What would it look like to repair a long-standing racial injustice? It’s a question roiling the U.S., and Native American tribes in Oklahoma say they got a clear example last week from the Supreme Court.
At a time of deep U.S. political polarization, the Supreme Court ended its term with two decisions that emphasized unifying basic principles: the importance of the rule of law, and the fact that it applies to everyone, including presidents.
When one of the high court’s staunchest defenders of LGBTQ rights, Justice Anthony Kennedy, retired in 2018, most court watchers expected those rights to only get rolled back. Enter a strict textualist.
Presiding over an impeachment trial, Chief Justice John Roberts will seek to embody the judicial independence he often promotes. But the remainder of the Supreme Court term may be a tougher test.
Into an especially volatile political environment, a coming wave of hot-button Supreme Court decisions is set to crash. The cultural impact may extend to the institution itself.
The mere act of adding a citizenship question to the U.S. census was not the main concern of a divided Supreme Court. What concerned the justices was motive.
As chief justice, John Roberts must both protect the U.S. Supreme Court’s integrity in a polarized era and be true to his conservative values. How might he balance both goals?
During confirmation hearings, Judge Brett Kavanaugh showed two distinct sides: a cool-headed umpire and a fiery partisan. The question now is, which one is likely to show up at the Supreme Court?
The nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh has exposed questions of judicial partisanship like never before, legal experts say. Judges have never just mechanically applied the law, but is how they use their discretion changing?