No, SCOTUS Did Not 'Invent' Judicial Review in Marbury v. Madison
The Supreme Court’s power to nullify legislative and executive acts is inherent in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court’s power to nullify legislative and executive acts is inherent in the Constitution.
Most countries emerged from a shared language, lineage, or ancient heritage. The United States built a state first and then had to discover what it meant to be a nation.
Much of what the federal government does on a daily basis flouts constitutional protections and offends human decency.
Remembering the legacy of a principled legal activist.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund says it's one of the largest settlements for the police killing of a dog.
A lawsuit challenging extreme heat in a Florida prison collected temperature readings during the summer. It found brutal heat persisted day and night.
Landlords argue that rent caps on vacant units prevent them from financing the costs of legally mandated renovations.
The right to keep and bear arms occupies a curious place in American legal history.
Brandenburg v. Ohio established the "imminent lawless action" standard. More than 50 years later, partisans keep trying to apply it selectively.
The legal challengers to Trump's tariffs had a good day in court.
"The Trump Administration's Department of War gave me an ultimatum: call up your troops, or we will," Gov. J.B. Pritzker said.
For the past two weeks, Juan Barbosa Gomez has been in federal immigration detention, but he doesn't show up on ICE's online detainee locator. His family says he has valid work permit and no criminal record.
Remembering a monstrous era of American history
The DOJ tried to claim jurisdiction because he drove on a road.
Sam O'Hara went viral for playing "The Imperial March" behind groups of National Guard soldiers in D.C. He also says it led to him being illegally detained.
Long-ago debates about executive authority are not as distant as they might initially seem.
Politicians across the aisle love free speech—until they're in power.
Will the Supreme Court grant Trump the overwhelming judicial deference he demands?
The correct answer is: Yes, even when they are also regulations. Whether the Court agrees could determine the future of presidential power.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week about the "emergency aid exception" to the Fourth Amendment.
Multiple judges say SCOTUS is going out of its way to grant emergency relief to the president without even bothering to explain why.
Federal troops are also ill-suited to handle local policing issues.
Limits on government power are a venerable and beneficial feature of our system.
If the Trump administration wants to use military power, it should seek authorization from Congress, says Sen. Rand Paul.
In a new Supreme Court term packed with big cases, these disputes stand out.
The law is one of several attempts to override the right to bear arms by making it impractical to exercise.
Plus: Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a book.
The Hendry County Sheriff accused Captains for Clean Water of "fuel[ing] hostility and provok[ng] violent rhetoric," but a free speech advocacy group says they were well within the First Amendment.
The president’s attempt to evade the major questions doctrine deserves to be rejected.
Plus: Pam Bondi flunks free speech 101.
House Republicans passed a resolution that prevents Congress from ending the national emergency Trump is using to impose tariffs until March 31.
The Supreme Court justice’s new book fails to practice the historical fidelity it preaches.
The justice’s stance on immigration enforcement is undermined by the facts of the case before him.
The Supreme Court will hear Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety this fall.
Minnesota's proposed firearm restrictions raise serious constitutional questions—and offer little in return.
Plus: The National Guard standoff in Chicago, navigating debates when you’re outnumbered, and a court ruling that could upend Trump’s tariff agenda.
The president's plan to promote public safety by deploying troops in cities across the country is hard to reconcile with constitutional constraints on federal authority.
Plus: An impressive book by a Supreme Court justice.
Asking SCOTUS to hear a case is not the same thing as convincing SCOTUS to hear a case.
The president ordering federal agents onto the street is not how routine policing should work, even in the nation's capital.
SCOTUS will soon decide.
Did they have a point?
Glenn Greenwald debates Anna Gorisch on Trump's deportation policies.
The federal government has embraced unconstitutional tactics and now wants SCOTUS to do the same.
For years, the president has rightly railed against those oppressive regimes. So why is his administration targeting their victims?
The Commerce Clause protects free trade between the states.
A federal court says U.S. citizens “are likely to succeed in showing” that immigration agents violated their rights.
The anticommandeering doctrine stands in the way of Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks