Circuit Split Alerter

Whether the National Labor Relations Board has statutory authority under 29 U.S.C. § 160(c) to award "direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms" (the Thryv make-whole remedy) that may exceed interim earnings.

Whether requiring all spectators to watch a criminal trial exclusively via an audiovisual overflow room constitutes a 'total closure' (triggering the Waller overriding-interest test) or only a 'partial closure' (triggering a lesser, substantial-reason test) under the Sixth Amendment public-trial right.

Whether interpretation/applicability of a forum-selection clause (e.g., which parties and claims the clause covers) is governed by federal common law or by the substantive state/foreign law that governs the contract, while enforceability remains governed by federal law.

Whether a conviction under Virginia Code § 18.2-53.1 (use or display of a firearm during the commission of robbery) categorically qualifies as a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a), either through the elements clause or the enumerated-offense clause.

Whether, in Federal Tort Claims Act cases, the claim-preclusive effect of a prior federal judgment is governed by the forum State’s law where the act or omission occurred or by federal common-law res judicata principles.

Whether 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)'s "effective-prohibition" clause applies to the denial of a single wireless-tower permit (significant-gap test) or only to broader state or local rules regulating tower siting.

Whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1 requires the government to give a defendant specific written notice of the particular supervised-release condition (or statutory crime) alleged to have been violated, or whether notice of the underlying conduct alone suffices.

Whether, in an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), a court is limited to examining the nature of the predicate felony conviction or may consider the defendant’s broader criminal history and characteristics to assess dangerousness.

Whether, at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage, a district court may (or must) consider objective video evidence of an incident when deciding a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity.

Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) supplies appellate jurisdiction to review pre-conviction restraining or preservation orders over assets subject to criminal forfeiture.

Whether attempted bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) necessarily involves the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force so that it is categorically a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A).

Whether federal courts may invoke equitable/common-law defenses not enumerated in the Hague Convention (e.g., unclean-hands or judicial-estoppel) to deny the Convention’s mandatory return remedy.

Whether police officers have an independent, clearly-established duty under Brady v. Maryland to disclose exculpatory or impeachment evidence to prosecutors (and thus may be sued under §1983 for withholding it).

Whether a transferee of assets under 26 U.S.C. § 6901 may be held liable for the transferor’s federal tax penalties and pre-notice interest when the value of the transferred assets exceeds the underlying tax liability.

Whether a 'systemic violations' exception allows parents to bypass the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s administrative-exhaustion requirement when alleging district-wide staffing or funding failures.