The New Roberts Court Releases Its First Opinions in Argued Cases
The Supreme Court issued several opinions this morning, displaying a great deal of unanimty.
The Supreme Court issued several opinions this morning, displaying a great deal of unanimty.
Will a rightward shift on the bench would result in the reversal of Obergefell? Probably not.
Donald Trump, 17 State Attorneys General, and a bunch of Republican former office holders submit briefs to the Supreme Court.
What original principles would say about this term's big case.
The president and his allies keep losing election cases.
The justices declined to intervene on behalf of Republicans who challenged absentee voting in Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania's response to Rep. Kelly's effort to invalidate Pennsylvania's election results.
Embattled Attorney General Ken Paxton is the latest to ask the Supreme Court to intervene in the 2020 Presidential election results.
Plus: Congress to vote today on marijuana decriminalization, new study shows bad news for indoor diners, and more...
One Ilya reviews a book written by another. Hopefully, this won't exacerbate #IlyaConfusion!
The Institute for Justice wants the Supreme Court to rule that the Fifth Amendment requires a prompt post-seizure hearing.
A challenge to the federal ban on gun possession by people convicted of felonies gives SCOTUS a chance to rectify its neglect of the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment Foundation files a flurry of lawsuits in November, with three aiming at laws restricting public carry.
Is this the Supreme Court’s next big gun rights case?
Plus: Pennsylvania rejects mail-in vote challenge, Facebook begs for regulation, and more...
The New York Times columnist misconstrues the issues at stake in the challenge to New York's restrictions on houses of worship.
The legal doctrine provides rogue government agents cushy protections not available to the little guy.
This is one of several cases that could become moot within weeks.
The legal doctrine is a free pass for rampant government abuse.
The case gives SCOTUS another chance to enforce constitutional limits on disease control measures.
The prospects of a new Congress and a new Administration justifies delaying the case.
The president’s increasingly desperate legal filings won’t change the ultimate result of the 2020 election.
The senators warned that the Court might have to be "restructured" if it did not reach the conclusion they preferred in a Second Amendment case.
When "fundamental rights are restricted" during an emergency, he says, the courts "cannot close their eyes."
It is not clear how the Court will ultimately resolve the case. But it is obvious that a majority of justices oppose invalidating the entire Affordable Care Act.
Democratic warnings that Amy Coney Barrett would threaten Obamacare were predictably overblown.
High points and low points of today's oral argument in the latest Affordable Care Act case. (Updated with some summary conclusions.)
Some things to listen for when the Supreme Court hears oral argument in the latest Affordable Care Act case.
Plaintiffs may have had standing in NFIB v. Sebelius, but they don't in California v. Texas.
According to the government, a law aimed at helping victims like King prevents him from holding his assailants accountable.
When must claimants raise appointments-clause challenges?
New Justice Amy Coney Barrett expresses concerns about wider implications of antidiscrimination policies.
The legal fight over mail-in ballots may soon heat up at SCOTUS.
The federal government wants the Supreme Court to rule that the victim has no recourse.
The case doesn't make any change in legal doctrine. But it may be intended to send a message to lower courts.
How different will the newly constituted Court be from what has come before?
In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, a key case currently before the Supreme Court, there is a strong reason to rule for the government that doesn't apply in most other religious-liberty disputes.
It is easy for originalists to reject challenges to court-packing; but the non-originalist arguments should be spelled out
Both candidates have serious flaws. But a Trump victory would be a much greater evil than the alternative.
Attorneys for Luzerne County are no longer asking the newest justice to recuse from Pennsylvania election litigation.
And maybe a lot longer, since the Supreme Court left the door open to re-hearing a Republican-led challenge seeking to discard late-arriving absentee ballots.
The Supreme Court weighs police shootings and unreasonable seizures in Torres v. Madrid.
The motion was submitted on behalf of the Luzerne County Board of Elections but Luzerne County has voted to have the motion withdrawn.
Decisions that progressives don't like are not necessarily a sign that something has gone horribly wrong.
Plus: Fewer Americans are watching sports, Milton Friedman's powerful TV series turns 40, Amy Coney Barrett joins the Supreme Court, and more...
There's no precedent for a recusal, but there's also no precedent for the current situation.
This time, the justices explain themselves.