Search

The article investigates the story behind the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of the Roe v. Wade constitutional right to abortion ruling. Topics discussed include leak of the draft opinion of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, arguments between conservative and liberal justices over the preservation of abortion rights, decision of the justice to restrict abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy, and final ruling against the constitutional right to abortion.

The article reports on the dissenting opinions delivered by U.S. Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett questioning the methods and conclusions of the conservative majority on various issues. Focus is given on the stance of Barrett on the Affordable Care Act and Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It shows Barrett's dissent on the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack prosecutions and on the plan of the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden to combat air pollution.

The article discusses the Supreme Court's recent term, highlighting major decisions favoring Donald J. Trump, curtailing administrative agencies' powers, and addressing issues like guns and abortion. Topics include immunity for former presidents, social media platforms' First Amendment rights, and obstruction charges related to the Capitol attack.

The article presents information on rulings made by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2024. Topics discussed include the cases against former U.S. President Donald J. Trump and the Court's rulings, a comparison between the Supreme Court and the federal appeals court Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, Louisiana, and the conservative and liberal justices in the Supreme Court.

The article reports on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court that former U.S. President Donald J. Trump is entitled to immunity from prosecution on charges of attempting to overturn the 2020 election. It presents the opinion of justices on presumptive immunity for official acts and the exercise of presidential power. It informs about the court's rejection of an attempt to bar Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment and its denial of the use of obstruction law to prosecute pro-Trumps. INSET: Highlights of the Ruling..

The article reports on the trial of former U.S. President Donald J. Trump on charges of seeking to overturn the 2020 election that has been delayed following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision about executive immunity. It mentions that task of Federal District Court judge Tanya S. Chutkan to perform the official-unofficial test for the methods allegedly used by Trump to subvert the election results as described in the indictment.

The article reports on the decision of U.S. Supreme Court to cut the power of the federal agencies. Topics mentioned include the imposition of limitation of federal agencies to regulate environment, consumer safety and health care, the role of courts in establishing national policy, and a description of court case Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.

The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court over the ruling made by federal prosecutors on the prosecution of some proponents of U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump who rallied in Washington, D. C. on January 6, 2021. Topics mentioned include the participation of proponents to block certification of the 2020 election results, the effect of riot on Trump's federal case, and the proper application of the obstruction law.

The article reports on the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that reject the Republican challenge to the practice by the administration of President Joe Biden to contact social media platforms to fight the alleged misinformation posted on their platforms. The administration is questioning posts on topics like election fraud claims and the coronavirus vaccine. Also cited is the majority opinion of Justice Amy Coney Barrett on the case.

The article reports on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling stating that the federal government can confiscate the guns of individuals subject to restraining orders for domestic violence. The ruling is a retreat from the court's history of favoring the constitutional right of Americans to keep firearms at home for self-defense. The case ruled by the court is U.S. v. Rahimi.

The article reports on the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court lifting a ban on bump stocks that enable semiautomatic rifles to fire at machine gun speeds. In the decision, the court claimed that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its authority when it ordered the ban. Also cited are the federal government's efforts to address gun violence and mass shootings, and the dissenting judges like Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The article reports on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the Republican-led state of South Carolina to keep using the First Congressional District's voting map that a lower court had deemed an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. It shows the opinion of the court's majority on partisan redistricting, political apartheid and race-based redistricting accusations. It raises arguments of civil rights groups over the racial effect of the map and dilution of African American voting power.

The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a challenge on the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is funded. It discusses the argument whether the CFPB had violated the appropriations clause of the Constitution. It shows criticisms on the ruling including the failure of the court to police the exercise of constitutional powers of the Congress, the unchecked power of the CFPB, and how to fund the CFPB.

The article talks about the efforts of some the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative justices not to focus, consider or even acknowledge the facts of the actual case against former U.S. President Donald Trump for trying to subvert the 2020 election. Cited are how the conservative majority treated Trump's assertion that he is immune from persecution and the question of whether the court would act quickly enough to allow the trial progress before the 2024 election.

The article reports on the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's scheduled ruling about some immunity for former presidents from criminal prosecution on the criminal case against ex-president Donald Trump. Topics discussed include the claim that Trump plotted to interfere in the 2020 election, the possibility that Trump's case will be sent back to the trial court if the Supreme Court rules in favor of immunity, and the argument on how to differentiate prosecution for official or private actions.

The article suggests the inclination of a majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices to uphold local ordinances that allowed Grants Pass, Oregon to ban homeless people from sleeping or camping in public spaces. It reports the justices' weighing of poverty and the civil rights of homeless people against the ability of cities to clear public spaces for health and safety. It raises the issues of local government regulation of homelessness, lack of shelter, and violation of the Eighth Amendment.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has expressed doubt on April 16, 2024 for allowing prosecutors to use a federal obstruction law to charge hundreds of rioters involved in the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021. Cited are how the decision could not only disrupt those prosecutions but also eliminate half of the cases filed against former U.S. President Donald Trump for plotting to subvert the 2020 election, and questions from justices which considered the gravity of the assault.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's decision to reject an unusual lawsuit by Missouri's attorney general, Andrew Bailey, seeking to intervene in the criminal case against former President Donald Trump in New York and delay his sentencing until after the election.

The article focuses on comparisons drawn between the Supreme Court's recent decision granting former President Donald J. Trump substantial immunity from prosecution and Roe v. Wade, highlighting similarities in judicial methodology and the consequential impact on legal interpretations.

The article explores David D. Cole's tenure as the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) national legal director, focusing on battles under shifting Supreme Court dynamics, including challenges against the former U.S. President Trump administration and debates over free speech advocacy. Topics include the ACLU's defense against the Muslim travel ban, its diverse litigation strategies under conservative court majorities, and internal critiques regarding its stance on civil liberties.

The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to hear an appeal from a juvenile offender in Arizona sentenced to life without parole, despite a prior Supreme Court ruling against mandatory life sentences for juveniles, sparking dissent from liberal justices.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's decision to consider a challenge to a Texas law aimed at restricting minors' access to internet pornography through age verification measures, sparking debates over First Amendment rights and concerns about privacy and censorship.

The article details the U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to hear cases challenging Illinois' ban on high-powered guns and high-capacity magazines, as well as a federal law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms, signaling reluctance to revisit Second Amendment issues.

The article outlines a U.S. Supreme Court decision that extends the statute of limitations for challenging regulations, ruling that the time period begins when regulations first impact companies, rather than when they are initially issued.

The article reports on rejection by the U.S. Supreme Court of affirmative action at colleges and universities around the nation and declaring race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina unlawful. Topics discussed include statement from Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. about the admissions programs, reason for the dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and reaction of President Joe Biden to the court's ruling.

The article reports on the skepticism expressed by U.S. Supreme Court justices to efforts to curtail access to the abortion pill mifepristone that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It informs that mifepristone will remain illegal in several states that have enacted near-total abortion bans. It presents warning about the potential consequences of the distribution of the drug for the pharmaceutical industry, reproductive rights, anti-abortion doctors and groups.

The article reports on the ruling of U.S. Supreme Court justices to allow Texas to arrest migrants who enter the border without authorization or suspected of crossing the border illegally. It shows the dissent of liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagana and Ketanji Brown Jackson, citing further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement. It presents arguments over the use of administrative stay, the constitutionality of the Texas law, and potential disruption in federal immigration.

The article shows the skepticism of several U.S. Supreme Court justices of a bid by two Republican-led states to limit the interaction of the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden with social media companies on the grounds of their legal theories and assertions of free speech. It raises arguments about the relationship between the federal government and social media platforms, constitutionality of government power and censorship of private speech and violation of the First Amendment.

The article reports on the ruling issued by the U.S. Supreme Court stating that states should not ban former President Donald J. Trump from running for another term, reversing the judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court banning Trump due to his alleged role in the 2021 insurrection. All U.S. judges opined that individual states should not ban candidates for the presidency. Also cited is the provision of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution on the issue.

The article reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear whether former president Donald Trump is immune from criminal prosecution on charges of attempting to overturn the 2020 election. Topics discussed include a delay in the criminal trial of Trump, the court's decision on the extent of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for acts made during his tenure in office, and the implications of Trump's trial on his bid in the 2024 presidential election.

The article reports that U.S. Supreme Court justices are said to be skeptical of laws in Florida and Texas which constrain social media companies. Topics discussed include the aim of the laws to ban social media platforms from making editorial discretion on which messages should be posted, the First Amendment rights of social media companies, and the political and economic implications of the Supreme Court's ruling on the social media cases.

The article reports on the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on the cases Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton on the way social media companies police their sites. Topics discussed include a challenge of the Texas and Florida laws which prohibit social media platforms from removing political content and from banning a candidate for office on their sites, respectively, the rights of social media firms under First Amendment and the government's influence on social media platforms.

The article reports on how the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on two First Amendment cases could reshape social media in the country. Topics discussed include a challenge to laws in Florida and Texas which forbids social media sites from removing posts expressing conservative views, the debate on whether social media sites have free speech rights to make editorial judgments, and argument that the laws violate the First Amendment rights of the platforms.

The article reports on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the use of admissions criteria intended to diversify the student body at an elite public high school in Virginia. It raises opinions on discrimination in admissions, the constitutionality of the diversity criteria in admissions, and the use of race-neutral strategies in universities and colleges. It discusses the court's reasoning on intentional racial discrimination and judges' dissent on racial motivation in admissions.

The article suggests the likelihood of the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that states cannot disqualify former U.S. President Donald J. Trump from running in the 2024 general election. It considers the argument about the post-Civil War prohibition of candidates who engaged in insurrection from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. It discusses the restriction of states' rights and the empowerment of the federal government in determining the eligibility of candidates.

The article reports on the consensus among the conservative majority of members of the U.S. Supreme Court to limit or even overturn a precedent that vested regulatory power to executive government agencies. It raises arguments about the foundational doctrine of administrative law called Chevron deference and discusses cases relating to the National Marine Fisheries Servives' interpretation of a 1976 law that requires fishermen to carry observers to gather data to prevent overfishing.

The article reports on the agreement of the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether former U.S. President Donald J. Trump is eligible for Colorado's Republican primary ballot after the State Supreme Court disqualified him for engaging insurrection in his efforts to subvert the 2020 election. It raises the argument of Trump's lawyers about the unconstitutional disenfranchisement of voters and the provision of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

The article focuses on recent Supreme Court decisions regarding abortion rights, which, despite appearing positive superficially, are seen as temporary and evasive measures that may pave the way for future legal battles and increased restrictions on abortion access.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's decision to temporarily halt the Environmental Protection Agency's "good neighbor" plan aimed at curbing air pollution drifting across state lines, marking a setback for the Biden administration's environmental agenda amidst ongoing legal challenges.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's rejection of the Securities and Exchange Commission's use of in-house tribunals to enforce securities fraud rules, citing a violation of defendants' Seventh Amendment rights to a jury trial.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's decision to narrow the application of a federal anti-corruption law, ruling 6-to-3 that it does not criminalize gifts and payments intended to reward actions by state and local officials, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh arguing that the law's ambiguity.

The article discusses the proliferation and impact of amicus briefs on abortion cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, highlighting how these filings reflect evolving arguments on fetal personhood, emotional appeals, and factual disputes. Topics discussed include the influence of advocacy groups, challenges in factual accuracy, and implications for judicial decision-making.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court ruling that former Texas city councilwoman Sylvia Gonzalez can proceed with a lawsuit alleging officials abused their power by arresting her in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's slow pace in issuing decisions for the term, which reflects ongoing internal tensions among justices exacerbated by leaks and ethical controversies, impacting major upcoming rulings on issues such as abortion, gun rights, and executive authority.

The article focuses on the Supreme Court's unanimous decision to reject a California lawyer's attempt to trademark the phrase "Trump too small," sparking debate among the justices over the application of a historical and traditional approach in First Amendment cases.

The article examines Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., highlighting their contrasting judicial styles and ideological stances as revealed in recorded remarks at a Supreme Court, illustrating their approaches to the role of the judiciary amidst cultural debates.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's consideration of Arizona's stance on juvenile life sentences without parole, despite previous rulings against mandatory life terms for juvenile offenders. Topics include arguments over constitutional rights, Arizona's defiance of precedent, and implications for juvenile sentencing across the country.

The article focuses on former President Donald J. Trump's assertion that he would prosecute his political enemies if re-elected, highlighting concerns from legal experts about the damage to the rule of law such threats pose and the potential consequences for the independence.

The article examines the controversy surrounding U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's decision not to recuse himself from cases related to the January 6th Capitol attack, despite his wife's involvement with flags associated with the "Stop the Steal" movement. It discusses the ethical concerns raised by experts, the growing pressure on the Supreme Court to address recusal issues, and previous instances of justices providing explanations or not for their recusal decisions.