Supreme Court

Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters should be a straightforward case. But nothing is ever straightforward in this Supreme Court.

The explosive political fight over Hector LaSalle, the nominee to be New York’s top judge, explained.

Arizona v. Mayorkas, the Court’s new Title 42 decision, appears to be the latest act of gamesmanship by a Republican Supreme Court.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is where law goes to die.

The US Senate is a fundamentally broken institution. Democratic judges need to account for that in their retirement decisions.

The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Crawford v. Cain is a monument to judicial lawlessness.

A rule governing federal courts in Texas turned a former lawyer for the religious right into one of the most powerful people in the United States.

In retrospect, it was inevitable that this particular judge would come for contraception.

Moore v. Harper, one of the scariest election cases in the Supreme Court’s modern history, probably won’t end in catastrophe.

Moore v. Harper is a test of whether this Supreme Court can ever be trusted with power.

What is art? The Christian right wants that question to be decided by the Supreme Court in 303 Creative v. Elenis.

Arguments in United States v. Texas dwelled on whether to upend one of the judiciary’s longstanding procedures in order to neutralize the most reactionary judges.

Judge Drew Tipton’s order in United States v. Texas is completely lawless. Thus far, the Supreme Court has given him a pass.

All they do is win, win, win, no matter what. So why are America’s most powerful lawyers so unhappy?

The program is almost certainly legal, but that fact is unlikely to persuade a judiciary dominated by his partisan foes.

The anti-Medicaid arguments in Health and Hospital Corporation v. Talevski appeared to be too much even for this Court.

Brackeen v. Haaland attacks a 44-year-old law enacted to halt cultural genocide.

Health and Hospital Corporation v. Talevski is the single greatest threat to America’s social safety net since Paul Ryan.

The Supreme Court’s abortion decision could help some Democrats in tight midterm contests. But will it be enough?

Not that anything is likely to stop them from doing it anyway.

Graham v. Fulton County asks a highly partisan Supreme Court to sabotage a criminal investigation into the Big Lie.

The Fifth Circuit’s opinion in Community Financial v. CFPB is completely incoherent.

On October 25, Ian answered questions from our contributors.

One of the stupidest chapters in recent American legal history comes to a close.

National Pork Producers v. Ross presents difficult questions about when one state’s laws can impact life in other states.

Californians passed a landmark law that bans cages for pigs. Now the Supreme Court could overturn it.

A Supreme Court case asks just how far one state can go to change life in the other 49 states.

Gonzalez v. Google is a high-stakes case about what we actually see when we go online.

Alabama hoped to destroy a key prong of the Voting Rights Act. It’s probably going to walk away with a smaller victory.

But it isn’t sure how.

Merrill v. Milligan could eliminate one of the few remaining nationwide safeguards against rigged legislative maps.

Sackett v. EPA may prove to be the most significant attack on America’s clean water laws since the 1970s.

Even Trump’s own appointees had no patience for the rogue judge who sabotaged the DOJ investigation into the former president.

How “the sense of defeat over the Black freedom struggle” shaped the Supreme Court justice’s thinking.

The Fifth Circuit wants to put Texas Republicans in charge of social media platforms.