Supreme Court decisions, oral arguments, judicial appointments, constitutional rulings, and legal analysis from America's highest court.
The US Supreme Court issued an unsigned shadow-docket order dismissing a lower-court ruling that had blocked Alabama from implementing gerrymandered congressional districts for the 2026 election cycle. The map had been found intentionally discriminatory against Black voters. Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Kagan and Brown Jackson.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court's unsigned order in an Alabama redistricting case dramatically expands a recent ruling, effectively gutting remaining protections against racial discrimination in voting. The author contends the conservative supermajority has imposed a standard that makes it nearly impossible for racial minorities to challenge discriminatory maps, undermining both the Voting Rights Act and constitutional safeguards.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court's recent decision in Allen v. Milligan, which gives Republicans an additional House seat, is inconsistent with the Court's own prior rulings and appears motivated by partisanship. The author contends that the Republican-appointed justices are dismantling safeguards against gerrymandering to benefit their party.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court faces a critical test of its independence as it decides cases involving Trump's executive power, with the president likely to attack any adverse rulings. It contends that while some cases align with the conservative majority's long-term goals, the court has shown it will push back on overreach.
This commentary argues that progressive litigators can win favorable rulings from Justice Neil Gorsuch by filing 'Gorsuch briefs' that use textualist and historical arguments. It contends that Gorsuch's textualist methodology, applied consistently, can lead to outcomes that benefit workers, as demonstrated in recent Supreme Court decisions on arbitration exemptions.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court's shadow docket ruling allowing Alabama to eliminate a Black-majority congressional district effectively nullifies Voting Rights Act protections. The authors contend the decision signals that the Court will no longer guard against racial discrimination in voting, instead protecting white voters from perceived overrepresentation of minority communities.
This commentary analyzes recent Supreme Court relist activity, highlighting a rare summary reversal in a death penalty case and the denial of several government petitions. It argues that the Court's actions reveal a cold streak for the solicitor general and ongoing divisions among justices on procedural and immigration detention issues.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court's conservative majority is not monolithic, as close cases sometimes reveal cross-bloc coalitions rather than ideological splits. It contends that focusing solely on the 6-3 conservative-liberal divide misses important internal divisions among conservatives on issues like institutional role and statutory authority.
New York borrowers petitioned the US Supreme Court to decide if national banks must pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts, reigniting a multi-billion dollar legal battle. The Second Circuit ruled that paying interest interferes with banks' powers, conflicting with other circuits. At least 12 states have laws requiring such interest.
This commentary argues that the US Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority, through an unsigned shadow docket order, has approved racial gerrymandering in Alabama and undermined voting rights protections. The authors contend that the Court's actions reveal a disregard for legal precedent and lower court findings, posing a threat to fair elections and democracy.