated liquidated damages, penalties and employee attorney fees? While individual circumstances would dictate how the employer should react, of course, losing the opportunity to remedy the situation, make the employees whole, and avoid multiplied liability is an unfortunate development for employers.

As the cancellation of the PAID Program is a likely harbinger of the Biden administration’s treatment of wage and hour issues, now is a good time to review your payroll policies to ensure compliance with the FLSA. This is particularly important for employers who offer pay differentials or other bonus-type payment programs, including those who provide such payments as a reward to their employees for in-person work during the COVID-19 pandemic.

© 2020 Davis|Kuelthau, s.c. All Rights Reserved

ARTICLE BY Anthony J. Steffek of Davis|Kuelthau, s.c.
For more, visit the NLR Labor & Employment section

Biden Administration Issues “Regulatory Freeze” Memo

On January 20, 2021, the administration of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. issued a “regulatory freeze” memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies to ensure that President Biden’s appointees or designees have an opportunity to review any new or pending rules (the Memo). Pursuant to the memo, rules that have been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but that have not yet been published must not be published until a department or agency head appointed or designated by the new administration reviews and approves the rule. In addition, the memo directs department and agency heads to consider postponing rules that have been published in the Federal Register but that have not yet taken effect to seek additional public comment on issues of fact, law and policy raised by the rules and thereafter to take appropriate action.

Although the SEC is not an executive department or agency but rather an independent regulatory agency of the U.S. federal government, there is, some ambiguity about whether the memo applies to SEC rules. In addition the SEC may choose to will voluntarily follow the memo’s directives and recommendations.

The regulatory freeze memo is available here. 

© 2020 Vedder Price
ARTICLE BY John S. Marten, Nathaniel Segal and Jacob C. Tiedt of Vedder Price
For more, visit the NLR Election Law / Legislative News section.

Regology’s Analysis to Predict Lawmaking Activity by the 117th Congress

The term of the 116th Congress of the United States ended on January 3rd, 2021. This date also marked the beginning of the 117th Congress, with the start of the first of two sessions in this 24-month term. Just a few days later on January 6th, 2021, it became clear that the Democratic Party would control both houses of Congress.

To get a sense of what can be expected now that the 117th Congress is underway and controlled by a single party, Regology performed an analysis of the legislative activity of the past 9 terms of Congress.  Regology found that the beginning of a new Congress is marked by the introduction of a large number of bills.  Although a small percentage of bills make it to law, having both houses of Congress controlled by a single party point to a significant increase in the success rate of bills being enacted.

Lawmaking by Congress: Top Three Trends

Regology identified three key trends in lawmaking activity of each Congressional term. For its analysis, Regology reviewed the bills that were introduced during the last 9 Congressional terms by both the Senate and House of Representatives, covering 18 years of lawmaking activity that led to a total of 95,000 bills reviewed.  For the 9 Congressional terms reviewed, there were 6 terms where Congress was controlled by a single party and 3 terms where there was a divided Congress.

Trend 1– 23% of all Congressional bills were introduced during the first 1/8th of the Congressional term

On average, 23% of the total amount of bills that got introduced by a Congress were introduced during the first 3 months of a Congress’ 24-month term.  The large number of bills that are expected to come through in the next couple of months will not only create plenty of work for the members of Congress and their staff, law practitioners are also challenged to assess those bills that have a chance of being enacted and determine their implications on stakeholders.

Regology Chart 1

Click to view larger.

Trend 2 – 26% of a Congress’ successful bills were introduced during its first 3 months

With a success rate of approximately only 3.5%, meaning the percentage of bills that got signed into law, a lot of work is of short relevance.  Although this success rate may draw skepticism to pay close attention to the wave of bills the 117th Congress is introducing in its first 3 months, it is worth noting that Regology found that about 26% of the laws from the past 9 Congressional terms were introduced as bills in the first 3 months of the term.

Regology Chart 2

Click to view larger.

While on average it took 235 days for a successful bill to go from introduction to enactment, successful bills introduced during the first 3 months of Congress took 300+ days before they got enacted.  A visualization of the relationship between the introduction and enactment date of successful bills is shown next.

Regology Chart 3

Click to view larger.

Trend 3 – 38% of a Congress’ successful bills were enacted during its last 3 months

On average 38% of all bills that became law were enacted during the last 3 months of a Congress.

Regology Chart 4

Click to view larger.

Looking back: comparing the 116th Congress to the prior 8 Congressional terms

As we look at the lawmaking activity of the 116th Congress and compare it with the lawmaking activity of the prior 8 timers of Congress, the following observations can be made:

  • The 116th Congress was very active in introducing bills.  Some 14,000 bills were introduced compared to roughly 10,000 bills averaged by the prior 8 sessions of Congress.
  • The 116th Congress managed to get 333 bills signed into law versus an average of 379 laws by the 8 prior sessions of Congress.
  • The success rate of bills that got signed into law for the 116th Congress stands at 2.3% versus 3.7% during the prior 8 terms. It must be noted that the 116th Congress was divided.

Lawmaking in a divided Congress

Single party control of both chambers of Congress has relevance in the number of bills they are able to pass into law. Such a Congress saw an average success rate of 4% while a divided Congress saw a success rate of 2.7%. Further analysis of the single party controlled Congressional terms revealed that the success rate was 3.7% for the 2 terms Congress was controlled by the Democratic Party and 4.2% for the 4 times the Republican Party controlled Congress. Nevertheless, the last 2 terms of Congress controlled by the Republican Party saw an average success rate of 3.4%.

Expectations for the 117th Congress

Looking at what to expect from the 117th Congress’ lawmaking activity, historical data suggests that we will see a significant number of bills being introduced on the floor in the first quarter of 2021. Furthermore, with a single party controlling both houses of Congress, these bills will have an almost 50% higher chance of making it into law.

© 2021 Regology All Rights Reserved
ARTICLE BY Paul V. Bruin of Regology
For more, visit the NLR Election Law / Legislative News section.

Law Firm News and Updates for January 2021: Law Firm Merger, Diversity in Legal Industry and Law School News

We hope that your 2021 is going along well all things considered.  We wanted to extend a big thank you to our law firm publishing partners for helping the National Law Review surpass 25,000,000 page views in 2020.  You can read about some of the articles and authors we noted as exceptional high flyers in our press release from earlier this week.  Additionally, we recognized roughly 70 exceptional authors and contributors in our 2020 Go To Thought Leadership Awards issued a few weeks back which you can read about here. But enough about us and our talented authors, here are some recent updates from around the legal industry.

Law Firm Hires and Promotions

Ballard Spahr named Damon O. Barry the Office Managing Partner for the Denver office of the firm. Mr. Barry is an experienced deal and government affairs attorney, working on mergers and acquisitions, recapitalizations and other sophisticated commercial transactions.  The Denver office of Ballard Spahr is the epicenter of the firm’s western United States Labor and Employment, Public Finance Data Privacy and Cybersecurity practices.  Mr. Barry praised the Denver office of Ballard Spahr, pointing out the attorneys located there do exciting work with industry leaders in the region, and said, “I’m looking forward to building on our previous success and continuing to deliver first-rate service to our clients, both existing and new, while simultaneously driving and increasing our commitment to the Denver community.”

Idan Netser and Andrew Harper joined Sidley Austin LLP in the Palo Alto office.  Both attorneys will join Sidley as transactional partners, joining the Emerging Companies and Venture Capital practice, and Mr. Netser will also join the Tax Practice.  Martin Wellington, Managing Partner of the Palo Alto office describes the addition of Mr. Nester and Mr. Harper as an important milestone in Sidley’s expansion into Northern California, and the emerging technology field of practice.  Wellington says, “Idan has a well-deserved reputation both as a trusted adviser to entrepreneurs and emerging companies in the software, security, and life sciences markets, and as a leading international tax counselor for some of the technology sector’s best-known brands. Andrew is a rising star with established relationships at an exciting roster of both companies and blue-chip venture investors. Together, they elevate our brand in the Valley and position Sidley for sustained growth in this market.”

Vedder Price announced that Wayne M. Aaron has joined the firm as a member of the Investment Services Group and Corporate practice in New York.  Mr. Aaron is an experienced securities regulatory lawyer, and his practice includes financial services advisory matters, broker-dealer regulation and enforcement, government and regulatory investigations and FinTech.  He regularly advises securities firms on complex sales and trading, and other regulatory issues, as well as in examinations, inquiries and enforcement proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission and other government regulators.  Corporate Practice Area Chair at Vedder, Jennifer Durham King indicated she is looking forward to Aaron’s addition to the financial services and corporate-related practices in New York.  She says, “Wayne is a terrific addition to our existing broker-dealer and regulatory investigations practices as we look to continue to grow and diversify those practices, including into other complementary areas, such as high frequency trading and FinTech regulatory work.”

Murray Plumb & Murray is pleased to announce that Katherine Krakowka has been elected a Director of the firm as of January 1, 2021, and  Stacey Neumann has been named to Murray Plumb & Murray’s Management Committee.

Ms. Krakowka has been with Murray, Plumb & Murray since 2019, focusing on Business & Corporate Law and Business Reorganization & Insolvency, and she has been working with local businesses, navigating the COVID-19 pandemic.  Drew Anderson, Managing Director of Murry Plumb & Murray calls Katie a wonderful addition to the ranks, saying,  “She has been an active participant in the firm since joining our team and this year especially has played a crucial role in supporting our local business community as a thought leader on risk planning and a legal expert on pandemic assistance programs. We look forward to having the benefit of her wisdom, experience and intellect in this leadership role.”

Additionally, Stacey Neumann has been named to Murray Plumb & Murray’s Management Committee. Neumann is a Director at the firm and Chair of the Employment and Criminal/White Collar Defense Practice Groups, and she has extensive litigation experience with federal and state white-collar and other criminal defense, employment law with discrimination and other human resources matters, and Title IX investigations and other collegiate disciplinary processes.

Steven W. Zelkowitz joined Spiritus Law as Managing Partner, reuniting with Spiritus law founding partners Marbet and Robert Lewis.  Additionally, Jonathan Portuondo is joining Spiritus Law as an associate. Spiritus Law will be focusing on helping firm hospitality clients recover from the pandemic.

Mr. Zelkowitz comes to Spiritus Law with more than 30 years of experience in real estate, financial services industries, including infrastructure and development, hospitality and public/private partnerships.  Zelkowitz also has government relations experience, and experience in assisting businesses establishing or relocating to Florida by leveraging tax and other financial incentives.  Additionally, Zelkowitz has a long-established relationship with the firm’s founders Robert and Marbet Lewis, which will translate into a productive and effective working relationship.

“Spiritus Law is already known as a powerhouse nationally in the alcohol and hospitality industries. I am confident that my depth of experience will further cement the firm’s reputation in those industries in 2021 and beyond,” said Mr. Zelkowitz. “I am both humbled and excited to reunite with Marbet and Rob, and in applying my decades of experience growing law firms for the benefit of Spiritus Law and its clients at this pivotal moment in history.”

Dinsmore & Shohl Merges with Wooden McLaughlin

On January 1, 2021, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP has merged with Wooden McLaughlin LLP in Indiana, continuing Dinsmore’s growth across Indiana, adding offices in Indianapolis, Evansville and Bloomington.  Dinsmore added 47 Wooden attorneys, growing Dinsmore’s lawyer headcount by over 7 percent, and continuing Dinsmore’s goal of continued growth and strength in the Midwest.  George Vincent, Dinsmore Chairman and Managing Partner, says, “I’ve always believed in having a renewable five-year plan and working back from where you want to be. Five years ago, we wanted to be in Boston, Florida and Indiana, and we’ve done all of those things. We are in every state surrounding Indiana, so it is a natural place for us to be. There are significant opportunities for new and existing Dinsmore clients there, and Wooden has a great legacy.”

The merger builds on both firm’s legacies of valued client relationships that can span decades, with an emphasis and value on diversity.  Wooden Partner, Misha Rabinowitch, says Dinsmore’s focus on diversity was an important element in the decision, saying, “I’m personally excited to continue working to make our offices as inclusive as possible, now with the assistance of Dinsmore’s diversity initiatives that are already in place and have great momentum.”

Law Firm Diversity: Norton Rose Fulbright and Blank Rome Tap New Diversity and Inclusion Officers, and Nelson Mullin’s Diversity Pipeline Outreach Program Recognized

Norton Rose Fulbright announced that Katherine Tapley, a San Antonio partner, will replace Denise Glass as the firm’s new US Chief of Diversity and Inclusion.  She will chair the US Diversity and Inclusion Committee at the firm, and she will work closely with the US Management Committee to strengthen Norton Rose Fulbright’s diversity and inclusion efforts.  Tapley previously chaired the Women in Norton Rose Fulbright (WiN) Network.  Additionally, Tapley has served on the Real Estate Service Board of Directors for the San Antonio Area Foundation, and she currently chairs the Board of Governors of SA Youth, a non-profit working to improve the education, character and lives of high-risk San Antonio youth.

Jeff Cody, Norton Rose Fulbright’s US Managing Partner: “Katherine championed diversity for several years at Norton Rose Fulbright, consistently looking for opportunities for the firm to make meaningful enhancements. While we have made notable progress in our diversity and inclusion efforts, this important area remains a priority for us.”

Norton Rose Fulbright achieved several honors related to their diversity efforts, including a Gold Standard Certification by Women in Law Empowerment Forum (WILEF) for their inclusion of women into leadership positions.  Norton Rose Fulbright also received a perfect score from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation on its Corporate Equality Index for policies related to LGBT workplace equality, and Diversity Lab announced Norton Rose Fulbright had achieved Mansfield Rule Certification 3.0 and Mansfield Certification Plus status, both benchmarks in the legal industry.

Ms. Tapley announced a desire to continue the firm’s work in this important area, saying, “Fostering diversity and inclusion is a critical component to being the best possible place to work for our people. I will work tirelessly to ensure the firm succeeds in this arena.”

Nelson Mullins Diverse Pipeline Outreach Program was selected by Profiles in Diversity Journal as a winner in its Top 10 Innovations in Diversity for 2020.  The Innovations in Diversity honors inventive solutions in workforce diversity, selecting corporations, organizations, and institutions for ground-breaking programs furthering inclusion and diversity in their respective fields.

The goal of Nelson Mullins Diverse Pipeline Outreach Program is to combat a lack of diversity in the legal industry by working with Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the Carolinas and Georgia to provide students with an inside look at the legal profession.  By demonstrating the legal industry in action across a variety of areas and demystifying the steps to go to law school and become a practicing attorney and capping it off with a paid internship for one student at each school that participates. The first internship will begin in the spring of 2021.

The Nelson Mullins program is spearheaded by Ariel Roberson and Jack Slosson, partners in Raleigh and Charlotte, respectively.  Roberson says, “Diversity in the legal profession is tremendously lacking, but we all know how necessary it is to hear different perspectives in the courtrooms, boardrooms, classrooms, etc. across America.”   Slosson says, “I am hopeful that this unique program can have a real impact in growing diversity in the legal profession going forward.”

Blank Rome announced that Krystal Studavent Ramsey is the firm’s new Director of Diversity and Inclusion in Blank Rome’s Houston office.  As Director of Diversity and Inclusion, Ms. Studavent Ramsey will implement Blank Rome’s strategic DEI plans to create an inclusive environment within the firm, and to partner with clients on DEI plans and programs.  To further this goal, Studavent Ramsey brings her experience co-founding and co-chairing Blaxiom, a group of Black Axiom employees when she served as a senior legal consultant at Axiom, and her experience working as director of strategy and operations for the Diverse Attorney Pipeline Program, devoted to nurturing first-year, women of color law students.

Studavent Ramsey calls her new role “an amazing opportunity” and praises Blank Rome’s foundation of DEI.  She says, “I am excited to join Blank Rome as its Director of Diversity and Inclusion, especially at such a pivotal time in our world . . . [T]his is an amazing opportunity . . . to make sustainable change and a positive impact throughout our firm, the legal industry, the communities we serve, and beyond.”

Law School Updates

Over 150 academics issued a joint statement saying “The violent attack on the Capitol was an assault on our democracy and the rule of law. The effort to disrupt the certification of a free and fair election was a betrayal of the core values that undergird our Constitution. Lives were lost, the seat of our democracy was desecrated, and our country was shamed.”

Citing their role as the educators of the next generation of lawyers, the academics claimed an obligation to “support the rule of law and preserve the integrity of the legal profession.”  The statement frowned on the actions of attorneys filing frivolous and ungrounded lawsuits challenging the election, filings unsupported by any evidence, saying they “betrayed the values of our profession” by doing so.  Additionally, the statement praised the lawyers and judges who worked hard to bring about an honest election in trying circumstances.  Read the complete joint statement and see a list of academics who signed the Joint Statement on the 2020 Election and Events at the Capitol.

John F. Kennedy School of Law at Northcentral University welcomed its first cohort of law students in the online Juris Doctor program, the university announced last week.  Since 1996, Northcentral University has been a leader in graduate-focused online education, with over 11,000 students enrolled in graduate programs across education, psychology and now law.

The program is taught by faculty who are practicing attorneys, judges and other legal professionals, to bring real-world expertise into the virtual classroom.  Faculty areas of expertise include civil and criminal law, constitutional law, insurance defense litigation and public interest law.  Along with online classes, hands-on curriculum opportunities include clinical and internship experiences. Dean Hutton says the online JD program will have opportunities for students to get individualized feedback from faculty members.  He says, “”Students have multiple opportunities to apply legal doctrine throughout each course, along with personalized faculty feedback, allowing for a much deeper understanding of the material and greater preparation for exams and, ultimately, for the California Bar Examination.”

Other law offerings at Northcentral include a Bachelor of Arts in legal studies and a paralegal certificate program, both approved by the American Bar Association.

Copyright ©2020 National Law Forum, LLC

ARTICLE BY Eilene Spear of The National Law Review / The National Law Forum LLC
For more, visit the NLR Law Office Management section.

Shining a Spotlight on ESG Disclosures in the Biden Administration

In a period where almost nothing seems certain, it is inevitable that ESG issues will be on the front of the incoming SEC Chair’s mind. Jay Clayton, who resigned as SEC Chairman in December 2020, has urged that one-size-fits-all metrics for environmental disclosures aren’t appropriate given the varied impacts of climate change on different industries. However, President-elect Biden has made clear that climate change will be a high priority for his administration: he has vowed to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement on his first day of office. Thus, the five-member SEC, where three seats are controlled by the President’s party, can be expected to make ESG disclosures a high priority.

Investors are also in part to thank (or blame) for the growing significance of ESG topics in public disclosures. An SEC advisory committee that advocates for investors urged last May that the SEC establish disclosure policies regarding ESG topics, arguing that investors want reliable information on these matters before making investment and voting decisions. And in its 2019 “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation,” even the Business Roundtable—a former champion of “shareholder primacy”—agreed that the purpose of corporations is to promote “an economy that serves all Americans.” While this document has been criticized for not providing more palpable sustainability goals, Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) called it “a welcome step toward a more moral capitalism” and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it “agreed wholeheartedly with the renewed focus.” With the changing of the guard at the SEC, all signs point in the direction of further steps toward “moral capitalism” in the months to come.

© 2020 Proskauer Rose LLP.

ARTICLE BY Erica T. Jones of Proskauer Rose LLP
For more, visit the NLR Securities & SEC section.