1. Home
  2. News and Insights
  3. Client Alert: Senator J.D. Vance Calls for FTC and DOJ to Investigate Admissions Practices of Universities in the Wake of SFFA

Client Alert: Senator J.D. Vance Calls for FTC and DOJ to Investigate Admissions Practices of Universities in the Wake of SFFA

Publications

September 1, 2023

By: Ishan K. Bhabha, Douglas Litvack

On August 10, 2023, Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, called for the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate top universities for allegedly coordinating their admissions policies following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision banning affirmative action.[1]

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and SFFA v. University of North Carolina.[2] The Court’s 6-3 decision held that race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and UNC violate the federal Equal Protection Clause, and in so holding, effectively proscribed nearly all race-conscious college admissions programs as they currently stand.[3] The Court, applying strict scrutiny, rejected the universities’ professed diversity goals as too immeasurable and, in any event, held that the admissions programs were not narrowly tailored to meet a permissible interest.[4] The majority opinion concluded with a warning: “universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.”[5] The Court echoed the long-established principle that “what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly.”[6]

In his letters to the FTC and DOJ[7] , Sen. Vance explained that he had sent inquiries to ten top universities, many within the Ivy League, regarding their commitment to revise their race-based policies in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in SFFA. He characterized the responses he received from nine of the ten institutions as “generalized and dismissive” and stated they featured “uncanny similarit[ies], both in substance and structure.”[8] Based upon these responses, Sen. Vance concluded these universities have exhibited collusive behavior by coordinating their admissions policies and thus, the institutions should be subject to FTC and DOJ investigation.

Key Takeaways:

Senator Vance’s suspicion of anticompetitive collusion under Section 1 of the Sherman Act or Section 5 of the FTC Act appears misguided. As a general matter, anticompetitive collusion typically requires proof of: (1) an agreement — express or implied — between two or more independent entities and (2) a likely anticompetitive impact on consumers in a relevant market. Here, Senator Vance’s observations do not provide a reasonable basis to believe either, let alone both, of these elements could be satisfied.

First, the fact that the universities responded in a generally consistent manner is not sufficient to establish an agreement among the universities. In his letter, Sen. Vance relies on the universities’ common assurances that they would comply with the SFFA decision and referrals to their university website for further information, among other things, as evidence of collusion. However, it is well-established that parallel conduct alone is insufficient to prove collusion.[9] That is because the parallel conduct could represent each organization’s independent, rational decision-making and does not necessarily denote coordination. That could be the case here where the universities’ responses are exactly consistent with how a reasonable organization, protecting its self-interest, would unilaterally respond to a discretionary request.

Second, to the extent that the universities were coordinated in their activities (again something for which there is no indication at all), critics would be hard-pressed to identify any harmful anticompetitive effect of such coordination. In order to demonstrate collusion, there must be a showing that the alleged unlawful act has a substantial anticompetitive effect that harms consumers in the relevant market.[10] It is not clear what harm enrolled and prospective students would suffer if the universities were to collaborate on best practices for achieving student-body diversity in a manner compliant with the new legal standards announced in SFFA.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the FTC might nevertheless take steps in response to Sen. Vance’s letter. Under Chairwoman Lina Khan’s leadership, the FTC has taken a more aggressive stance towards consumer protection and antitrust enforcement.[11] Last November, the agency released a policy statement analyzing its authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to investigate and prosecute unfair methods of competition.[12] The policy statement envisions an FTC with significantly broader enforcement authority, proclaiming that the FTC’s mandate “reaches more broadly than the antitrust laws.”[13] Since then, the FTC has taken big swings against noteworthy players—pharmacy benefit managers for potentially illegal rebate schemes,[14] OpenAI for possible data privacy issues relating to ChatGPT,[15] and, most recently, Amazon for alleged antitrust violations.[16] Khan and her staff have also come under increasing the scrutiny of congressional Republicans, who have accused her of over-politicizing the nation’s chief consumer protection agency.[17] It is possible that Khan may pay at least nominal consideration to Sen. Vance’s accusations to appear even-handed and principally consistent. Higher education institutions should be prepared for potential FTC scrutiny, although for the reasons briefly discussed above, they should be well-placed to push back forcefully against any investigation based on Sen. Vance’s observations.

Jenner & Block has a deep commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as, extensive experience helping clients accomplish their DEI goals while minimizing legal risk. Jenner & Block also houses an active antitrust and competition law group with expertise in handling complex litigation and sensitive investigations. If you are interested in learning more about our work in these areas, please contact Ishan Bhabha (ibhabha@jenner.com), or Doug Litvack (dlitvack@jenner.com).

[1] Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 143 S. Ct. 2141 (2023).

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 2175.

[4] Id. at 2166–68.

[5] Id. at 2176.

[6] Id. (quoting Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277, 325 (1867) (unaltered quotation taken from original)).

[7] J.D. Vance, Letter to Hon. Lina M. Khan (Aug. 10, 2023) https://www.vance.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Sen.-Vance-Letter-To-FTC-8.10.23.pdf.

[8] Id.

[9] See, e.g., Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554 (2007) (“The inadequacy of showing parallel conduct or interdependence, without more, mirrors the ambiguity of the behavior: consistent with conspiracy, but just as much in line with a wide swath of rational and competitive business strategy unilaterally prompted by common perceptions of the market.”).

[10] Ohio v. Am. Express Co., 138 S. Ct. 2274, 2284 (2018).

[11] FTC Chair Khan Accused of ‘Abuse of Power’ in New US House Probe, Reuters (June 2, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ftc-chair-khan-accused-abuse-power-new-us-house-probe-2023-06-01/ [hereinafter FTC Chair Khan].

[12] Fed. Trade Comm’n, Comm’n File No. P221202, Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of Unfair Methods of Competition Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (2022).

[13] Id. at 2.

[14] Fred Ashton, FTC and Congress Put PBMs on Notice, Am. Action F. (Apr. 17, 2023), https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-and-congress-put-pbms-on-notice.

[15] Cecilia Kang & Cade Metz, FTC Opens Investigation Into ChatGPT Maker Over Technology’s Potential Harms, N.Y. Times (July 13, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/technology/chatgpt-investigation-ftc-openai.html.

[16] David Shepardson & Diane Bartz, Amazon.com Set to Meet with US FTC Ahead of Potential Antitrust Lawsuit, Reuters (Aug. 7, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/amazoncom-set-meet-with-ftc-ahead-potential-antitrust-lawsuit-source-2023-08-07.

[17] Mary Clare Jalonick & Matt O’Brien, House Republicans Interrogate FTC’s Khan Over Regulation of Big Tech, Assoc. Press (July 12, 2023), https://apnews.com/article/republicans-ftc-khan-technology-companies-41610756160e10732f7ded6c587cec0e; see FTC Chair Khan, supra note 11.

Footnotes

[1] Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 143 S. Ct. 2141 (2023).

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 2175.

[4] Id. at 2166–68.

[5] Id. at 2176.

[6] Id. (quoting Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277, 325 (1867) (unaltered quotation taken from original)).

[7] J.D. Vance, Letter to Hon. Lina M. Khan (Aug. 10, 2023) https://www.vance.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Sen.-Vance-Letter-To-FTC-8.10.23.pdf.

[8] Id.

[9] See, e.g., Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554 (2007) (“The inadequacy of showing parallel conduct or interdependence, without more, mirrors the ambiguity of the behavior: consistent with conspiracy, but just as much in line with a wide swath of rational and competitive business strategy unilaterally prompted by common perceptions of the market.”).

[10] Ohio v. Am. Express Co., 138 S. Ct. 2274, 2284 (2018).

[11] FTC Chair Khan Accused of ‘Abuse of Power’ in New US House Probe, Reuters (June 2, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ftc-chair-khan-accused-abuse-power-new-us-house-probe-2023-06-01/ [hereinafter FTC Chair Khan].

[12] Fed. Trade Comm’n, Comm’n File No. P221202, Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of Unfair Methods of Competition Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (2022).

[13] Id. at 2.

[14] Fred Ashton, FTC and Congress Put PBMs on Notice, Am. Action F. (Apr. 17, 2023), https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-and-congress-put-pbms-on-notice.

[15] Cecilia Kang & Cade Metz, FTC Opens Investigation Into ChatGPT Maker Over Technology’s Potential Harms, N.Y. Times (July 13, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/technology/chatgpt-investigation-ftc-openai.html.

[16] David Shepardson & Diane Bartz, Amazon.com Set to Meet with US FTC Ahead of Potential Antitrust Lawsuit, Reuters (Aug. 7, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/amazoncom-set-meet-with-ftc-ahead-potential-antitrust-lawsuit-source-2023-08-07.

[17] Mary Clare Jalonick & Matt O’Brien, House Republicans Interrogate FTC’s Khan Over Regulation of Big Tech, Assoc. Press (July 12, 2023), https://apnews.com/article/republicans-ftc-khan-technology-companies-41610756160e10732f7ded6c587cec0e; see FTC Chair Khan, supra note 11.

Related Capabilities

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Stay Informed

Client Alert: Senator J.D. Vance Calls for FTC and DOJ to Investigate Admissions Practices of Universities in the Wake of SFFA

Publications

September 1, 2023

By: Ishan K. Bhabha, Douglas Litvack

On August 10, 2023, Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, called for the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate top universities for allegedly coordinating their admissions policies following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision banning affirmative action.[1]

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and SFFA v. University of North Carolina.[2] The Court’s 6-3 decision held that race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and UNC violate the federal Equal Protection Clause, and in so holding, effectively proscribed nearly all race-conscious college admissions programs as they currently stand.[3] The Court, applying strict scrutiny, rejected the universities’ professed diversity goals as too immeasurable and, in any event, held that the admissions programs were not narrowly tailored to meet a permissible interest.[4] The majority opinion concluded with a warning: “universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.”[5] The Court echoed the long-established principle that “what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly.”[6]

In his letters to the FTC and DOJ[7] , Sen. Vance explained that he had sent inquiries to ten top universities, many within the Ivy League, regarding their commitment to revise their race-based policies in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in SFFA. He characterized the responses he received from nine of the ten institutions as “generalized and dismissive” and stated they featured “uncanny similarit[ies], both in substance and structure.”[8] Based upon these responses, Sen. Vance concluded these universities have exhibited collusive behavior by coordinating their admissions policies and thus, the institutions should be subject to FTC and DOJ investigation.

Key Takeaways:

Senator Vance’s suspicion of anticompetitive collusion under Section 1 of the Sherman Act or Section 5 of the FTC Act appears misguided. As a general matter, anticompetitive collusion typically requires proof of: (1) an agreement — express or implied — between two or more independent entities and (2) a likely anticompetitive impact on consumers in a relevant market. Here, Senator Vance’s observations do not provide a reasonable basis to believe either, let alone both, of these elements could be satisfied.

First, the fact that the universities responded in a generally consistent manner is not sufficient to establish an agreement among the universities. In his letter, Sen. Vance relies on the universities’ common assurances that they would comply with the SFFA decision and referrals to their university website for further information, among other things, as evidence of collusion. However, it is well-established that parallel conduct alone is insufficient to prove collusion.[9] That is because the parallel conduct could represent each organization’s independent, rational decision-making and does not necessarily denote coordination. That could be the case here where the universities’ responses are exactly consistent with how a reasonable organization, protecting its self-interest, would unilaterally respond to a discretionary request.

Second, to the extent that the universities were coordinated in their activities (again something for which there is no indication at all), critics would be hard-pressed to identify any harmful anticompetitive effect of such coordination. In order to demonstrate collusion, there must be a showing that the alleged unlawful act has a substantial anticompetitive effect that harms consumers in the relevant market.[10] It is not clear what harm enrolled and prospective students would suffer if the universities were to collaborate on best practices for achieving student-body diversity in a manner compliant with the new legal standards announced in SFFA.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the FTC might nevertheless take steps in response to Sen. Vance’s letter. Under Chairwoman Lina Khan’s leadership, the FTC has taken a more aggressive stance towards consumer protection and antitrust enforcement.[11] Last November, the agency released a policy statement analyzing its authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to investigate and prosecute unfair methods of competition.[12] The policy statement envisions an FTC with significantly broader enforcement authority, proclaiming that the FTC’s mandate “reaches more broadly than the antitrust laws.”[13] Since then, the FTC has taken big swings against noteworthy players—pharmacy benefit managers for potentially illegal rebate schemes,[14] OpenAI for possible data privacy issues relating to ChatGPT,[15] and, most recently, Amazon for alleged antitrust violations.[16] Khan and her staff have also come under increasing the scrutiny of congressional Republicans, who have accused her of over-politicizing the nation’s chief consumer protection agency.[17] It is possible that Khan may pay at least nominal consideration to Sen. Vance’s accusations to appear even-handed and principally consistent. Higher education institutions should be prepared for potential FTC scrutiny, although for the reasons briefly discussed above, they should be well-placed to push back forcefully against any investigation based on Sen. Vance’s observations.

Jenner & Block has a deep commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as, extensive experience helping clients accomplish their DEI goals while minimizing legal risk. Jenner & Block also houses an active antitrust and competition law group with expertise in handling complex litigation and sensitive investigations. If you are interested in learning more about our work in these areas, please contact Ishan Bhabha (ibhabha@jenner.com), or Doug Litvack (dlitvack@jenner.com).

[1] Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 143 S. Ct. 2141 (2023).

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 2175.

[4] Id. at 2166–68.

[5] Id. at 2176.

[6] Id. (quoting Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277, 325 (1867) (unaltered quotation taken from original)).

[7] J.D. Vance, Letter to Hon. Lina M. Khan (Aug. 10, 2023) https://www.vance.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Sen.-Vance-Letter-To-FTC-8.10.23.pdf.

[8] Id.

[9] See, e.g., Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554 (2007) (“The inadequacy of showing parallel conduct or interdependence, without more, mirrors the ambiguity of the behavior: consistent with conspiracy, but just as much in line with a wide swath of rational and competitive business strategy unilaterally prompted by common perceptions of the market.”).

[10] Ohio v. Am. Express Co., 138 S. Ct. 2274, 2284 (2018).

[11] FTC Chair Khan Accused of ‘Abuse of Power’ in New US House Probe, Reuters (June 2, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ftc-chair-khan-accused-abuse-power-new-us-house-probe-2023-06-01/ [hereinafter FTC Chair Khan].

[12] Fed. Trade Comm’n, Comm’n File No. P221202, Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of Unfair Methods of Competition Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (2022).

[13] Id. at 2.

[14] Fred Ashton, FTC and Congress Put PBMs on Notice, Am. Action F. (Apr. 17, 2023), https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-and-congress-put-pbms-on-notice.

[15] Cecilia Kang & Cade Metz, FTC Opens Investigation Into ChatGPT Maker Over Technology’s Potential Harms, N.Y. Times (July 13, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/technology/chatgpt-investigation-ftc-openai.html.

[16] David Shepardson & Diane Bartz, Amazon.com Set to Meet with US FTC Ahead of Potential Antitrust Lawsuit, Reuters (Aug. 7, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/amazoncom-set-meet-with-ftc-ahead-potential-antitrust-lawsuit-source-2023-08-07.

[17] Mary Clare Jalonick & Matt O’Brien, House Republicans Interrogate FTC’s Khan Over Regulation of Big Tech, Assoc. Press (July 12, 2023), https://apnews.com/article/republicans-ftc-khan-technology-companies-41610756160e10732f7ded6c587cec0e; see FTC Chair Khan, supra note 11.

Footnotes

[1] Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll., 143 S. Ct. 2141 (2023).

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 2175.

[4] Id. at 2166–68.

[5] Id. at 2176.

[6] Id. (quoting Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277, 325 (1867) (unaltered quotation taken from original)).

[7] J.D. Vance, Letter to Hon. Lina M. Khan (Aug. 10, 2023) https://www.vance.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Sen.-Vance-Letter-To-FTC-8.10.23.pdf.

[8] Id.

[9] See, e.g., Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554 (2007) (“The inadequacy of showing parallel conduct or interdependence, without more, mirrors the ambiguity of the behavior: consistent with conspiracy, but just as much in line with a wide swath of rational and competitive business strategy unilaterally prompted by common perceptions of the market.”).

[10] Ohio v. Am. Express Co., 138 S. Ct. 2274, 2284 (2018).

[11] FTC Chair Khan Accused of ‘Abuse of Power’ in New US House Probe, Reuters (June 2, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ftc-chair-khan-accused-abuse-power-new-us-house-probe-2023-06-01/ [hereinafter FTC Chair Khan].

[12] Fed. Trade Comm’n, Comm’n File No. P221202, Policy Statement Regarding the Scope of Unfair Methods of Competition Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (2022).

[13] Id. at 2.

[14] Fred Ashton, FTC and Congress Put PBMs on Notice, Am. Action F. (Apr. 17, 2023), https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-and-congress-put-pbms-on-notice.

[15] Cecilia Kang & Cade Metz, FTC Opens Investigation Into ChatGPT Maker Over Technology’s Potential Harms, N.Y. Times (July 13, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/technology/chatgpt-investigation-ftc-openai.html.

[16] David Shepardson & Diane Bartz, Amazon.com Set to Meet with US FTC Ahead of Potential Antitrust Lawsuit, Reuters (Aug. 7, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/amazoncom-set-meet-with-ftc-ahead-potential-antitrust-lawsuit-source-2023-08-07.

[17] Mary Clare Jalonick & Matt O’Brien, House Republicans Interrogate FTC’s Khan Over Regulation of Big Tech, Assoc. Press (July 12, 2023), https://apnews.com/article/republicans-ftc-khan-technology-companies-41610756160e10732f7ded6c587cec0e; see FTC Chair Khan, supra note 11.

Related Capabilities

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Stay Informed

News and Insights

News

Partner Lucy Blake Quoted in CityAM on SFO Whistleblower Reward Proposal

Partner Lucy Blake was quoted in CityAM on the UK government’s consultation to let the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) financially reward whistleblowers who report economic crime.

October 16, 2026

Recognition

Chambers UK 2027 Ranks Jenner & Block’s London Office and Five Partners

Jenner & Block’s London office has once again earned a ranking in Corporate Crime & Investigations in the newly published Chambers UK 2027. The annual guide ranks leading law firms and lawyers across the United Kingdom, drawing on in-depth research and client feedback.

October 15, 2026

News

Jenner & Block Secures Another Win for Chance the Rapper Following Bench Trial on Fiduciary Duty Claim

On October 13, 2026, Cook County Circuit Court Judge James E. Hanlon, Jr. ruled in favor of Jenner & Block client Chancelor J. Bennett, known as Chance the Rapper, on his breach of fiduciary duty claim against former manager Patrick Corcoran, finding that Corcoran breached his fiduciary duties in multiple instances. The ruling closes a nearly six-year dispute.

October 15, 2026

Event

Amanda Shafer Berman to Speak on Energy and Administrative Law at WEN-DC Webinar

As the Supreme Court's new Term begins, Jenner & Block Partner Amanda Shafer Berman will join a Women's Energy Network of Washington, DC (WEN-DC) webinar on how the Court's decisions are shaping the energy sector.

October 14, 2026

News

Helen Gilbert, Veteran Northern District of California Prosecutor and Former National Security Chief, Joins Jenner & Block in San Francisco

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, October 14, 2026 – Jenner & Block is pleased to announce that Helen Gilbert, a former federal prosecutor and trial lawyer, has joined the firm as a partner in its San Francisco office. Drawing on more than 10 years in the US Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California, including as Chief of the National Security, Cyber, and Special Prosecutions Section, Helen will guide clients through government investigations, white-collar matters, and corporate crises, with a

October 14, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Team Honored with The Legal Aid Society’s 2026 Pro Bono Publico Award

A Jenner & Block team was honored by The Legal Aid Society as a recipient of its 2026 Pro Bono Publico Award at an awards ceremony in New York on October 7.

October 9, 2026

News

Partner Lucy Blake Quoted in Forward Law Review on Litigation and Reputational Risk in Business and Human Rights

Partner Lucy Blake shared her insights with Forward Law Review on how pressure on companies over business and human rights issues is shifting from regulatory enforcement to litigation and reputational risk.

October 9, 2026

News

Partner Lucy Blake Quoted in International Employment Lawyer on Governance Lessons from Odey Ruling

Partner Lucy Blake was quoted in International Employment Lawyer on what financial firms can learn about independent governance from the Upper Tribunal's decision to uphold the FCA's lifetime ban on hedge fund manager Crispin Odey.

October 9, 2026

Event

Lindsay Harrison to Moderate Panel at IBA Annual Conference Copenhagen 2026

On October 8, Washington, DC Office Managing Partner Lindsay Harrison will moderate a panel at the International Bar Association (IBA) Annual Conference in Copenhagen.

October 8, 2026

News

London Office Managing Partner Christine Braamskamp Quoted in City AM on Government Plans for Judge-Alone Fraud Trials

London Office Managing Partner Christine Braamskamp shared her insights with City AM on the UK government's plans to hear "technical and lengthy fraud and financial offences" before a judge alone, without a jury, as part of efforts to reduce the record backlog in the Crown Court.

October 8, 2026

News

London Office Managing Partner Christine Braamskamp Quoted in Law360 on Criminal Probe Risk for Manchester City

London Office Managing Partner Christine Braamskamp shared her insights with Law360 on the hurdles any criminal investigation would face after an independent Premier League commission found that Manchester City used "sham" agreements to disguise owner funding as sponsorship income.

October 8, 2026

Publications

Partner Amanda Shafer Berman Quoted in Bloomberg Law on Senate Permitting Overhaul Bill

Partner Amanda Shafer Berman was quoted in an October 5 Bloomberg Law article, "Permitting Deal Gives Projects Defense Against Litigation Delays," on the Senate's new permitting overhaul package and its expected impact on litigation over federal permitting reversals.

October 2026

Event

Partner David Kroeger to Speak on IBA Annual Conference Copenhagen 2026 Panel

Partner David Kroeger will join a panel at the International Bar Association (IBA) Annual Conference in Copenhagen on October 8.

October 8, 2026

Event

Partner John Storino to Speak at Sandpiper Partners' “AI and Outside Counsel Guidelines Roundtable”

On October 8, Partner John Storino will serve as a panelist at the “AI and Outside Counsel Guidelines Roundtable,” hosted by Sandpiper Partners in Chicago.

October 8, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Leads Washington, DC Legal Industry in Pro Bono Hours for 2025

On September 30, Jenner & Block's Washington, DC office was honored by Chief Judges of the District of Columbia federal courts at the "40 at 50" Judicial Pro Bono Recognition Breakfast. The breakfast, sponsored by the DC Circuit Judicial Conference Standing Committee, recognizes firms in which at least 40% of lawyers contributed a minimum of 50 hours of pro bono legal services in 2025. 

October 7, 2026

News

Jenner & Block Secures Preliminary Injunction Blocking Utah's Age-Verification Mandate for VPN Users

Jenner & Block secured a preliminary injunction on behalf of Aylo Freesites Ltd, the owner and operator of Pornhub, YouPorn, and RedTube, blocking Utah from enforcing an amendment to its age-verification law. On September 24, a federal judge held the amendment likely violates the dormant Commerce Clause.

October 7, 2026

News

Jenner & Block Wins Emergency Relief for Association of American Universities to Protect Donor Privacy

Jenner & Block won a temporary restraining order for the Association of American Universities (AAU) on October 1, hours before the US Department of Education was set to publish the names of foreign donors to American universities on its website.

October 7, 2026

Client Alerts

National Fraud Enforcement Division Issues New Memorandum Outlining Priorities, Capping Two-Year Evolution of Approach to Corporate Enforcement

Since last year, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued a series of memoranda and policies developing and refining its corporate fraud enforcement priorities. Recently, in April 2026, DOJ announced the creation of the National Fraud Enforcement Division (NFED or the Division)—whose “core mission” is to “zealously investigate and prosecute those who steal or fraudulently misuse taxpayer dollars”—and it has been rapidly expanding ever since. In August 2026, the NFED issued a memo identifying f

October 7, 2026

Event

Partner Meghan Greenfield to Speak on Supreme Court Climate Case at Edison Electric Institute's Fall Legal Conference

On Wednesday, October 7, Partner Meghan Greenfield will speak on a panel titled "Boulder County v. Suncor Energy: What the Supreme Court's Climate Case Means for the Energy Industry" at the Edison Electric Institute's Fall Legal Conference in Salt Lake City, Utah.

October 7, 2026

Publications

The Form Rules Everything: A Seventh Circuit Ruling on ERISA's Substantial Compliance Doctrine

Partner Joseph Torres and Special Counsel Jennifer Beach authored an article for Employee Relations Law Journal examining the Seventh Circuit's decision in Packaging Corp. of America Thrift Plan for Hourly Employees v. Langdon, a ruling that addresses both the standard of review in ERISA interpleader actions and the continued viability of the substantial compliance doctrine for changing plan beneficiaries.

October 5, 2026

View All News and Insights