Joe Biden shouldn't repeat FDR's big mistake.
Justice Clint Bolick dissents in Arizona v. Mixton.
The incoming president can bring some much-needed professional diversity to the federal bench.
Is the chief justice just a politician in robes?
Is this the Supreme Court’s next big gun rights case?
There's no precedent for a recusal, but there's also no precedent for the current situation.
Plus: $150,000+ in fines in NYC's first weekend of new shutdowns, California ballot-box confusion, and more...
What sort of judicial nominee can we expect from the Democratic candidate?
The episode reflects poorly on Biden.
The chief justice has managed to infuriate every major political faction.
"Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit."
Pundits often speak of the judiciary in terms of liberal or conservative judges issuing liberal or conservative opinions. The reality is far more complicated.
“Officers don’t have the time to pull out law books and analyze the fine points of judicial precedent.”
A flawed argument for judicial passivity in cases of government regulation.
The idea is not so far-fetched.
Following Georgia's ruling in favor of a lactation consultant, Pennsylvania’s high court reviews another “unreasonable” occupational licensing scheme.
"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.
Gorsuch Throws Shade at Trump Administration for Rewriting Federal Gun Laws Without Congressional Approval
“Why should courts, charged with the independent and neutral interpretation of the laws Congress has enacted, defer to such bureaucratic pirouetting?”
This New Deal Precedent May Decide the Fate of Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
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.
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.
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.”