"In both cases, the Solicitor General agreed with the petitioners ... that the legal questions are sufficiently important to warrant the Supreme Court's review. Further, the Solicitor General supported the plan sponsor and fiduciary defendants (and disagreed with the plaintiffs) on the merits of the legal questions being presented to the Supreme Court. This reflects a clear shift under the new Administration to interpret ERISA in reasonable and common-sense manner." 
[Johnson v. Parker-Hannifin Corp., No. 24-3014 (6th Cir. Nov. 20, 2024; cert. pet filed Mar. 26, 2025, No. 24-1030; DOL amicus brief filed Dec. 9, 2025); Pizarro v. Home Depot, No. 22-13643 (11th Cir. Aug. 2, 2024; cert. pet. filed Dec. 3, 2024; DOL amicus brief filed Dec. 9, 2025) ]   MORE >>