<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Justice Sotomayor on Texas Appeals Journal</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/topics/justice-sotomayor/</link><description>Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2025 07:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://texasappeals.org/topics/justice-sotomayor/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Supreme Court Vacates Fifth Circuit Judgment on FDA Denials of Flavored E-Cigarette Applications</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2025/04/fda-v-wages-and-white-lion-flavored-vapes/</link><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2025 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2025/04/fda-v-wages-and-white-lion-flavored-vapes/</guid><description>A unanimous Court held that the FDA’s denial orders were sufficiently consistent with its earlier guidance on scientific evidence, comparative efficacy and device type, and so did not violate the change-in-position doctrine. It remanded the question whether the agency’s failure to consider marketing plans was harmless, holding that the Fifth Circuit had read Calcutt v. FDIC too broadly.</description></item><item><title>Supreme Court Holds ATF Rule on Weapon Parts Kits and Unfinished Frames Is Not Facially Inconsistent With the Gun Control Act</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/bondi-v-vanderstok-ghost-gun-rule/</link><pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2025 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/bondi-v-vanderstok-ghost-gun-rule/</guid><description>Reviewing a Fifth Circuit judgment in a suit filed in the Northern District of Texas, the Court held that the Gun Control Act reaches at least some weapon parts kits and at least some partially complete frames or receivers, so the challenged provisions of ATF’s 2022 rule are not facially invalid. The Court did not decide whether the rule may lawfully be applied to any particular product.</description></item></channel></rss>