Originalism and the Result in Dobbs
Would the outcome in Dobbs put originalism in doubt?
Would the outcome in Dobbs put originalism in doubt?
A new case asks whether a Border Patrol agent may be sued for alleged First and Fourth Amendment violations.
Symposium issue in Constitutional Commentary now publicly accessible
The Supreme Court should reject a law that bars ordinary people from carrying guns for self-defense.
The slippery slope risks created by upholding SB 8 threaten a vital constitutional principle - one far more important than any considerations on the other side. That is sufficient reason to rule against Texas in this case.
"This is not just an obvious constitutional infringement—it's hard to imagine a more textbook violation of the First Amendment."
A majority of the Court voiced skepticism about the state’s conceal-carry licensing scheme.
Even justices who take a dim view of Roe v. Wade recognize the law’s chilling implications.
If Texas' SB 8 subterfuge works, it would be a dangerous road map for attacking other constitutional rights. The slippery slope risks on the other side are minor by comparison.
Today's Supreme Court oral argument suggests they will get the votes of six or more justices. If so, it will be a crucial victory for judicial protection of all constitutional rights, not just abortion rights.
Denver cops received qualified immunity after performing a warrantless search of a man’s tablet and trying to delete a video he took of them beating a suspect.
The justice grilled a Texas official over the implications of his state’s abortion law.
Do Americans have a right to know the extent that the government surveils them?
The Firearms Policy Coalition amicus brief offers a simple and effective way to neuter the threat to judicial review posed by SB 8.
However the Supreme Court handles the S.B. 8 litigation, it may unleash mischief in other policy areas.
An amicus brief in Whole Women's Health v. Jackson warns of how S.B. 8's structure could be used to target other constitutional rights.
A surprising grant of certiorari places a high-stakes regulatory case on the Court's docket, with profound implications for EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
The actual number of abortions that S.B. 8 prevented by the end of September may be closer to 500 than 3,000.
John Marion Grant convulsed and vomited as he was put to death.
The Supreme Court's notion of "fair notice," which it says requires blocking many civil rights lawsuits, is based on a demonstrably false assumption.
The idea that massive government spending, hate speech laws, and gun control will improve America—when they failed horribly elsewhere—is a dangerous myth.
Several groups urging the Supreme Court to overturn New York’s virtual ban on bearing arms emphasize the policy’s racist roots and racially disproportionate impact.
Imposing a wealth tax may not even be among the enumerated powers of Congress.
The justices will hear United States v. Texas and Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson on November 1.
The Court will hear oral argument in the two cases on November 1.
The Texas law “could just as easily be used by other States to restrict First or Second Amendment rights,” the Firearms Policy Coalition tells SCOTUS.
The gun rights group has filed a brief supporting the petition for certiorari in one of the cases challenging the controversial Texas abortion law.
In two opinions issued Monday, the Court gave qualified immunity to several police officers accused of violating the Constitution.
Adam Liptak reports on a Supreme Court typo that was quickly fixed, but lives on nonetheless.
A Supreme Court decision against New York's gun control scheme would be a victory for both criminal justice reform and the Second Amendment.
The preliminary reports are generally negative on court-packing, but favorable to term limits.
And Justice Sotomayor suggests one reason for the new format is that male justices tended to interrupt female justices.
Demand Justice's Balls and Strikes provides more heat than light.
The experience with the Texas Heartbeat Act offers a preview of what that means.
S.B. 8 allows lawsuits against people who perform prohibited abortions even if they relied on a court's determination that the law is unconstitutional.
The D.C. Circuit rejected the Trump Administration's approach to regulating power plant emissions of greenhouse gases. Some states and industry groups want the Supreme Court to take a look.
In a prior case challenging the law, the 5th Circuit said state judges were not appropriate defendants.
Qualified immunity "does not protect an officer who inflicts deadly force on a person who is only a threat to himself."
The policy imposed an additional form of ritual humiliation on a reviled category of people without any plausible public-safety justification.
The justices robe up for another term.
It could make the Court more vulnerable to political attack and to measures such as court-packing. But the vulnerability might not be great - or last long.
Justices complain about how their work is misrepresented, but then do not make the text or audio of their remarks available to the public.
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