Several justices seem skeptical of the claim that revising the rules after SCOTUS agreed to consider a challenge to them made the case moot.
The justices will hear oral arguments today in a major Second Amendment case.
An important development in the legal wrangling over the separation of powers.
The Supreme Court will not rehear Gundy v. United States, but Justice Kavanaugh seems ready to revisit the doctrine.
The Institute for Justice asks the Supreme Court to block sneaky tactics that prevent victims of property grabs from recovering their legal costs.
The legendary jurist and champion of "originalism" who withdrew his name from Supreme Court consideration weighs in on Donald Trump's impeachment, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and his upcoming PBS series on the Constitution.
Plus: New York's rent control expansion has predictable effects, people are boycotting Uber again, and violence continues in Hong Kong.
The Seventh Circuit's ruling on remedies for Janus violations
The constitutional showdown over federalism and immigration approaches SCOTUS.
Todd Henderson on the legal status of Eastern Oklahoma
The Supreme Court should not let police stop cars solely because they’re registered to people with suspended licenses.
Progressive purity tests and Supreme Court wish lists
Who will rein in the ever-expanding administrative state?
Efforts to take Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund off the Supreme Court's docket hit a snag.
The Supreme Court will consider a constitutional challenge to the composition of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Understanding what’s at stake in Ramos v. Louisiana.
Justices weigh textual conflict over what counts as “sex discrimination” versus what Congress originally intended.
Race-based admissions will likely make a return visit to the Supreme Court.
Does the Civil Rights Act of 1964 cover sexual orientation and gender identity?
The Supreme Court known for its skepticism of government regulation nonetheless upheld early environmental protection efforts.
The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation doesn't shed much light on the Supreme Court justice or the allegations against him.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders convinced the Fifth Circuit to declare the Federal Housing Finance Agency's structure unconstitutional, but they're seeking Supreme Court review nonetheless.
Congress takes up the issue of "acquitted conduct."
A former Scalia clerk revisits Justice Scalia's famed lecture on legal canards and offers a defense of textualism.
Qualified immunity protects cops from liability for actions that would land ordinary people in jail.
What’s at stake in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue.
In a newly filed brief with the Supreme Court, the Justice Department claims the Consumer Financial Protection Board's structure is unlawful.
History provides a window into how abortion bans will play out if re-instituted.
Plus: Andrew Yang opts out of cancel culture, Andrew Cuomo wants to crack down on flavored e-cigarettes, and more...
Plus: 4 myths about social media law, Trump wants to ban cigarette alternatives, and more...
What’s at stake in Kansas v. Glover.
The Notorious RBG counsels against ideological litmus tests for judicial nominees.
The article is now available for free on SSRN.
Understanding what’s at stake in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia
Plus: North Carolina sues eight more e-cig companies, Tulsi Gabbard fails to meet debate threshold, and more...
It’s the Trump administration vs. civil rights groups on federal protections from workplace discrimination.
“Modern immunity practice—essentially 'heads government wins, tails plaintiffs lose'—leaves many victims violated but not vindicated."
The book by political scientist Michael Dichio argues that the Court has done more to promote centralization than protect states, and is the most thorough analysis to date, of this longstanding issue..
It’s time for SCOTUS to revisit the "border search exception" to the Fourth Amendment.
The five Democrats warn that the Court may have to be "restructured" if it keeps making decisions they don't like.
The justices would be abdicating their duty to uphold the Constitution if they let such political considerations decide legal issues.
The concerns I expressed about her record on property rights when I testified at her 2009 confirmation hearing were justified. But she has compiled an admirable record on several other issues.
Plus: Marijuana banking, suing Facebook, and more...
What’s next for the Second Amendment at SCOTUS?
Episode 5 of Free Speech Rules, from UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10
