President Biden Issues Yom HaShoah Proclamation

President Biden yesterday evening at the start of Yom Hashoah issued A Proclamation on Days Of Remembrance Of Victims Of The Holocaust, 2023 (full text). It reads in part:

During Yom HaShoah and throughout these days of remembrance, we mourn the six million Jews who were murdered during the horror of the Holocaust — as well as the millions of Roma and Sinti, Slavs, disabled persons, LGBTQI+ individuals, and political dissidents who were murdered at the hands of the Nazis and their collaborators.  Together with courageous survivors, descendants of victims, and people around the world, we renew our solemn vow:  “never again.”...

Hate must have no safe harbor in America or anywhere else.  Today and always, we make our message clear:  Evil will not win.  Hate will not prevail.  And the violence of antisemitism will not be the story of our time.  Together, we can ensure that “never again” is a promise we keep....

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 16 through April 23, 2023, as a week of observance of the Days of Remembrance of Victims of the Holocaust, and I call upon the people of the United States to observe this week and pause to remember victims and survivors of the Holocaust.

Report on Worldwide Antisemitism Released

Yesterday, the Center for the Study of European Jewry at Tel Aviv university, along with the ADL, published the 86-page Antisemitism Worldwide Report for 2022 (full text). The Report says in part:

The Antisemitism Worldwide Report for 2022 informs of both increases and decreases, some more meaningful than others, in the number of antisemitic incidents in different countries. The United States, where the largest Jewish minority in the world lives, saw a particularly alarming rise in anti-Jewish violence and slander.

These data are not encouraging. The record-levels of 2021 were attributed in part to the exceptional social tensions created by the Covid-19 epidemic and the political tensions created by the Guardian of the Walls operation in Gaza. The data for 2022 suggest that the motivations for present-day antisemitism are not transient as some may have hoped. Despite the investment of substantial legal, educational, and political efforts, thousands of antisemitic incidents took place across the globe in 2022, including hundreds of physical assaults. Everyone who cares about human dignity and justice must recognize the need to prevent this reality from becoming normalized....

The current state of antisemitism is serious, but must not be inflated or self-servingly politicized. Antisemitic incidents should be reported and analyzed based on rigorous and careful methodologies and definitions and aspire for accuracy rather than sensationalism. Throughout 2022, a spate of studies that seemed oriented towards nothing more than newspaper headlines were published, presenting hysterical data, some grotesquely so. Such efforts do little more than feed cynicism, inaction, and allegations that the fight against antisemitism is an act of “crying wolf.” 

Several of the case studies presented in this Report point to one of the most disturbing attributes of antisemitism: Jews do not have to be a part of a society for them to be defamed there. Last year, the Houthis of Yemen, where almost no Jews live, were one of the loudest antisemitic propagandists in the Arab world ..., while in Japan, two minor political parties that advance vicious anti-Jewish conspiracy theories made it to parliament for the first time.... 

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments Today In Title VII Religious Accommodation Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in Groff v. DeJoy, an important religious liberty case testing the extent to which Title VII requires accommodation of employees' religious practices. In the case, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, held that accommodating a Sunday sabbath observer by allowing him not to report for work on Sunday would cause an "undue hardship" to the U.S. Postal Service.  Thus, failure to grant that accommodation did not violate Title VII. (See prior posting.) In the case, petitioners are asking the Supreme Court to revisit and reject the "more than de minimis" test for "undue hardship" announced in TWA v. Hardison. SCOTUSblog has a Case Preview with more details on the parties' arguments. The SCOTUSblog Case Page has links to the filings by the parties as well as to the more than 50 amicus briefs that have been filed. The arguments will be streamed live from the Supreme Court today at 10:00 AM here. The transcript and audio of the full oral arguments will be available later today here on the Supreme Court's website.

Supreme Court Review Sought in Challenge to Conversion Therapy Ban

On March 27, a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Tingley v. Ferguson. In the case, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied an en banc rehearing of a 3-judge panel's decision rejecting free speech, free exercise and vagueness challenges to Washington state's ban on practicing conversion therapy on minors. Conversion therapy encourages change in sexual orientation or gender identity. (See prior posting). SCOTUSblog  reports on the petition for review.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Carolyn Sharp, A Heart-Centered Defense, (March 18, 2023).
• Miranda McGowan, The Democratic Deficit of Dobbs, (Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, (forthcoming 2023)).
• Deborah Hellman, Defining Disparate Treatment: A Research Agenda for Our Times, (Indiana Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Francesca Laguardia, Pain That Only She Must Bear: On the Invisibility of Women in Judicial Abortion Rhetoric, (Journal of Law and the Biosciences, Volume 9, Issue 1, January-June 2022, lsac003).
• Carlos A. Ball, Balancing Abortion, (Santa Clara Law Review, Vol. 63, 2023, Forthcoming).
• Gerard Letterie & Dov Fox, Legal Personhood and Frozen Embryos: Implications for Fertility Patients and Providers in Post-Roe America, (Journal of Law and the Biosciences, Vol. 10 (2023)).
• Kyle Velte, The Supreme Court's Gaslight Docket (March 30, 2023).
• Sara Friedman & Chao-Ju Chen, Same-Sex Marriage Legalization and the Stigmas of LGBT Co-Parenting in Taiwan, (Law & Social Inquiry, 1-29 (2022).
• Shea Esterling, The Journey Home: The Repatriation of the Maaso Kova, (27 American Society of International Law Insights 3 (March 2023)).
• Rosemary Teele Langford & Miranda Webster, The Australian Charitable Incorporated Organisation: A Reform Proposal, ((2023) 39 Company and Securities Law Journal 347).

From SmartCILP:

• M. Mehdi Ali, Shi'i Legal Discourses in Iraq and Lebanon: Exploring the Intersection of Juristic Rulings and State Legal Regimes, 45 Loyola Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review 249-280 (2022).

Biden Sends Greetings on Orthodox Christian Easter

President Biden today issued a Statement (full text) sending warm wishes from himself and the First Lady to those in the Orthodox Christian community celebrating Easter today. He said in part:

 Today, as we pray for all those suffering from war and persecution, we also give thanks for people around the world who are binding up the wounds of the injured and working to protect the dignity of all—including by welcoming refugees and standing up for human rights....

During this sacred season and the years ahead, we look forward to continuing to work together to build a more just and compassionate world for all God’s children.

WAPO Says Judge Hid His Authorship of Anti-Abortion, Anti-LGBT Law Review Article

Washington Post reported today that Texas federal district court judge Matthew Kacsmaryk who issued last week's controversial opinion finding the FDA's approval of the abortion medication mifepristone invalid removed his name as author of a pending law review article as his nomination to the federal bench became imminent.  According to the Post:

As a lawyer for a conservative legal group, Matthew Kacsmaryk in early 2017 submitted an article to a Texas law review criticizing Obama-era protections for transgender people and those seeking abortions.

The Obama administration, the draft article argued, had discounted religious physicians who “cannot use their scalpels to make female what God created male” and “cannot use their pens to prescribe or dispense abortifacient drugs designed to kill unborn children.”

But a few months after the piece arrived, an editor at the law journal ... received an unusual email: ... Kacsmaryk, who had originally been listed as the article’s sole author, said he would be removing his name and replacing it with those of two colleagues at his legal group, First Liberty Institute....

The article, titled “The Jurisprudence of the Body,” was published in September 2017 by the Texas Review of Law and Politics, a right-leaning journal that Kacsmaryk had led as a law student at the University of Texas. But Kacsmaryk’s role in the article was not disclosed, nor did he list the article on the paperwork he submitted to the Senate in advance of confirmation hearings....

A spokesman for First Liberty ... said that Kacsmaryk’s name had been a “placeholder” on the article and that Kacsmaryk had not provided a “substantive contribution.”....

The full Post article has additional details.

Colorado Bars Abortion Pill Reversal; Suit Challenges New Law

Yesterday, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed into law SB23-190 (full text). The new law makes it a deceptive trade practice to advertise that a clinic offers abortions, referrals for abortions or emergency contraceptives when it does not offer these services.  It also provides that it is unprofessional conduct for a healthcare provider to prescribe or administer medication abortion reversal, unless by Oct. 1 the state medical, pharmacy and nursing boards all have in effect rules finding that it is a generally accepted standard of practice to engage in medication abortion reversal.

On the same day the bill was signed, an anti-abortion Catholic healthcare clinic filed suit in a Colorado federal district court challenging the new law's provisions on medication abortion reversal as violating its 1st and 14th Amendment rights. The complaint (full text) in Bella Health and Wellness v. Weiser, (D CO, filed 4/14/2023), alleges that the law violates its Free Exercise rights because it is neither neutral nor generally applicable, saying in part:

[A]bortion pill reversal is nothing more than supplemental progesterone. And there are a multitude of off-label uses of progesterone, which has been widely prescribed to women—including pregnant women—for more than 50 years.

... Yet SB 23-190 makes no attempt to regulate—much less outright prohibit— the off-label use of progesterone in any other circumstance. That omission renders SB 23-190 not generally applicable.

The complaint also alleges that the law violates their free speech rights and patients' right to medical treatment.  According to Becket Law, the district court quickly granted Bella Health temporary emergency relief and set a hearing on a preliminary injunction while litigation proceeds for April 24. CPR News reports on the lawsuit.

Two Justices Say Iowa Should Adopt Ministerial Exception Doctrine

In Konchar v. Pins, (IA Sup. Ct., April 14, 2023), the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's dismissal of fraud, defamation and breach of contract claims by the former long-time principal of a Catholic school.  The court said in part:

Ultimately ... Konchar’s defamation claim is about whether a Catholic priest was justified in deciding that Konchar should no longer serve as principal at a Catholic school. But the district court believed that this kind of inquiry would run afoul of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.... In fact, the district court specifically found that the First Amendment precludes inquiries by “a civil court” into “the decision of whether Konchar was suitable for the role of Principal at St. Joseph’s.” And Konchar’s briefs do not challenge this conclusion. So we presume without deciding that the district court was correct, and we decline to reverse.

Justice Waterman, joined by Justice McDermott, filed a concurring opinion saying in part:

I write separately to confirm the majority opinion leaves the door open to formally apply the ministerial exception in our state. I would apply that exception in this case as an alternative ground to affirm dismissal of all tort claims asserted by Phyllis Konchar related to her termination as principal and “spiritual leader” of this church-operated private school. The ministerial exception better protects the autonomy of religious organizations guaranteed under the First Amendment to choose who ministers their faith and spares churches, dioceses, priests, and bishops the entanglement with costly civil litigation this case exemplifies. The extensive discovery, depositions, and trial spanning two weeks that these church defendants endured could have been avoided by a prompt dispositive motion under the ministerial exception long recognized by the United States Supreme Court, federal circuit courts, and other state courts.

Supreme Court Grants 5-Day Administrative Stay of Texas District Court's Abortion Pill Order

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito this afternoon in Food & Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, (Docket No. 22A902, April 14, 2023), granted a 5-day administrative stay of a Texas federal district court's order invalidating the FDA's approval of the abortion drug mifepristone. Any response to the application for a lengthier stay must be filed by 11:59 pm April 18. Any response to that filing must be submitted by noon the next day. CNN reports on developments.

UPDATE: Here is the White House's reaction to the Court's stay.

Supreme Court Asked to Stay Abortion Pill Rulings

Today both the FDA and the manufacturer of the abortion drug mifepristone filed with the U.S. Supreme Court applications for a stay of the Texas federal district court's Order invalidating the FDA's approval of the drug. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed part of the district court's order to remain in effect. Today's Applications for a Stay were filed with Justice Alito, the Justice assigned by the Court to receive emergency applications from the 5th Circuit.  Here is the filing by Danco Laboratories, and here is the Solicitor General's filing on behalf of the FDA.  Axios reports on the filings.

Dismissal Recommended in Healthcare Worker's Claim for Religious Exemption from Vaccine Mandate

In Bolonchuk v. Cherry Creek Nursing Center/ Nexion Health, (D CO, April 12, 2023), a Colorado federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a suit by a former nursing home healthcare employee whose 18-year long employment was terminated after she refused on religious grounds to comply with her employer's Covid vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. A state regulation required the vaccine mandate. The court rejected plaintiff's 1st Amendment claim because defendant was not alleged to be a state actor.  It also rejected her claim that Title VII required a religious accommodation, saying in part:

Defendant would have had to violate a state law (i.e., the regulation mandate) in order to accommodate Plaintiff, clearly establishing an undue hardship.

Florida Enacts More Restrictive Abortion Law

Yesterday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed SB 300 (full text) which bans abortions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, amending the state's prior law that permitted abortions until 15 weeks.  Under the new law, exceptions remain for saving the mother's life or preventing imminent substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function other than a psychological condition. There are also exceptions before the third trimester where the fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality, and during the first 15 weeks in cases of documented rape, incest or human trafficking.  A press release from the Governor's office announcing the signing or the said in part:

While other states like California and New York have legalized infanticide up until birth, Governor DeSantis has enacted historic measures to defend the dignity of human life and transform Florida into a pro-family state.

The White House issued a statement sharply criticizing the bill.  CNN reports on the new law.

5th Circuit Allows Part of Stay on Abortion Pills To Remain; U.S. Will Appeal to Supreme Court

 In Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food & Drug Administration,(5th Cir., April 12, 2023), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a partial stay of a Texas federal district court's decision invalidating the FDA's approval of the abortion drug mifepristone. The appeals court held that the statute of limitations barred a challenge to the FDA's initial approval of the drug in 2000. However, the court refused to stay the district court's disapproval of changes the FDA made in 2016.  Those changes significantly reduced prior restrictions on the administration and use of the drug. The court said in part:

Here, applicants have failed to carry their burden at this preliminary stage to show that FDA’s actions were not arbitrary and capricious. We have two principal concerns in that regard. First, FDA failed to “examine the relevant data” when it made the 2016 ... changes.... That’s because FDA eliminated ... safeguards based on studies that included those very safeguards....

Second, the 2016 ... Changes eliminated the requirement that non-fatal adverse events must be reported to FDA. After eliminating that adverse-event reporting requirement, FDA turned around in 2021 and declared the absence of non-fatal adverse-event reports means mifepristone is “safe.”... This ostrich’s-head-in-the-sand approach is deeply troubling.... It’s unreasonable for an agency to eliminate a reporting requirement for a thing and then use the resulting absence of data to support its decision.

Reuters reports on the decision. 

Earlier today, the Justice Department announced that it would seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.

FDA Seeks Stay Pending Appeal of Order Ending Approval of Mifepristone

The Justice Department on behalf of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration yesterday filed an Emergency Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal (full text of motion) in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, (5th Cir., filed 4/10/2023). The motion seeks a stay while an appeal is heard by the 5th Circuit of a Texas federal district court decision setting aside the 2000 FDA order approving doctors prescribing mifepristone for medical abortions. The FDA argues in part:

The [district] court repeatedly characterizes mifepristone as unsafe. But over the last two decades, the available evidence conclusively demonstrates that mifepristone is safe under the approved conditions of use. More than five million women have used mifepristone to terminate their pregnancies in the United States.... Mifepristone is also approved in dozens of other countries..... The literature reflects “exceedingly rare” rates of serious adverse events.

AP reports on the appeal.

185 Methodist Churches in Georgia Sue Parent Body Seeking Disaffiliation

 At the end of last month, 185 Methodist congregations in Georgia filed suit in a Georgia state trial court against their parent body and its officials.  The congregations are attempting to disaffiliate from the North Georgia Conference of the United Methodist Church pursuant to a provision (❡2553) added to the Church's Book of Discipline in 2019.  The provision, which applies to disaffiliations completed by the end of 2023, allows disaffiliating congregations to keep their real and personal property.  The complaint (full text) in Carrollton First United Methodist Church, Inc. v. Trustees of the North Georgia Conference of the United Methodist Church, Inc., (GA Superior Ct., filed 3/30/2023), alleges in part that: 

Defendants have conspired to "run out the clock" on Plaintiffs ability to utilize ❡2553 by a combination of ultra vires actions, fraudulent misrepresentations, and promises which they have failed to keep so that, unless this court intervenes, Plaintiffs cannot and indeed will not be allowed to fulfill the legislated requirements of ❡2553 in time to meet the sunset date of 12/31/23.

The complaint also alleges that the parent body is no longer allowing disaffiliating churches a credit for their share of a $23 million pension plan reserve fund.

In introductory paragraphs, the complaint contends:

This case can be resolved in accordance with secular Georgia law ... without interfering with the separation of church and state.... Defendants cannot be heard to contest this point, as Defendants have availed themselves of the same principles recently in a substantially similar context in this very court....

UM News, reporting on the lawsuit, says in part:

The lawsuit ... involves more than a quarter of the North Georgia Conference’s nearly 700 congregations. 

It’s also the most congregations that have banded together in a single lawsuit since the denomination began undergoing a slow-motion separation after decades of intensifying debate over LGBTQ inclusion.

House Committee Seeks Documents on FBI Interest in Radical Traditionalist Catholic Extremists

Yesterday, U.S. House Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan issued a subpoena to FBI Director Christopher Wray seeking documents related to the FBI's attempt to monitor possible violent extremism among radical-traditionalist Catholics.  In an April 10 Committee Press Release (full text), the Committee said in part:

From this limited production, it is apparent that the FBI, relying on information derived from at least one undercover employee, sought to use local religious organizations as “new avenues for tripwire and source development.”... 

The FBI similarly noted two other opportunities to engage in outreach with religious institutions in the Richmond area, citing a desire “to sensitize the congregation to the warning signs of radicalization and enlist their assistance to serve as suspicious activity tripwires.” This outreach plan even included contacting so-called “mainline Catholic parishes” and the local “diocesan leadership.” 

The subpoena cover letter (full text) says in part:

The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) handling of domestic violent extremism investigations against Catholic Americans and its effect on protected First Amendment activity....

We have repeatedly sought information from the FBI relating to a January 23, 2023 document generated by the Richmond Field Office entitled “Interest of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology Almost Certainly Presents New Mitigation Opportunities”.... In this document, the FBI purported to categorize Catholic Americans based on theological distinctions and relied on the Southern Poverty Law Center to suggest that certain kinds of Catholic Americans may be domestic terrorists.

A report by Bloomberg on the subpoena adds:

There was no immediate response from Wray, but he told senators last month that the document “does not reflect FBI standards” and the bureau “took steps immediately to withdraw it and remove it from FBI systems.”

“We do not conduct investigations based on religious affiliation or practices, full stop,” Wray told the Senate Intelligence Committee.

7th Circuit: Accommodating Teacher's Religious Beliefs as To Transgender Students Imposed Undue Hardship

 In Kluge v. Brownsburg Community School Corp., (7th Cir., April 7, 2023), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision upheld a school's dismissal of a teacher who refused on religious grounds to comply with the school policy of calling transgender students by their names registered in the school's official database. In a 79-page majority opinion rejecting the teacher's Title VII claims, the court said in part:

After Brownsburg initially accommodated Kluge’s request to call all students by their last names only, the school withdrew the accommodation when it became apparent that the practice was harming students and negatively impacting the learning environment for transgender students, other students both in Kluge’s classes and in the school generally, as well as the faculty. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the school after concluding that the undisputed evidence showed that the school was unable to accommodate Kluge’s religious beliefs and practices without imposing an undue hardship on the school’s conduct of its business of educating all students that entered its doors. The district court also granted summary judgment in favor of Brownsburg on Kluge’s retaliation claim. We agree that the undisputed evidence demonstrates that Kluge’s accommodation harmed students and disrupted the learning environment. Because no reasonable jury could conclude that harm to students and disruption to the learning environment are de minimis harms to a school’s conduct of its business, we affirm.

Judge Brennan dissented as to the reasonable accommodation claim. In a 54-page dissent, he said in part:

Kluge’s religious accommodation claim comes down to a fact-intensive inquiry: Did the School District demonstrate that Kluge’s gender-neutral accommodation of calling all students by only their last names causes undue hardship—that is, more than a de minimis cost? The majority opinion says “yes,” but it sidesteps Kluge’s countervailing evidence, fails to construe the record in his favor, and overlooks credibility issues on both sides, which are reserved for resolution by the factfinder. 

... [W]ithout supporting authority, my colleagues hold that the undue hardship inquiry looks only to evidence within the employer’s knowledge at the time of the adverse employment decision.... Considering the entire record, there is a genuine issue of material fact on undue hardship, which we should remand for trial.

Reuters reports on the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Sanchaali Chakravorty, Can the Vatican Really Be Called a "State"?, (March 21, 2023).
• Mordechai (Mordy) Sahler, Is This a Real Problem? – HOA Rules that Interfere with the Practice of Religion, (CSLR Research Paper No. 1.2023-ESS (2023).
• Robert Kahn, The Hijab Row in Karnataka, Egalitarian Uniformity and the Right to Adorn One’s Face, (U of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 23-01 (2023).
• Suryapratim Roy & Rahul Sambaraju, Hindu Zion: The Politics of Constitutional Accommodation, (Mark Tushnet and Dimitry Kochenov (eds), Research Handbook on the Politics of Constitutional Law (Edward Elgar 2023)).
• Reva B. Siegel, How "History and Tradition" Perpetuates Inequality: Dobbs on Abortion's Nineteenth-Century Criminalization, (Houston Law Review, Vol. 60, 2023).

From SmartCILP:

• Javid Rehman, Revisiting the Jihad Ideology in Islamic International Law and Its Appropriation by Nonstate Actors [Abstract], 44 Human Rights Quarterly 417-440 (2022).
• Niaz A. Shah, The Application of Human Rights Treaties in Dualist Muslim States: The Practice of Pakistan, 44 Human Rights Quarterly 257-285 (2022).
•  Rabea, Benhalim, Oppression in American, Islamic, and Jewish Private Law. 94 University of Colorado Law Review 149-216 (2023).

Deed Restriction Does Not Violate Establishment Clause

In Hilo Bay Marina, LLC v. State of Hawaii, (HI Cir. Ct., March 21, 2023), a Hawaii trial court dismissed a suit seeking to void a deed restriction.  In 1922, the land at issue was conveyed by the Territory of Hawaii to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, with a deed restriction that the land could only be used for church purposes. Under the restriction, the land would revert to Hawaii if it was used for non-church purposes.  In 2000, the land was conveyed to the Hilo Bay Marina, presumably triggering the reversion. Fifteen years later it was conveyed by the Marina to Keaukaha Ministry.  Now the Marina and the Ministry sue to void the deed restriction, among other things contending that it violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. and the Hawaii Constitutions.  The court rejected the claim citing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton Schol District, and saying in part:

The Establishment Clause "must be interpreted 'by reference to historical practices and understandings.'"...

The practice of selling government lands with deed restrictions was an early form of use-zoning and is interpreted as a historical practice of zoning....

Even if Article I, §4 of the Hawai'i Constitution is not coextensive with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment..., the deed restriction passes constitutional muster under Lemon v. Kurtzman....

The deed restriction allows for any religious organization to benefit from the property, so it does not endorse or approve one religion over another....

The surveillance and monitoring required to enforce the deed restriction do not present excessive entanglement because they are no different than that of what is required to enforce any other zoning regulation.