Justice Gorsuch has never voted against Native American interests in a Supreme Court case. But that probably isn't because he's biased in favor of Indians. He simply believes that much existing precedent in this field is biased the other way.
The question presented is whether the 16th Amendment authorizes Congress to tax unrealized sums without apportionment among the states.
The Supreme Court did not overturn the standing holding of MAssachusetts v. EPA, but it may have left it on life support.
Some worth-what-you-paid-for-them predictions for the final(?) week of SCOTUS opinions.
Today’s decision “is narrow and simply maintains the longstanding jurisprudential status quo,” wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh for the majority.
While intended to keep Native families together, the ICWA subjects American Indian children to a lower level of protection than is enjoyed by non-Native kids.
Plus: Court rules against judge who threw child stars in jail during parents' custody dispute, inside the FTC's attempt to stop Microsoft from acquiring Call of Duty, and more...
The Supreme Court was wrong to deny relief to a man imprisoned for activity that Court's own rulings indicate was not illegal - one who never had an opportunity to challenge his incarceration on that basis.
Joanna Schwartz on how law enforcement "became untouchable"
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson may speak the most at oral argument, but Justice Thomas is writing more pages.
It's not a broad attack on free expression, but Thursday's ruling is certainly a victory for brands that can't take a joke.
It did so in today's Voting Rights Act ruling in Allen v. Milligan. This holding has implications for other cases where litigants attempt to overturn statutory precedents, especially longstanding ones.
The decision highlights the injustice of a federal law that bans gun possession by broad categories of "prohibited persons."
As pot prohibition collapses across the country, that policy is increasingly untenable.
Criticizing the law by calling for people to break it is an American tradition.
The lawsuit looks iffy in light of the Supreme Court's "open fields" doctrine.
The Supreme Court is agnostic on questions of science, but clear and resolute on questions of law.
Could the Court treat Justice Powell's Bakke opinion the way it treated Justice Kennedy's Rapanos opinion?
a sub silentio invocation of the general law and positive law approaches
The Tyler home equity theft case is just the tip of a much larger iceberg of property rights issues where stronger judicial protection can protect the interests of the poor and minorities, as well as promote the federalist values of localism and diversity.
Thanks to Sackett v. EPA, the feds can no longer treat a backyard puddle like it's a lake.
The Clean Water Act decision was a unanimous win for the Sacketts, and a 5-4 victory for Justice Scalia's 2006 Rapanos v. United States plurality.
The Supreme Court ruled that home equity theft qualifies as a taking, and that state law is not the sole source for the definition of property rights. The ruling is imprecise on some points, but still sets an important and valuable precedent.
"The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but no more," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch highlights a vital lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The FBI is investigating the shooting, but Supreme Court precedent from last year's Egbert v. Boule will make it nearly impossible for Raymond Mattia's family to find justice through civil courts.
A welcome reminder that reviewing courts must judge the propriety of agency actions solely by the grounds invoked by the agency.
The case could have long-term implications for how broadly fair use can be applied.
"Since March 2020, we may have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country," Gorsuch wrote. That might be an exaggeration, but it isn't far off.
Plus: A new lawsuit in Montana over the state's TikTok ban, the economic realities of online content creation, the rights of private companies, and more...
The narrow rulings concluded the platforms aren’t responsible for bad people using their communication services.
On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with an Alabama death-row inmate who, after surviving a botched lethal injection attempt last year, says he wants to die by gas chamber instead.
The state defied a Supreme Court ruling by banning guns from myriad "sensitive places."
Plus: APA says social media not inherently harmful for kids, senators propose Artificial Intelligence Regulatory Agency, and more...
He either doesn't understand or won't admit why this violates the First Amendment.
U.S. District Judge Robert Payne concluded that 18-to-20-year-olds have the same Second Amendment rights as older adults.
The Supreme Court has accepted certiorari in Carnahan v. Maloney to consider whether members of Congress can sue to force disclosure of information from the General Services Administration.
Justice Kavanaugh continues to support granting certiorari in cases his colleagues do not wish to hear.
The Supreme Court issues five merits opinions, but there are still forty more waiting.
Biden v. Nebraska has far-reaching implications for presidential power.
The decision is at odds with Supreme Court precedent, and endangers the constitutional rights of millions of people. This brief urging the court to reverse it was filed by the Cato Institute and myself.
Plus: A look back at Rochelle Walensky's tenure as head of the CDC
The state's own attorney general has said Glossip deserves a new trial.
A new report purporting to show that Missouri's arguments for standing in Nebraska v. Biden are based on a lie fails to deliver.
The Supreme Court wants further briefing on whether it retains jurisdiction
Its existence was revealed when Justice John Paul Stevens' papers were made public earlier this week.
There are several interesting revelations, including an unpublished dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia.
The author of one of the Supreme Court's most widely hated rulings left us extensive files on the case, which have just been made public. They could help shed light on key unanswered questions about.
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 thanks
Every 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 interested
So 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 thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks