Insights Search

On Thursday, September 18, Washington, D.C. Managing Partner Zach Terwilliger and Government Contracts Co-head Alex Canizares will present a Coalition for Common Sense in Government Procurement webinar.

Organizations challenging an agency’s termination of a grant or government contract based on an allegedly illegal government policy need to master a two-step dance, according to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision.

With its growing size and importance, the renewable energy industry needs to be aware of antitrust rules. Members of V&E’s nationally recognized antitrust practice have produced a comprehensive survey article that addresses a variety of competition issues faced by renewable energy companies.

On July 29, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memorandum offering specific examples of what the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) considers to be unlawful discriminatory policies and practices under federal civil rights laws, as well as recommendations on best practices for employers to avoid engaging in unlawful discrimination.

As the Trump administration continues to roll out its sweeping tariff policy, the North American energy industry is working to address the effects of the President’s tariff strategy. The Trump administration intends to “unleash American energy,”¹ in part by imposing tariffs designed to remedy what the administration views as unfair trade practices and increase U.S. domestic energy production. The currently imposed and threatened tariffs will inevitably impact the energy industry and its consumers. The particularly relevant tariffs can be defined in two broad categories: (1) sectoral tariffs, in this case, imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, and (2) the country-specific and “reciprocal tariffs” that the Trump administration has imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Parties to transactions should be aware of new requirements for state-level merger reporting – so-called “mini-HSR Acts” – modeled on the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act (“UAPNA”).

The White House recently unveiled “America’s AI Action Plan,” a comprehensive strategy designed to secure United States leadership in the global artificial intelligence race.

On July 8th, 2025, President Trump issued an order (the “Order”) forcing divestment of U.S.-based Jupiter Systems (“Jupiter”) by its China-based parent company, Suirui Group Co., Ltd. (“Suirui”), more than five years after Suirui acquired Jupiter.

On July 11, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) announced that it had settled an enforcement action against two individuals who were alleged to have engaged in insider trading. The SEC’s complaint in SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen, filed in the Southern District of New York, serves as a pointed reminder that insider-trading enforcement remains a top‐tier priority — even when the dollar amounts appear modest and the conduct occurs far below the C-suite. Trijya Vakil, a senior director at Elanco Animal Health, Inc. (“Elanco”), obtained material non-public information (“MNPI”) while performing due-diligence work on Elanco’s then-confidential plan to acquire Kindred Biosciences, Inc. (“Kindred”). She (i) purchased 500 Kindred shares for herself and (ii) tipped longtime friend Neeraj Visen, who bought 38,000 shares the day before the deal was announced. Following a 46 percent price jump after the June 16, 2021 announcement, Vakil profited by approximately $2,400 and Visen by roughly $109,000.

On July 3, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or the “Commission”), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Army Corps”), and the Departments of Energy (“DOE”), Interior (“DOI”), Transportation (“DOT”), Agriculture (“USDA”), and Defense (“DOD”) released sweeping updates to their regulations and procedures implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”).

Kara Kuritz and Ryan Will examine how shifting FTC policies on prior approval provisions are reshaping merger enforcement, offering in-house legal teams critical insights into navigating antitrust risk. They outline practical strategies for anticipating regulatory scrutiny, understanding divergent FTC and DOJ approaches, and structuring deals to avoid or mitigate burdensome consent order requirements in today’s evolving antitrust landscape.

Colorado’s antitrust landscape is undergoing a fundamental transformation — not just because of the sweeping legislative changes enacted in 2023, but also due to the assertive approach now being taken by the Colorado Attorney General (“AG”).