Supreme Court decisions, oral arguments, judicial appointments, constitutional rulings, and legal analysis from America's highest court.
A Washington Post-Ipsos poll found 46% of Americans believe the Supreme Court rules on Trump administration policies based on political views, and 55% disapprove of the court's performance. The disapproval rating is approaching the 58% recorded after the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Todd Eddins authored a ruling overturning a 1990 conviction, criticizing the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative justices and declaring Hawaii will not follow their interpretation of the state constitution. The court ordered a new trial due to discredited FBI hair and fiber evidence.
This commentary analyzes Justice Clarence Thomas's dissent in a Supreme Court case on birthright citizenship, arguing that Thomas frames the issue as an ideological battle over who counts as an American. The piece contends that Thomas's interpretation of the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause, focusing on domicile and jurisdiction, supports President Trump's executive order and challenges the majority's view.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court is undermining the authority of federal district courts by concentrating power in itself, particularly during the Trump administration. It contends that the Court has failed to protect lower courts from political attacks and executive defiance, instead contributing to the erosion of the judicial system.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 30 to strike down limits on coordinated party spending with candidates, making it easier for political parties to spend money in coordination with specific candidates. The decision is expected to strengthen party influence in the upcoming midterm elections, building on the 2010 Citizens United decision.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II ruling, which holds brokers liable for negligent carrier selection, camera safety systems are being used to document due diligence. Bennett Family of Companies, a logistics provider, employs these systems for litigation protection.
The commentary argues that Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's understanding of the Declaration of Independence's principles is more historically grounded than critics suggest. It contends that her judicial philosophy reflects a deep appreciation for the nation's founding ideals and their evolving application.
This commentary argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Landor v. Louisiana Dept. of Corrections represents a radical attack on Congress's power, reviving a long-dead legal theory to strip federal prisoners of the right to sue for religious accommodation violations. The author contends the decision's rationale is more consequential than its result, signaling a dangerous expansion of judicial authority.
This commentary argues that three underappreciated constitutional provisions—the 13th Amendment's exception clause, the guarantee clause, and the Third Amendment—have been largely ignored by the US Supreme Court. It contends that the Court's avoidance reveals how justices navigate unfamiliar constitutional territory and shape their role.
This commentary argues that the Supreme Court's ruling in Monsanto v. Durnell, which sided with the weed killer manufacturer over cancer warning labels, reveals a growing rift between the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) movement and the Trump administration. The author contends that the administration has consistently favored market-driven approaches over the binding regulatory changes MAHA advocates, leading to feelings of betrayal among its supporters.