Even If Trump's Ballroom Project Is Illegal, a DOJ Lawyer Says, the Courts Cannot Stop It
The D.C. Circuit is reviewing an injunction issued by a judge who said "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."
The D.C. Circuit is reviewing an injunction issued by a judge who said "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."
Blanche is happy to pervert justice in service of the president's personal agenda. No wonder Trump wants to keep him as attorney general.
An addendum to the president's "settlement" of his lawsuit against the IRS shields him and his family from liability for any federal offenses they committed prior to May 19.
The Justice Department signals a retreat from defending the blatantly corrupt scheme, which provoked vigorous objections from Republican lawmakers.
One order temporarily blocks money for the president's "Anti-Weaponization Fund." The other asks whether the agreement is a fraudulent "product of collusion."
Using taxpayer money to reward the president’s allies has nothing to do with the president's claims against the IRS.
In one lawsuit after another, the president has claimed damages in amounts completely disconnected from reality.
Most federal appeals courts have recognized the right to record police. DHS employees nevertheless seem to view it as a crime.
Three Second Amendment groups say the law violates the right to own arms in common use for self-defense and other lawful purposes.
The 6th Circuit upheld that 158-year-old law, while the 5th Circuit concluded it could not be justified as a revenue measure.
Even as the Justice Department files lawsuits aimed at vindicating gun rights, it undermines them in other cases.
The civil liberties group, which long maintained that there is no constitutional right to arms, is singing a different tune at the Supreme Court.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon argues that both laws violate the Second Amendment by banning arms in common use for lawful purposes.
The brief, which asks a federal judge to reconsider an injunction blocking the project, reads like it was transcribed from the president's Truth Social account.
The defense secretary's asserted authority to control the speech of retired military officers "would chill public participation by veterans," a brief supporting Mark Kelly warns.
The city has created a network of nearly 500 cameras that routinely monitor innocent people as they go about their daily lives.
The Justice Department is permanently blocked from prosecuting Californians who fail to register when the state no longer requires it.
After withdrawing a summons in the face of a legal challenge, the government is seeking a grand jury subpoena.
In the guise of investigating "potentially unlawful advertiser boycotts," the commission is punishing the organization for its views.
Trump's failure to properly allege "actual malice" is consistent with his long history of filing shaky legal claims against people who say things he does not like.
The Court of International Trade is weighing the legality of the import taxes that the president wants to impose under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Two petitions ask the Supreme Court to uphold the remedy required by the Fifth Amendment.
"No statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have," U.S. District Judge Richard Leon concluded when he enjoined the project.
The jurors concluded that the officers violated the Fourth and 14th amendments when they seized a 14-year-old without evidence that she was in danger.
Despite its rejection of the Biden administration's interference, the Trump administration is still asserting authority over online speech.
The president’s invocation of Section 122 conflates a trade deficit with a balance-of-payments deficit.
A mayor and a police chief "mistook their authority to maintain order for a license to suppress criticism," says U.S. District Judge Stephanie Rose.
The president is relying on a provision that the government's lawyers said had no "obvious application" to his goal of reducing the trade deficit.
There are many laws that explicitly authorize the president to impose taxes on imports, but they include limits that Trump was keen to avoid.
Aimen Halim sued Buffalo Wild Wings, saying he was tricked into buying chicken breast nuggets when he thought he was getting deboned wings.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon notes that Sen. Mark Kelly's comments about unlawful military orders were "unquestionably protected" by the First Amendment.
The commission has targeted the news rating company with onerous record demands and a merger condition aimed at cutting off its revenue.
Adrian Gonzales is on trial for acts of "omission" that prosecutors say amounted to 29 felony counts of child endangerment.
Presidents, legislators, and police officers were desperate to blame anyone but themselves.
The department's lawsuit notes that the prohibited firearms are "in common use" for "lawful purposes," meaning they are covered by the Second Amendment.
In addition to its symbolic significance, rescheduling the drug will facilitate research and provide tax relief to state-licensed cannabis suppliers.
The appeals court ruled that administrators violated Stuart Reges' First Amendment rights when they investigated and threatened to punish him for constitutionally protected speech.
This is Priscilla Villarreal’s second trip to the Supreme Court, which last year revived her First Amendment lawsuit.
The Justice Department's litigation positions are at odds with its avowed intent to protect Second Amendment rights.
Whatever the merits of climate tort suits (or lack thereof), the argument they are preempted does not hold up.
Congress justified that National Firearms Act of 1934 as a revenue measure—a rationale undermined by the repeal of taxes on suppressors and short-barreled rifles.
Steven Duarte is one of several petitioners who are asking the justices to address the constitutionality of that absurdly broad gun ban.
On Thursday, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that echoed Donald Trump's claims against the Des Moines Register and pollster Ann Selzer.
Elsid Aliaj says the seizure violated state law and the Second Amendment.
Another reply to the former attorney general on climate litigation that may end up in the Supreme Court.
That understanding of a familiar anti-Biden slogan hinges on the political message it communicates.
The settlement, which followed Sylvia Gonzalez's victory at the Supreme Court, also includes remedial First Amendment training for city officials.
The cases give the justices a chance to address a constitutionally dubious policy that disarms peaceful Americans.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! 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 thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks