Supreme Court Declines To Address Section 230 in Two Cases for This Term
Weakening or removing Section 230 would not fix the problems of social media, and in fact it could make things worse.
Weakening or removing Section 230 would not fix the problems of social media, and in fact it could make things worse.
Plus: Air traffic controllers get mysteriously sick, California gubernatorial contenders can't answer basic questions, and more...
Industry insiders dominate the boards that control who can work, using government power to shut out competitors, protect profits, and block reform.
In a new Supreme Court term packed with big cases, these disputes stand out.
A revealing interview with the Supreme Court's "Steel Magnolia."
This one addresses the issue of whether the owner of a home foreclosed for nonpayment of debt is entitled to "fair market value" compensation, or only whatever the government gets from auctioning off the property, minus the debt owed.
The law is one of several attempts to override the right to bear arms by making it impractical to exercise.
The president thinks he can transform murder into self-defense by executive fiat.
The Justice discusses originalism, common good constitutionalism, and King v. Burwell in a recent interview.
A recent panel discussion on the current Supreme Court.
Which version of the chief justice will emerge in the Supreme Court’s newest term?
Civil liberties attorney Jenin Younes recounts her role in Murthy v. Missouri, her opposition to pandemic mandates, and why she believes Trump poses an even greater threat to free speech than Biden.
Plus: Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a book.
The decision, which hinges on an exception to the Gun-Free School Zones Act, does not say whether that law is consistent with the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court will soon review the president’s authority to fire “independent” agency heads.
The president’s attempt to evade the major questions doctrine deserves to be rejected.
Legal scholar Steve Vladeck explains how and why.
"We can do this the easy way or the hard way," the FCC chairman said, threatening to punish broadcasters for airing the comedian's show.
Plus: Pam Bondi flunks free speech 101.
The Supreme Court justice’s new book fails to practice the historical fidelity it preaches.
Should it be the interim docket? The emergency docket? The emergency orders docket? The short order docket? Something else?
The New York Times examines the "sharp partisan divides" on the Supreme Court's interim docket.
Freedom of speech cannot reliably protect conservatives unless it also protects people they despise.
A unanimous three-judge panel concluded that "no historical tradition supports" the 1987 law.
The justice’s stance on immigration enforcement is undermined by the facts of the case before him.
Such a gun ban is not authorized by statute or allowed by the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court will hear Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety this fall.
There is no majority opinion, so the reasoning is unclear. But Justice Kavanaugh's concurring opinion undercuts principle that government must abjure racial discrimination.
The same legal theory that tripped up Joe Biden's student loan scheme could also sink Donald Trump's tariffs.
We agree the Court should take the case and resolve it as quickly as possible, to minimize the harm caused by the illegal tariffs.
Minnesota's proposed firearm restrictions raise serious constitutional questions—and offer little in return.
Justice Kavanaugh on what to call the "shadow docket" now that it is no longer in the shadows.
The Justice Department reportedly is considering a regulation aimed at disarming "mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria."
Plus: A momentous date in the life of Frederick Douglass
The Justice Department has proposed a pathway to restore gun rights for millions of Americans.
The appeals court blocked the removal of alleged Venezuelan gang members under that law "because we find no invasion or predatory incursion."
The federal law relies on a risible reading of the Commerce Clause to restrict a constitutional right.
Donald Trump's claim that the appeals court ruled against him for partisan or ideological reasons is hard to take seriously.
The Administration's arguments have more doctrinal support than some might think
"The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity," the Supreme Court wrote in a ruling this year.
Seven judges agreed that the president's assertion of unlimited authority to tax imports is illegal and unconstitutional.
The appeals court rejected most of the arguments in favor of that policy, saying "the government must show non-intoxicated marijuana users pose a risk of future danger."
Or will the justices say that Trump fired her for illegal reasons?
Plus: An impressive book by a Supreme Court justice.
The appeals court concluded that the government had failed to show that policy is consistent with "this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
Asking SCOTUS to hear a case is not the same thing as convincing SCOTUS to hear a case.
The 2016 brief defended the understanding of the 14th Amendment that the president wants to overturn.