For decades, federal officers have had to rely on more than race or ethnicity to stop and question someone over citizenship. That is now being tested.
Hoy en día, hablar español en voz alta en Estados Unidos se siente, extrañamente, como un acto transgresor.
The administration says the ruling, stemming from the seizure of an old mare, forbids judges from second-guessing his use of the National Guard.
Plus, a drastic drop in peanut allergies.
A Supreme Court ruling, while technically temporary, could set the ground rules for National Guard deployments elsewhere in the country.
The Second Amendment case tests a federal law used to convict Hunter Biden that bars drug users and addicts from possessing guns.
Half a century ago, Congress protected its power of the purse, and conservatives balked at letting presidents disobey lawmakers’ instructions.
The conviction of Pedro Hernandez in the 1979 murder of the 6-year-old was vacated. The Manhattan district attorney is exploring whether to try him again.
The office that administers the federal court system said that as of Monday, the judiciary will not have funding to sustain “full, paid operations.”
The president has mobilized state-based military forces to U.S. cities over the objections of state and local officials.
What do we expect from the Supreme Court and what can it actually do? On “Interesting Times,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Ross Douthat discuss how the court makes decisions, with an eye toward the future, rather than focusing on the moment we live in right now.
Abortion isn’t a right protected by the Constitution nor is it deeply rooted in the country’s history. Justice Amy Coney Barrett describes how the Supreme Court’s majority came to that conclusion on this week’s episode of “Interesting Times.” She tells Ross Douthat the tools she uses to interpret the law.
A movement born in churches to help vulnerable immigrants has become a constitutional battleground in Chicago and Portland, Ore.
Trump’s crypto windfall represents a mixing of personal and government interests at an unprecedented scale.
After the Supreme Court appeared poised to weaken a key provision of the landmark civil rights law, both parties began to reckon with an uncertain future.
The Supreme Court justice isn’t making decisions based on public opinion.
Thousands of hostages are still awaiting freedom.
A prohibition on the use of race in drawing electoral districts could allow states to redraw legislative lines before voting begins next year.
Democrats would be in danger of losing around a dozen majority-minority districts across the South if the court struck down part of the Voting Rights Act.
While the 1965 law was adopted in response to discriminatory practices in southern states, it has affected states and localities nationwide.
Montana is defending the actions of law enforcement officers who did not have a warrant when they responded to a possibly suicidal Army veteran.
If the justices decide that lawmakers cannot consider race in drafting maps, redistricting could result in congressional seats flipping from blue to red throughout the country.
The district attorney is searching for witnesses and plans to ask the Supreme Court to consider the Etan Patz case. A defense lawyer for the man accused in the killing says they’re dawdling.
Mr. Jones was ordered to pay $1.4 billion in damages to families who lost children in the 2012 shooting in Newtown, Conn.
The justices have shown a willingness to chip away at the landmark civil rights legislation. A Louisiana case could unravel much of its remaining power.
As the Supreme Court seems poised to expand the president’s power, a leading scholar whose work the justices have often cited issued a provocative dissent.
There is little information in court filings about the dozen plaintiffs who challenged the state’s voting map as an illegal racial gerrymander.
Dozens of sitting judges shared with The Times their concerns about risks to the courts’ legitimacy as the Supreme Court releases opaque orders about Trump administration policies.
It belongs to us. And we can use it to rescue our democracy.
A judge ordered Jones to pay as a result of a defamation lawsuit that he is now asking the Supreme Court to review.
The justices will decide whether to strike down a ban on the practice of trying to change a person’s sexual orientation.
A pivotal term beckons.
Separately, in the administration’s first 200 days, only two of 98 Senate-confirmed appointees to the most senior jobs in government were Black.
In a rare interview, the justice bemoaned vulgarity in public life, discussed his family’s ties to President Trump and reflected on his own history and legacy.
Remember when Republicans loved small government?
The case, one of several challenges to mail-in ballot rules lodged by allies of President Trump, involves an effort to exclude votes received after Election Day.
The conservative Christian law firm and advocacy group has been involved in a number of recent cases, including challenges to abortion access and gay and transgender rights.
The Supreme Court’s decision in a case challenging Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors would have implications for many states with similar laws.
As the administration’s top advocate before the justices, D. John Sauer has notched several recent Supreme Court victories.
It is the most demanding form of judicial review. If it applies, Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy is probably doomed.
The ruling, usually referred to as NIFLA, arose from a First Amendment challenge to California law regulating “crisis pregnancy centers.”
The practice surged in the 1980s and 1990s, before medical groups began warning it was harmful.
Plus, a new way to fight robocalls.
The president’s claims about cities don’t hold up.
The court’s ruling in the Colorado case will have implications for more than 20 other states with similar laws.
The emergency order is the latest turn in a longstanding legal dispute between the tech giant and the creator of the popular game Fortnite.
La exempleada y amiga de Jeffrey Epstein argumentó que un acuerdo secreto entre unos fiscales y el multimillonario financiero invalidaba su condena.
The onetime employee and friend of Jeffrey Epstein argued that a secret agreement between prosecutors and the multimillionaire financier invalidated her conviction.
Plus, when Silicon Valley comes to the farm.
As the justices return to the bench Monday, the court will confront a series of cases central to the president’s agenda.
The phrase doesn’t appear in the Constitution or its amendments.
Colorado and more than 20 other states restrict therapists from trying to change the gender identity or sexual orientation of clients under age 18.
Conflicting court rulings have plunged hundreds of thousands of people with temporary protection from deportation into uncertainty.
What exactly is religion, anyway?
The Second Amendment case involves a Hawaii law that generally prohibits firearms on private property that is accessible to the public.
There seems to be no limit to the president’s odious attempts to control higher education.
Her streak of Supreme Court victories, which began during the New Deal era, benefited millions of workers and continue to shape labor rights today.
Plus, what Jane Goodall learned among the chimps.
A Supreme Court order keeping Lisa Cook on the Federal Reserve Board for now is “a time to exhale but not breathe easy,” one expert said.
Justice Department lawyers are asking judges to pause their cases until funding resumes.
Readers sharply criticize the speeches by the president and the secretary of defense. Also: A cynical order from the Supreme Court.
The justices deferred a decision on the president’s efforts to oust Ms. Cook and instead set oral arguments in the case for January.
The decision vacated a finding by a panel of the court’s judges regarding President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport immigrants, but did not clear the way for such expulsions to resume.
Three legal experts on an action-packed Supreme Court, as it enters a new term.
The plane’s owner, an 82-year-old veteran, has asked the Supreme Court to hear his case and set limits on forfeitures of property used to commit crimes.
Coral Davenport, a New York Times reporter, explains how Russell Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, plans to circumvent Congress’s budgetary powers to advance the Trump administration’s agenda.
Los abogados del gobierno pidieron a los jueces que despejaran el camino para la orden ejecutiva del presidente que pone fin a la ciudadanía por derecho de nacimiento.
Jadira Bonilla, a kindergarten teacher at a Catholic school in southern New Jersey, was told she might have violated her contract, according to an email shared with The New York Times.
Government lawyers asked the justices to clear the way for the president’s executive order ending birthright citizenship.
The justice talks about everything from his indictment of the regulatory state to the rights of Native Americans.
Plus, a gun rights case at the Supreme Court and WeWork’s bankruptcy filing.
The case is the second one this term asking the justices to decide when government activity crosses the line to become coercion forbidden by the First Amendment.
The legislation would prevent President Biden from issuing another last-minute extension on the payments beyond the end of the summer.
A justice who frequently struggles to see injustice and cruelty in the present will surely struggle to see injustice and cruelty in the past.
The justices acted after the Biden administration announced that the health emergency used to justify the measure, Title 42, was ending.
President Biden has acknowledged that he has not accomplished all he wished to. But that, he maintains, is an argument for his re-election.
Two criminal defendants have asked the Supreme Court to decide whether remote testimony against them violated the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause.
Recent orders suggest that the justices are thinking of dismissing cases involving the “independent state legislature” theory and Title 42, an immigration measure imposed during the pandemic.
The administration faced a conservative court that has insisted that government initiatives with major political and economic consequences be clearly authorized by Congress.
The justices are set to hear arguments on March 1 on whether Republican-led states may seek to keep in place the immigration measure, which was justified by the coronavirus pandemic.
The unanimous ruling was the first one summarized by a justice since the start of the coronavirus pandemic and an indication that the court is off to a slow start this term.
In a brief filed with the justices, the president’s lawyers argued that his administration had acted within its authority in moving to forgive hundreds of billions in student debt.
Readers praise plans for more contemporary works. Also: Zelensky and American values; protecting the minority; remote work; the Groucho exception.
Plans to lift Title 42 have prompted dire predictions of chaos on the border. But there is already a migrant surge, because the pandemic policy was never an effective border-control tool.
For some lawmakers and politicians on both sides of the aisle, brandishing Title 42 is a way to flaunt an aggressive stance on the border.
The temporary stay in lifting the pandemic rule known as Title 42 is a provisional victory for 19 states, led mostly by Republicans, that had sought to keep it in place on the border.
¿Se está acabando el mundo tal como lo conocíamos? ¿Lo sabrías, siquiera, antes de que fuera demasiado tarde?
In 2022, we debated the apocalypse.
At issue is Title 42, a public health measure invoked by the Trump administration during the pandemic to block migrants from seeking asylum in the United States.
The justices left in place an injunction blocking the Biden administration’s authority to forgive up to $20,000 in debt per borrower.
The social network’s new owner wants to cut costs and make money from more aspects of tweeting. But some advertisers and celebrities remain cautious.
The courthouse has been closed to most visitors since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, and in the meantime the court has been transformed.
Readers debate the party’s strategy of supporting far-right G.O.P. candidates it thinks it can beat. Also: Covid and schools; Ukraine’s students; Kansas and abortion.
The House speaker’s visit is reviewed, pro and con. Also: The Kansas abortion vote; OB-GYNs; coal miners; rich and poor friends; single-issue voters.
Plus Xi Jinping visits Hong Kong and Ukraine takes back Snake Island.
Here’s what you need to know at the end of the day.
Readers call for more openness and discuss judicial restraint and the justices’ religious beliefs. Also: Mask decisions; Twitter’s dark side; skipping school.