State Supreme Courts Stand Up for Economic Liberty While SCOTUS Falls Down on the Job
"We have long interpreted the Georgia Constitution as protecting a right to work in one's chosen profession free from unreasonable government interference."
"We have long interpreted the Georgia Constitution as protecting a right to work in one's chosen profession free from unreasonable government interference."
The federal courts start to grapple with COVID-19 shutdown orders.
“The federal government forgot the Tenth Amendment and the structure of the Constitution itself.”
Kansas “will not wholly exonerate a defendant on the ground that his illness prevented him from recognizing his criminal act as morally wrong.”
The coronavirus upends business as usual at SCOTUS.
Fatal police shootings and the Fourth Amendment
The Supreme Court weighs abortion regulation in June Medical Services v. Russo.
“Why should courts, charged with the independent and neutral interpretation of the laws Congress has enacted, defer to such bureaucratic pirouetting?”
What’s at stake in Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
What’s at stake in Michigan v. Wood
A new abortion case raises an old question.
It's crucial to get the constitutional text and history straight.
The justices will hear oral arguments today in a major Second Amendment case.
Assessment of motives is often an essential tool for protecting our constitutional rights.
An important development in the legal wrangling over the separation of powers.
Progressive purity tests and Supreme Court wish lists
Who will rein in the ever-expanding administrative state?
Understanding what’s at stake in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
“Modern immunity practice—essentially 'heads government wins, tails plaintiffs lose'—leaves many victims violated but not vindicated."
It’s time for SCOTUS to revisit the "border search exception" to the Fourth Amendment.
What’s next for the Second Amendment at SCOTUS?
The liberal jurist puts judicial integrity before partisan politics.
“It should have been easy for the Court to say goodbye to Auer.”
The retired Supreme Court justice has died at 99.
The conservative justice would have permitted a nakedly anti-competitive regulation.
Another day, another conflict between the Supreme Court’s Republican appointees in a criminal justice case.
“The Court usually reads statutes with a presumption of rationality and a presumption of constitutionality.”
“Our role is to enforce the Takings Clause as written.”
The conservative justice comes out swinging on behalf of the non-delegation doctrine.
Understanding today’s Supreme Court decision in Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
Understanding what's at stake in the important case of Kisor v. Wilkie.
SCOTUS sidesteps the hard questions in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky.
The Utah Supreme Court upheld a six-month suspension without pay, based in part (though not entirely) on these remarks; the judge has a history of past discipline on other grounds as well.
In his new memoir, the retired justice seeks to justify his awful eminent domain ruling.
Ilya Somin of "The Volokh Conspiracy" discusses the dangers of liberal proposals to pack the Supreme Court.
What’s worse for the left, a conservative originalist or a conservative living constitutionalist?
Unlike Thomas and Gorsuch, Kavanaugh stayed mum on originalism in a major constitutional case.
Clint Bolick, a co-founder of the Institute for Justice, was for years one of the libertarian movement's most successful trial lawyers.
Lawsuits playing out for three years spotlight how poor people end up trapped in jail even before being convicted.
Don Willett has championed economic freedom and accountability for cops.
We really should, as Chief Justice Roberts suggests, be thankful for the "independent judiciary" on this Thanksgiving Day.
The justice prevailed by a lopsided margin of 71 percent to 29 percent.
Clint Bolick faces a judicial retention fight.
The 5th Circuit judge weighs in on qualified immunity, criminal sentencing, and false imprisonment.
A libertarian-leaning federal judge and a liberal Supreme Court justice both make the case against qualified immunity.
The Supreme Court nominee recites precedent instead of explaining his views.
What the Senate Judiciary Committee should ask the Supreme Court nominee.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10