Photo of Daniel W. Wolff

Daniel W. Wolff

Subscribe to Daniel W. Wolff's Posts

Dan Wolff is a litigator and regulatory problem solver. He is a partner in Crowell & Moring's Washington, D.C. office and chairs the firm's Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice. Dan works with clients across a wide spectrum of regulated industries, counseling them on their rights and obligations under a number of federal regulatory programs and in responding to government enforcement actions. Dan appears regularly in federal district and appellate courts, frequently in matters arising under the Administrative Procedure Act and other federal statutes, or which pose constitutional questions. He also litigates commercial and products liability cases in both federal and state venues.

Contact:Read more about Daniel W. Wolff

On November 4, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) released its much-anticipated COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”) requiring employers with 100 or more employees to ensure that their employees are either vaccinated by January 4, 2022, or submit to weekly testing.  According to OSHA, employees who are unvaccinated face a “grave danger” from COVID-19, including the more contagious Delta variant.  The ETS notes that COVID-19 is highly transmissible—particularly in workplaces where multiple people interact throughout the day often for extended periods of time—and exposure to COVID-19 can result in death or illness, with some individuals experiencing long-term health complications.  OSHA has determined that vaccination is the most effective way to protect these employees.
Continue Reading OSHA Publishes Vaccine Requirements for Employers with 100 or More Employees

On March 10, 2020, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued Guidance for employers to prevent occupational exposures to the coronavirus. In doing so, OSHA reminds employers that while no specific standard governs occupational exposure to the coronavirus, the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s General Duty Clause, 29 U.S.C. § 654 (a)(1), requires employers…

In a memo dated July 22, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced that it was revising its interpretation of the “retail facilities” exemption from its Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, as codified at 29 C.F.R. § 1910.119(a)(2)(1). The PSM standard requires employers to manage hazards associated with processes involving highly hazardous chemicals.…

Most everyone knows that the First Amendment restricts the government’s ability to limit commercial speech. Similarly, most everyone would probably think the First Amendment also restricts the government’s ability to compel commercial speech. But are there times when the government may compel commercial speech? Indeed it can in some circumstances, and the D.C. Circuit recently expanded those circumstances in American Meat Institute v. U.S. Department of Agriculture (AMI). AMI involved a trade association’s challenge to regulations requiring meat producers to include country-of-origin labels on their products. This decision is important to almost any company that is, or could be, subject to a regulatory mandate to disclose what the court calls “purely factual and uncontroversial information.”

Rehearing en banc a case decided in the government’s favor by a three-judge panel, the D.C. Circuit in AMI upheld the regulations, applying the test from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Zauderer upheld, against a First Amendment challenge, a state’s disciplinary action against an attorney whose advertisements had the potential to deceive consumers by failing to comply with state regulations mandating certain cost disclosures to prospective clients. Although the regulations concerning meat origins in AMI had nothing to do with countering consumer deception, the D.C. Circuit nonetheless applied Zauderer and thus extended its application beyond protection against consumer deception to the advancement of consumer edification.…

Continue Reading To Label Or Not To Label? Companies May Have No Choice