U.S. Chamber Litigation Center

The U.S. Chamber Litigation Center fights for business at every level of the U.S. judicial system, on virtually every issue affecting business.

Founded in 1977, the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center is a separately incorporated affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  The Litigation Center fights for business at every level of the U.S. judicial system, on virtually every issue affecting business, including class actions and arbitration, labor and employment, energy and environment, securities and corporate governance, financial regulation, free speech, preemption, government contracts, and criminal law.

We represent the Chamber in lawsuits to challenge unlawful federal, state, and local regulatory actions.  We intervene to defend the government in cases brought by activists to challenge pro-business or deregulatory actions.  We file amicus curiae briefs representing the broad views of the business community in important litigation throughout the country, including in the Supreme Court of the United States.  We help advocates prepare for oral arguments in cases that present important business issues.  We work with the media to help the public understand key decisions and legal principles.

The Litigation Center is staffed by a team of experienced in-house litigators—five previously clerked for Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, and five have significant government experience at the White House and the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security.  All have significant private sector litigation experience. It retains the nation’s top lawyers, including former U.S. Solicitors General and other executive branch officers, veterans of the Supreme Court bar, and former state court judges and officials, to serve as outside counsel.

Recent Activity

Litigation UpdateJan 17, 2020 - 4:30pm

U.S. Chamber and other business groups move to intervene in support of the Trump administration’s 2019 amendments to the Risk Management Program Rule

The U.S. Chamber and other business groups moved to intervene in support of the Trump administration’s 2019 amendments to the Risk Management Program Rule governing the prevention and detection of, and response to, accidental releases of hazardous substances from certain covered facilities.

Litigation UpdateJan 14, 2020 - 4:30pm

Supreme Court issues favorable decision in ERISA stock-drop case

The Supreme Court issued a brief opinion in Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander, vacating the Second Circuit’s unfavorable decision against IBM and remanding the case for further proceedings.

Press ReleaseJan 09, 2020 - 10:00am

Donohue: 'Engaging with the world is our best strategy for strong national security and lasting prosperity'

Today U.S. Chamber CEO Thomas J. Donohue cautioned that the United States must continue to engage on the world stage or risk being left behind in his annual State of American Business Address.

Litigation UpdateDec 10, 2019 - 12:00pm

Supreme Court issues favorable 8-1 decision in debt collection case

The Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations for Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims begins to run on the date the alleged FDCPA violation occurs, not the date on which the violation is discovered.

Litigation UpdateDec 09, 2019 - 11:00am

U.S. Chamber files complaint and motion for preliminary injunction challenging California AB 51

The U.S. Chamber filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California challenging California AB 51.  California AB 51 purports to bar employers from requiring employees and applicants for employment from arbitrating disputes.

Litigation UpdateDec 03, 2019 - 9:00am

D.C. Circuit reverses district court and further clarifies what constitutes final agency action that’s reviewable in the courts

On appeal, the Chamber supported Ipsen’s arguments that an agency action is final where there is no avenue for further review and a company faces enforcement for not following the agency’s determination.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed.  It reversed and remanded the district court’s decision and clarified that a federal agency’s decision expressed in a letter can constitute reviewable final agency action where there is no further avenue for administrative review and the letter creates a “legal consequence,” which includes increased risk. 

Litigation UpdateNov 26, 2019 - 6:30am

‘The Conservative Case for Class Actions’ Doesn’t Pass the Smell Test

When a fellow former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia claims that our client, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, betrays conservative legal ideals through its unyielding opposition to abuse of class-action suits by the plaintiffs’ bar, we take it seriously. But the argument that Professor Brian Fitzpatrick raised in his November 13 National Review piece does not stand up to scrutiny. Professor Fitzpatrick, relying principally upon the U.S. Chamber’s brief in the landmark 2011 Supreme Court case AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, attempts to ascribe to the Chamber a position he invented: Opposed to class actions in all cases, and instead pining for more federal enforcement against business. No self-respecting legal conservative, he argues, would favor law enforcement by the executive branch in lieu of private-sector lawyers, motivated by profit in the form of contingency fees (lots and lots of contingency fees). Well, our former boss Justice Scalia did, for good conservative reasons: history, tradition, and political accountability. As Justice Scalia wrote in Wal-Mart Inc. v. Dukes, class actions are an exception to the long-standing rule, dating to English common law and the Founding era, that litigation is conducted on behalf of the individual named parties. Today’s class-action colossus is a creation largely of the mid-1960s — hardly the heyday of conservative legal reform.

Litigation UpdateAug 30, 2019 - 4:45pm

U.S. Chamber and New Jersey Civil Justice Institute file complaint in federal court challenging New Jersey’s A.B. 121, which effectively bans the use of bilateral arbitration in employment agreements for employers in New Jersey

The complaint alleges that New Jersey’s law, as applied to arbitration, is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against the Attorney General of New Jersey from enforcing the law against employers with arbitration agreements.

Litigation UpdateAug 23, 2019 - 4:30pm

D.C. Circuit issues mixed ruling in challenges to Obama Administration’s 2015 Ozone NAAQS

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit denied the petitions for review filed by the U.S. Chamber, other industry groups, and states against the EPA’s primary and secondary ozone standards. 

Litigation UpdateJun 26, 2019 - 12:00pm

Supreme Court significantly limits but declines to eliminate judicial deference to agency interpretation of its own regulations

Auer deference used to be a heavy thumb on the scale in favor of the government in litigation against a business over what an agency’s own regulation means.  If the decision in Kisor is followed in the lower courts, then this should mean less leeway in the courts for government regulators vis-à-vis business.  Although the Court did not go so far as we asked, the Kisor decision is an improvement in the law on deference.