Supreme court

The real problem with US Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson attending the Grammys wasn’t that it revealed her true colors as a liberal, but that it showed the slow and steady erosion of the court’s institutional reserve. Senator Marsha Blackburn, the Tennessee Republican, demanded that Chief Justice John Roberts launch an investigation into Jackson alleging she breached ethics rules by appearing at the anti-ICE event. “Americans deserve a Supreme Court that is impartial and above political influence,” Blackburn gravely pronounced. “When a Justice participates in such a highly politicized event, it raises ethical questions. We need an investigation into Justice Jackson’s ability to remain impartial.” Yes, the crowd at

America needs Donald Trump, badly. He is the bull in the china shop that every nation needs from time to time. He is testing his country’s constitution to destruction as well as its relations with the outside world. Such tests hasten the necessity of reform. The only question is how long will it take for reform to catch up and overcome him, as it surely will. Constitutional chaos may then break loose after midterms. This is America’s great opportunity In January alone Trump toppled the leader of Venezuela, mooted the conquest of Greenland and a 100 percent tariffs on Canada, insulted the British army and killed Americans protesting his immigration

Rarely has the ideologically divided US Supreme Court seemed so much on the same wavelength. And that is not good news for President Trump. In arguments Wednesday in a case that centers on President Trump’s authority to fire members of the Federal Reserve, the US central bank, both Republican and Democratic appointees suggested giving the president unfettered control would harm financial markets and damage public confidence. “Your position – no judicial review, very low bar (for dismissal) and that the president alone makes the determination – would weaken if not shatter the independence of the Federal Reserve,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh in an exchange with US Solicitor General John Sauer,

It’s been a less than stellar year for trans activists. Shortly after taking office last January, President Trump signed an executive order withholding federal funds from any school that permits biological men and boys from playing on women’s sports teams. Then in June the US Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law banning the use of puberty blockers and hormones for the treatment of young patients suffering from so-called gender dysphoria and seeking to change their gender identity. And on Tuesday the Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases brought by transgender athletes seeking to overturn laws in Idaho and West Virginia barring biological boys and men from playing on female

Each Supreme Court term typically includes at least one explosive case that inflames political passions and captures the public imagination. When the court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, or when it greatly broadened presidential immunity, as it did last year in Trump v. the United States, or when it ruled against race-based college admissions in 2023, it reaffirmed its centrality and reminded voters that it mattered. As it happens, very few Americans can name the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (surveys show it is consistently under 16 percent), but most know instinctively the high court’s opinions deeply impact governance, politics and culture. Before the

In case after case, judges ruled to stymie the executive branch for one main reason

In promising an economic boom, Trump has highlighted his responsibility for inflation and unemployment

The court is contemplating big changes to the Voting Rights Act

The President is on a quest to reform mail-in voting and traditional ballot tabulation machines

The judiciary should defer to legislative judgments on fundamental rights – but only if legislatures actually make such judgments

The President should win the battle over who has authority to appoint US Attorneys

This is not personal; this is what intellectual combat looks like

There’s another office Trump could seek – one that affords as much protection from prosecution or assassination as the presidency does

New data finds a much higher rate of serious adverse events from abortion pills than was previously claimed

The current setup is anti-democratic

The administration now has the Supreme Court’s backing

In the long term, his masculine policies will function less as a punitive expedient

That includes former officials, even if they are the president’s political opponents

Plus: Trans activists take over Capitol bathrooms & David Hogg mulls DNC run