At oral arguments in the tariffs case, the conservative justices seemed ready to hit the president with the legal rationale ...
Myth: The 27th Amendment is an ‘obituary of the Supreme Court’. Reality: An institution is not abolished because its jurisdiction is rationalised. The Supreme Court remains the ...
SCOTUSblog on MSN
In tariff cases, verbs rather than major pronouncements about presidential power give the court the off-ramp it’s looking for
Clear Statements is a recurring series by Abbe R. Gluck on civil litigation and the modern regulatory and statutory state.
Cognitive dissonance is the phrase psychologists use to describe the uncomfortable mental state that results from ...
6don MSNOpinion
The Constitution is clear when it comes to Trump’s tariffs
Conservative justices have long embraced textualism and stressed that laws should be interpreted based on plain meaning. The ...
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments over President Donald Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on almost ...
The keenly awaited ruling should act as a ‘call to arms’ for a much-needed evolution of UK copyright law, says Rebecca Newman ...
Washington’s Supreme Court has ruled that flight attendants who catch COVID-19 while traveling for work can qualify for ...
The interpretation of “regular forces” could determine whether the Guard's federalization in Oregon, Illinois and California ...
The Court of Appeal held that repudiatory breaches can be remediable, adopting a practical approach to contractual ...
The White House urges agencies to fast-track repeals of “facially unlawful” rules using the Administrative Procedure Act’s ...
As the Supreme Court takes up Trump’s tariffs, we had two conservative legal scholars fight it out on the issue.
Some results have been hidden because they may be inaccessible to you
Show inaccessible results
Feedback