The Supreme Court's ruling striking down laws banning same-sex marriage was a great victory for liberty and equality. But it should have been based on better legal reasoning.
The Court's majority avoids the larger question of whether laws targeting transgender individuals should be subject to heightened scrutiny, but Justice Barrett did not.
The Supreme Court's refusal to hear Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence v. The School Committee for the City of Boston is bad news for equality under the law.
Washington's Covenant Homeownership Program excludes certain applicants on the basis of race.
An interesting question divides a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
By targeting "persons undermining peace, security, and stability," the plaintiffs argue, the president is threatening to punish people for opposing a two-state solution.
Although the FBI never produced evidence that Ali Hemani was a threat to national security, it seems determined to imprison him by any means necessary.
The Court's grant of certiorari is limited to only one of the issues in this litigation.
Congress is "silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate," the company argues.
Columbia law professor David Pozen recalls the controversy provoked by early anti-drug laws and the hope inspired by subsequent legal assaults on prohibition.
It's a good thing opponents of the move can appeal to the liberal values of free speech, free association, and equal treatment under law.
The court reverses a contrary trial court decision.
So an Eleventh Circuit panel tentatively concludes, preliminarily enjoining the statute; one judge would hold that the limits violate the Equal Protection Clause.
"The sole basis for targeting Joe was the race/ethnicity of his wife and her occupation" at an Asian massage parlor, the lawsuit claims.
No, you can't do that.
Federal courts continue to be split on this question.
Plus: More local "missing middle" reforms pass in Maine and Virginia, Colorado court blesses crackdown on student housing, and Florida tries to escape its slow growth past.
Another climate change lawsuit filed on behalf of children, this time against the Environmental Protection Agency.
The court had earlier issued a temporary restraining order against the law, to maintain the status quo; but now that it has gotten more full briefing, it declined to block the law (but also declined to dismiss the challenge to the law).
After a divided ruling, laws limiting such treatments in Tennessee and Kentucky will go into force.
can go forward, says a federal court.
The opinion was decided July 21, but was originally issued sealed; it was just unsealed today, in response to my motion to unseal.
A critical column by Jamelle Bouie prompts an extensive reply from Peter Canellos.
a Sixth Circuit panel concludes (by a 2-1 vote) in staying an injunction against the law pending appeal.
A divided panel concludes the plaintiffs are unlikely to prevail on the merits and pledges to expedite the appeal.
"there would be a very strong case for prompt review by this Court."
Whether the putative target is the "biomedical security state," wokeness, "Big Tech censors," or Chinese Communists, the presidential candidate’s grandstanding poses a clear threat to individual rights.
In a federal lawsuit on behalf of legal U.S. residents from China, the ACLU argues that "Florida's New Alien Land Law" is unconstitutional.
The Appeals Panel Rejects a Trangender Student's Bid to Use Bathroom Corresponding to the Student's Gender Identity Instead of Biological Sex.
Plus: Elon Musk bans Twitter account that tracks his private jet, Iong permit waits to build new apartment buildings in San Francisco, and more...
Plus: ACLU in court over law criminalizing school behavior, Twitter losing heavy users, and more...
Plus: Fiona Apple fights for court transparency, ACLU asks SCOTUS to consider boycott ban, and more...
If the Supreme Court was correct in Dobbs, was it wrong in Bolling?
Perhaps the real question is whether such a school is a state actor for purposes of Section 1983. The en banc Fourth Circuit says it is, so that a skirt requirement for girls is unlawful.
Questions about the scope of federal power will remain.
A bill touted as banning "critical race theory" in schools would actually ban a huge array of speech around culture, race, and sex, its sponsor says.
A divided panel grants a preliminary injunction against privileging relief applications based on the race or sex of the applicant.
According to the ruling, the former Trump attorney also filed the wrong claims in the wrong court at the wrong time on behalf of the wrong plaintiffs.
"The Campaign cannot win this lawsuit," the 3rd Circuit says. "The Campaign's claims have no merit."
U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann rejected an attempt to block certification of Pennsylvania's election results.
Two courts say COVID-19 lockdowns in Michigan and Pennsylvania were unconstitutional.
Only black and Pacific Islander women are eligible -- almost certainly a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
A week after being sued over his arbitrary COVID-19 policy, Gov. Charlie Baker says he will allow arcades to reopen.
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
