Trump's Reading of the Alien Enemies Act Defies the Usual Meaning of Its Terms
To justify the immediate deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members, the president is invoking a rarely used statute that does not seem to apply in this context.
To justify the immediate deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members, the president is invoking a rarely used statute that does not seem to apply in this context.
"Impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision," Roberts noted after Trump said federal judges who impede his agenda should be fired.
The removals challenge Humphrey’s Executor, a Supreme Court precedent that protects independent agency officials from political firings.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Jill Parrish emphasizes that religious freedom must protect "unpopular or unfamiliar religious groups" as well as "popular or familiar ones."
A New York case revives concerns about seizing private property to benefit favored developers.
The rationale for deporting Mahmoud Khalil is chillingly vague and broad.
In 2020, the Chief Justice condemned Senator Schumer's "dangerous" remarks.
There is no justification for such impeachment efforts.
A recently filed amicus brief in Fuld v. PLO.
Millions of people are barred from owning firearms even though they have no history of violence, and they have essentially no recourse under current law.
Presidential pardons have become a tool of favoritism and politics.
Justice Thomas dissents from the Court's continued unwillingness to hear bills of complaint filed under the Court's original jurisdiction.
FCC v. Consumers’ Research could dismantle a massive slush fund run by unelected regulators and industry insiders.
An exploration of some of the thorny issues that divided the Court.
A pre-opinion release order divides the justices 5-4, but this may not preview the split on the merits.
The Supreme Court will decide whether this threat to the Second Amendment is legally viable.
Justice Thomas dissents from the Court's refusal to resolve a clear circuit split.
Chairman Andrew Ferguson’s assault on "Big Tech censorship" aims to override editorial decisions protected by the First Amendment.
Whether or not a reasonable police officer violates clearly established law when he declines to check the features and address of his target house before raiding it is thus still up for debate.
Why is the Supreme Court issuing fewer summary reversals? Is Justice Barrett the reason?
His position is grounded in concerns about the separation of powers that presidents of both major parties have raised for many years.
Vice President J.D. Vance believes presidents can ignore the courts in some situations. Are we heading for a constitutional crisis?
Suggestions that the Executive Branch Ignore Federal Court Rulings May Look Different Today than When They Were Proposed.
Federal judges in Washington and Maryland say the president's attack on birthright citizenship flouts the 14th Amendment and 127 years of judicial precedent.
The government failed to persuade the appeals court that 18-to-20-year-olds are not part of "the people" or that the age restriction is consistent with the "historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The settlement vindicates Kimberly Diei's First Amendment right to comment on sexually explicit rap songs without suffering government retaliation.
A dissent from the denial of certiorari in another Sixth Circuit Habeas case.
The executive order contradicts the 14th Amendment and 127 years of judicial precedent.
Curtrina Martin's petition attracted support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers.
Though awkward and antiquated, the Second Amendment’s syntax and grammar unambiguously protect gun rights.
A unanimous Supreme Court decision established as much in 1965.
The order directs the attorney general to ensure that states have the drug cocktails to carry out lethal injections.
My latest article with Michael Stokes Paulsen is in print
Dan Epps and I discuss Royal Canin v. Wullschleger and TikTok v. Garland on the latest episode of Divided Argument
In granting Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court has agreed to consider this question.
"I cannot profess the kind of certainty I would like to have about the arguments and record before us," writes Justice Gorsuch.
The Supreme Court appears poised to uphold a ban on the app, but many creators aren't so sure.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a Texas case that could have major ramifications across the country—including, perhaps, the end of anonymity online.
The president-elect lost his Second Amendment rights thanks to a nonsensical gun ban.
The Cato Institute is urging the Supreme Court to take up the case and reaffirm that the liability shield does not apply to "obvious rights violations."
The justices are not persuaded to intervene in state-law climate litigation.
The Court will only consider one of the issues in Braidwood Management v. Becerra
How a 1949 Supreme Court dissent gave birth to a meme that subverts free speech and civil liberties
Another significant administrative law grant of certiorari (and a dog that didn't bark).
Justice Neil Gorsuch criticized "the government's attempt to lodge secret evidence in this case." Still, things look grim for the app.
Despite some notable wins, the president-elect's overall track record shows he cannot count on a conservative Supreme Court to side with him.
Patrick Darnell Daniels Jr. was sentenced to nearly four years in prison for violating a federal law that bars drug users from owning firearms.
A local government gave ownership of Kevin Fair's Nebraska house—and all of its value—to a private investor, in a practice known as home equity theft.
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