Melynda Vincent is asking the justices to decide whether it's constitutional to disarm people based on nothing more than a nonviolent criminal conviction.
The Supreme Court ruled decades ago that burning the flag is protected by the First Amendment, no matter how offensive that act may be.
But now his case against the government can move forward.
Plus: The glorious return of drive-in movie season.
Professor Joel Alicea on how to understand what may be the most important jurisprudential divisions on the Supreme Court.
Michael Mendenhall wants the Supreme Court to reconsider a precedent that allows home invasions based on nothing but hearsay.
The right to a civil jury trial is far more deeply rooted in American history and tradition than is the right to own guns, which the Supreme Court was right to incorporate.
The Trump Administration returned the illegally deported migrant from imprisonment in El Salvador after repeatedly claiming they could not do so.
Vicki Baker's legal odyssey is finally coming to an end.
The court ruled on Thursday that a heterosexual woman shouldn't have to clear a higher bar than a gay colleague to sue for discrimination.
Unanimous rulings on discrimination, guns, and religion once again challenge the common media narrative that the Court is hopelessly polarized.
Without such intervention, he warns, the government "could snatch anyone off the street, turn him over to a foreign country, and then effectively foreclose any corrective course of action."
Plus: A love letter to the heavy metal band Slayer.
The MAGA loyalty that Trump demands is anathema to everything that originalism is supposed to be about.
Claims that Justice Amy Coney Barrett is at the center for the Court are not supported by the data. The truth is more complicated.
A reminder that the Executive Branch retains substantial discretionary authority over immigration policy and will prevail in court when that authority is properly exercised.
The case involved a fully permitted railroad track in Utah that has yet to break ground because of environmental lawsuits.
Some additional thoughts on today's Supreme Court decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition.
Environmental Impact Statements do not have to consider upstream and downstream effects.
A Massachusetts 7th grader was sent home for wearing the shirt, though the school allows students to challenge the idea it conveyed.
Two decades after Granholm v. Heald was supposed to end protectionist shipping laws, states and lower courts continue to undermine the decision.
A federal judge blocks the administration's "Student Criminal Alien Initiative," which targeted foreign students who had no criminal records.
A defense of the Supreme Court's decision to let President Trump remove members of the NLRB and MSPB.
Trump’s firing of a federal agency head may soon spell doom for a New Deal era precedent that limited presidential power.
The deadlocked court doesn't provide much clarity to sticky questions about the limits of religious freedom.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Garcia rejected the argument that the officers "recklessly created the need to apply deadly force by going to the wrong address."
In the name of "restoring freedom of speech," FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson wants to override the editorial judgments of social media platforms.
The Maine legislature has sought to silence and disenfranchise one of its members due to objections to things she said.
The decision revives a lawsuit against a Texas officer who shot a driver after endangering himself by jumping onto a moving car.
The Court has been punting for months on whether it will take up a legal challenge brought by Los Angeles landlords alleging their city's COVID-era eviction ban was a physical taking.
The latest SCOTUS order shows the justices are taking a more nuanced approach to district court injunctions of Trump Administration policies than its critics, left or right.
The ruling held that migrants detained under AEA had not been given adequate notice of their potential deportation. It also reflects the Court's growing distrust of the Trump Administration.
A majority of the justices seem unconvinced the Administration was prepared to provide the process that was due. Justices Alito and Thomas dissent.
The president's executive order on birthright citizenship had its first test before the Supreme Court.
The text and history of the Fourteenth Amendment run counter to Trump’s executive order.
Stephen Miller's understanding of the Constitution is dubious for several reasons.
Briefs urging the Supreme Court to stay injunctions against the order challenge "the conventional wisdom" about the meaning of an 1898 decision interpreting the 14th Amendment.
The late justice was appointed by a Republican but quickly established himself as a judicial liberal.
How the phrase ended up in an opinion after it had been omitted.
The Department of Justice told the Supreme Court there were "policy tradeoffs that an officer makes" in determining if he should "take one more extra precaution" to make sure he's at the right house.
Democrats tried to alter unconstitutionally the membership of the Supreme Court; they extorted Facebook into censoring free speech; they issued presidential executive orders unsupported by statute; and they pushed unprecedented prosecutions of Biden's predecessor in office, and his 2024 opponent, in the presidential race.
A declassified assessment contradicts the president's assertion that Tren de Aragua is "closely aligned with" the Venezuelan government and acts at its "direction."
The Trump administration is desperate to avoid judicial review.
A Supreme Court case about religious parents' rights underscores a deeper problem: Without choice, public schools become a culture war battleground with no exit.
A Supreme Court case could determine whether Americans own their digital data—or whether the government can take that information without a warrant.
The president's bizarre insistence that Kilmar Abrego Garcia "had MS-13 tattooed" on "his knuckles" makes him seem like a confused old man.
A statutory interpretation case, involving national emergencies, splits the justices in an unusual way.
