Court Kills California's One-Gun-a-Month Law
There’s no historical precedent for trying to ration constitutionally protected rights.
There’s no historical precedent for trying to ration constitutionally protected rights.
A video by the White House corroborates that account, calling into question just how serious the president is about actually addressing crime.
The federal government has embraced unconstitutional tactics and now wants SCOTUS to do the same.
A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against any additional construction at the immigration detention center amid plans to increase the facility’s capacity to 4,000 detainees.
A federal court says U.S. citizens “are likely to succeed in showing” that immigration agents violated their rights.
President Trump’s invocation of emergency powers to impose tariffs faces skeptical judges.
The case is a baffling reminder that the more power a government official has, the harder it is for a victim to get a shot at justice.
If so, then why postpone any enforcement until October?
To win in court, the Trump administration will have to argue against a pair of legal theories that conservatives have spent years developing as a way to check executive power.
Golden State ammunition restrictions have been voided for violating the Second Amendment.
A federal judge ruled that Peninsula Township’s former restrictions on music, events, and grape sourcing violated the rights of local wineries.
After a pay dispute led to a work stoppage in late May, courts in Suffolk County, Massachusetts, dismissed cases of indigent defendants who had no legal representation for 45 days.
The New York Civil Liberties Union and the New York State Police have been fighting for years over misconduct records that the state legislature made public in 2020.
Plus: Did Mario Vargas Llosa write the world’s greatest political novel?
Norma Nazario blames her son's death on social media algorithms.
Plus: City-run grocery stores, Peronists for prison, California can't figure out how minimum wage hikes work, and more...
The ruling upholds protections afforded to officers of the "quasi legislative or quasi judicial agencies" created by Congress.
Plus: A fond farewell to Black Sabbath.
Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s six-year prison sentence and lifetime political ban mark a historic victory for accountability—and a public eager to believe that no one is above the law.
Despite the setback, Middletown Township is taking the case to the state supreme court.
When Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick is worried about our constitutional order, we should all pay heed.
Marcy Rheintgen was the first person to be arrested for trying to challenge Florida's bathroom bill. The case against her has been tossed out.
The lawsuit is a win not just for Anthropic, but for all users of large language models.
“Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,” declared Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
The liberal justice faults the majority for leaving deportees to “suffer violence in far-flung locales.”
No matter how John O'Keefe died, the government failed here on multiple levels.
Although the appeals court said the president probably complied with the law he invoked to justify his California deployment, it emphasized that such decisions are subject to judicial review.
Plus: The Supreme Court upholds a state ban on transgender care for minors.
A religious group using psilocybin mushrooms in ceremonies "put the State of Utah's commitment to religious freedom to the test," a federal judge wrote.
Plus: When Stalin Meets Star Wars.
Law enforcement seized Robert Reeves' Chevrolet Camaro without charging him with a crime. After he filed a class-action lawsuit, that changed.
The case against Michelino Sunseri exemplifies the injustice caused by the proliferation of regulatory crimes—the target of a recent presidential order.
The court ruled on Thursday that a heterosexual woman shouldn't have to clear a higher bar than a gay colleague to sue for discrimination.
Plus: A love letter to the heavy metal band Slayer.
The MAGA loyalty that Trump demands is anathema to everything that originalism is supposed to be about.
Both are wins for free trade, but only one vindicates the separation of powers.
For both practical and constitutional reasons, this is the obvious way out of the chaos Trump's tariffs have created.
The federal courts are supposed to be a bulwark against presidential overreach, not a rubber stamp.
Plus: Javier Milei puts state-run TV to good use, Texas' THC antagonism, rent control lunacy, and more...
No. One of the judges in Wednesday's unanimous ruling was a Trump appointee, and the ruling rested on important legal and constitutional principles.
The Court of International Trade ruled that Trump's emergency economic powers do not include the authority to impose tariffs on nearly all imports.
The next generation of online platforms is being shaped less by engineers and entrepreneurs and more by regulators and courts—and they’re very bad at it.
Two decades after Granholm v. Heald was supposed to end protectionist shipping laws, states and lower courts continue to undermine the decision.
Are human courts the best venue to protect wild animals?
The legal principle safeguards civil liberties, protecting even unpopular people from the government.
For nearly three years, Daniel Horwitz faced contempt of court for talking about a private prison that was one of his most frequent courtroom opponents.
But the ruling suggests prostitution clients could be convicted of sex trafficking in other circumstances.
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