By targeting "persons undermining peace, security, and stability," the plaintiffs argue, the president is threatening to punish people for opposing a two-state solution.
A federal judge rejected the government’s excuses for banning home production of liquor.
The majority and the dissenters agree that the drug was "central" to "the opioid crisis," even though there is little evidence to support that thesis.
Facing an opponent who has been credibly described as a sexual predator, Biden instead emphasizes Trump's cover-up of a consensual encounter.
An ideologically diverse mix of individuals and organizations supports a Texas journalist who was arrested for asking questions.
The Institute for Justice has launched a project to reform land use regulation.
School officials falsely accused the boys of posing for a photo in blackface.
Columbia law professor David Pozen recalls the controversy provoked by early anti-drug laws and the hope inspired by subsequent legal assaults on prohibition.
Under a legal theory endorsed by the 5th Circuit, Martin Luther King Jr. could have been liable for other people’s violence.
The justices established guidelines for determining whether that is true in any particular case.
Neither Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg nor New York Attorney General Letitia James can explain exactly who was victimized by the dishonesty they cite.
Plus: A listener asks if the editors have criteria for what constitutes a good law.
The law that Attorney General Letitia James used to sue the former president does not require proof that anyone was injured by his financial dishonesty.
An analysis of appeals involving the doctrine finds that less than a quarter "fit the popular conception of police accused of excessive force."
A federal judge allowed a lawsuit against the officers to proceed, finding evidence of several constitutional violations.
The verdict vindicates the constitutional rights that Louisiana sheriff's deputies flagrantly violated when they hauled Waylon Bailey off to jail.
The appeals court dismissed a civil rights lawsuit by a Laredo gadfly who was arrested for asking questions.
The state's law, which a federal judge enjoined last month, prohibits firearms in most public places.
His Supreme Court petition raises serious questions about how to interpret and apply Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
After a federal judge deemed the state's location-specific gun bans unconstitutional, the 9th Circuit stayed his injunction.
Letting state officials determine whether a candidate has "engaged in insurrection" opens a huge can of worms.
The year's highlights in blame shifting.
Police officers already are routinely indemnified, and suing them for abuse is much harder than Trump claims.
The former Trump lawyer could have avoided a massive defamation verdict by presenting his "definitively clear" evidence of election fraud.
Ralph Petty's "conflicted dual-hat arrangement" as an advocate and an adjudicator was "utterly bonkers," Judge Don Willett notes.
The former Trump campaign lawyer re-upped his false claims about two Georgia election workers in the middle of a trial aimed at determining the damages he owes them.
A federal lawsuit argues that it is time to reassess the Commerce Clause rationale for banning intrastate marijuana production and distribution.
Democrats and Republicans are united in thinking their political agendas trump the First Amendment.
The justices agreed to consider whether the Biden administration's efforts to suppress online "misinformation" were unconstitutional.
Several federal judges had expressed skepticism about the constitutionality of penalizing physicians for departing from a government-defined "consensus."
A lawsuit against a Black Lives Matter activist could have a chilling impact on constitutionally protected activity.
The decision is another rebuke to states that have imposed broad, location-specific limits on the right to bear arms.
The former president's lawyers argued that even the square footage of his apartment was a "subjective" judgment for which he cannot be held accountable.
Before correcting the record, the former president's spokesman inadvertently implicated him in a federal crime.
The governor's attempt to rule by decree provoked widespread condemnation instead of the applause she was expecting.
Tony Timpa's story shows how far the government goes to prevent victims of abuse from seeking recourse.
The appeals court narrowed a preliminary injunction against such meddling but confirmed the threat that it poses to freedom of speech.
The case is just one example of miscalculations that routinely keep Louisiana prisoners behind bars after they complete their sentences.
A federal judge compared Waylon Bailey’s Facebook jest to "falsely shouting fire in a theatre."
X-Dumpsters owner Steven Hedrick rents roll-away dumpsters to people, but now his city forces residents to contract with the county.
The appeals court ruled that a Facebook post alluding to World War Z was clearly protected by the First Amendment.
Violators are rarely caught, while the unlucky few who face prosecution can go to prison for years.
The decision casts further doubt on the constitutionality of a federal law that makes it a felony for illegal drug users to own firearms.
Unlike calling Trump's stolen-election fantasy "the Big Lie," his lawyer's statements were demonstrably false assertions of fact.
Plus: A listener question concerning drug decriminalization and social well-being
The ruling draws back the veil on routine police practices that victimize innocent drivers.
Republicans who participated in the scheme say they relied on legal advice grounded in historical precedent.
The response to the decision illustrates the alarming erosion of bipartisan support for the First Amendment.
