Supreme Court Turns Down Opportunity to Reconsider Three More Precedents
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch have a much greater appetite for reconsidering prior precedent than the other justices do.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch have a much greater appetite for reconsidering prior precedent than the other justices do.
In her short, yet searing dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argues that the court should have granted the petition of an Ohio man sentenced to death after prosecutors hid a key witness' severe intellectual disability from jurors.
Unfortunately, in five separate cases today, they're outnumbered.
The Supreme Court's 2018 ruling in Timbs v. Indiana revived the Excessive Fines Clause. Now state courts have to come up with tests to determine what's excessive.
The proposed constitutional amendment would shift the state's balance of political power.
The crucial protector of internet speech might have some cracks in its armor.
Supreme Court protesters may get their moment of fame, but they may make it less likely the justices will allow live video broadcast of oral arguments.
Out-of-state and self-managed abortions pose daunting challenges for pro-life legislators.
The two fake news organizations want the Supreme Court to review the case of a man who was arrested for making fun of the police.
In the two cases, brought against Harvard and the University of North Carolina, anti-affirmative action group Students for Fair Admissions argues that race-conscious admissions violate the Civil Rights Act
The report highlights the power and limits of state bans as well as the difficulty of measuring their impact.
On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito repeated the common myth that "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" is unprotected speech.
An amicus brief by Professor Derek Muller suggests the justices need not confront the "Independent State Legislature" doctrine head on.
Pro-tip: If you are sued, and you expect your insurer to pick up the bill, it is a good idea to give them timely notice.
The state made it a felony to carry handguns for self-defense in "any place of worship or religious observation."
Carry permit applicants would have to prove they are not dangerous, and guns would be banned from myriad locations.
Legislators in both states favor subjective standards and sweeping restrictions for carry permits.
Bloomberg's "The Trace" fabricates a conspiracy about amicus brief writers who adhere to Supreme Court Rules
The Court's newest justice was an extremely active questioner during the Supreme Court's October arguments.
An unsurprising development in the former President's latest legal doings.
The middle ground in Moore v. Harper (plus a few additional thoughts on redistricting remedies)
As the election approaches, the President sharpens his criticism of the Supreme Court.
Understanding the jurisprudence of the conservative Supreme Court justice
The Constitution's commerce clause guarantees a domestic free trade zone. A state law that bars a resident from traveling to take advantage of another state’s economic activity would be unconstitutional.
The decision is a warning to states that impose vague permit standards or sweeping bans on guns in "sensitive locations."
A First Amendment case prompts The Onion to explain how parody works.
The justices wrestled with the problem of identifying a clear, coherent, and administrable definition to constrain federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
The Supreme Court may soon consider if acquitted conduct sentencing is illegal.
Despite the state's law allowing no third-party House candidates to get on the ballot in 60 years, the Court declined to hear the case.
Does Section 230 shield YouTube from lawsuits about recommendations? Can Twitter be forced to pay damages over the terrorists it hasn’t banned?
Plus: SCOTUS is back in session, governments around the world are getting bigger, and more...
and some thoughts about judicial fearlessness
Ten years after their unanimous Supreme Court victory against the Environmental Protection Agency, the Sacketts return to One First Street for another round.
The 6th Circuit ruled that qualified immunity prevented Anthony Novak from vindicating his First Amendment rights.
A crackdown on insults, hate speech, and misinformation punishes dissenters who express themselves in ways that offend government officials.
Based upon Totenberg's new book, a prominent legal ethicist thinks the conflict was a real one.
Democrats and Republicans both demand solutions that are inconsistent with the First Amendment.
It’s a terrible ruling that misunderstands years of First Amendment precedents. And it’s increasingly likely that the Supreme Court will have to intervene.
The Republican senator improbably claims his bill is authorized by the 14th Amendment and the Commerce Clause.
You don't have to prove to a government official that you have “proper cause” to exercise your constitutional right, the Court ruled.
The Court's popularity has indeed fallen. But its relatively low approval ratings are neither unprecedented, nor worse than those of the other branches of government.
A compromise to protect religious freedom may bring on more Republican support.
The Insular Cases “rest on a rotten foundation,” Gorsuch wrote.
She’s asking the Supreme Court to consider whether this seizure is an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.
I was one of the participants, along with Karen Tumlin (Justice Action Center), Leon Fresco (formerly of the Department of Justice), and moderator Eileen Gilmer (Bloomberg).
The president claims broad authority to act under a post-9/11 law.
How do you justify government speech mandates? Apparently, you deliberately pretend that businesses have no right to control the messages they choose to present.