Besieged on all sides, the chief justice faces his greatest test yet.
The court’s order indicated that it may return to the issue as soon as next week, when a trial judge’s temporary restraining order is set to expire.
A former solicitor general, Mr. Clement has argued over 100 cases before the Supreme Court. Now he will present independent arguments as a judge decides whether to drop the charges against the mayor.
The justices unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs had not established a connection to the United States required by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
The Justice Department said a law protecting the officials from arbitrary removal is an unconstitutional intrusion on presidential authority.
The former Senate Republican leader had been widely expected to retire at the end of his term. He made it official on his 83rd birthday, after a recent run of opposing President Trump’s nominees.
La directiva aplica para diversas agencias del poder ejecutivo que el Congreso creó y facultó para regular aspectos de la economía.
The president has already challenged statutory protections against summarily firing officials overseeing such agencies without cause.
The department’s Office for Civil Rights warned that it would penalize schools that consider race in scholarships, hiring and an array of other activities.
Plus, how to remember everything.
The court’s conservative majority may be receptive to the argument that presidents have unlimited power to remove leaders of independent agencies.
People here illegally haven’t entered the social compact with the people of the United States.
More than 50 years ago, President Richard M. Nixon sought to fire the special prosecutor leading the Watergate investigation, but his attorney general refused and resigned.
If the president’s defiance continues, the standoff will create the prospect of a constitutional crisis, and it will be the state attorneys general who will defend the rule of law.
He lacks the skill to govern in the way the founders intended.
The president is challenging the constitutional order.
Danielle R. Sassoon, Manhattan’s interim U.S. attorney, built a life on conservative values and amassed a daunting resume. On Thursday, she took a stand against the Justice Department where she had made her career.
Unpacking the debate around President Trump’s executive orders.
Speaking in general terms at a Florida college and not naming President Trump, the Supreme Court justice’s remarks took on potency in the current climate.
Cuando las autoridades negaron que fuera ciudadano, Wong Kim Ark llevó su caso ante la Corte Suprema y ganó. Hoy, esa decisión es el centro del debate sobre quién puede ser estadounidense.
Law professors have long debated what the term means. But now many have concluded that the nation faces a reckoning as President Trump tests the boundaries of executive power.
Attacked by two justices, lower-court judges and litigants, the 1964 ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan keeps getting cited approvingly in the Supreme Court’s decisions.
When officials denied that he was a citizen, Wong Kim Ark took his case to the Supreme Court and won. Today, that decision is the focus of debate over who can be an American.
The new administration may transform our constitutional order fruitfully yet again, or it may accelerate a final degeneration into Caesarism.
An administration lawyer said a Tennessee law barring some medical treatments for transgender youths is constitutional and urged the justices to say so.
Protesting Trump isn’t enough this time.
If the case reaches the Supreme Court, its conservative majority will be receptive to Donald J. Trump’s argument that presidents have unlimited power to remove members of independent agencies.
The president is using every tool at his disposal to reshape the American founding.
Media institutions and technology companies are offering obscene sums of money to settle feeble or frivolous lawsuits.
As Canada wrangles an epic, decades-long saga of who can fish for lobster, and when, emerging threats are heating up the conflict in Nova Scotia.
The legal system is not so easily dismissed.
The prospect of legal challenges to President Trump’s purges may be a feature, not a bug, for adherents of sweeping presidential authority.
The involvement of Sullivan & Cromwell in the appeal of President Trump’s criminal conviction underscored how New York’s legal power players have moved toward Mr. Trump.
La pausa temporal de la Casa Blanca a billones de dólares en gasto federal podría desencadenar una lucha judicial sobre la autoridad del poder ejecutivo y el control del Congreso sobre el presupuesto.
The White House’s temporary pause on trillions in federal spending could set up a court fight over executive authority and Congress’s control of the purse.
A rule known as the endangerment finding requires the E.P.A. to regulate greenhouse gases. It has proved resilient against earlier attacks.
The president, who was found liable for sexually abusing the writer E. Jean Carroll, is contending that he doesn’t have to pay the $83 million he owes for defaming her.
The 14th Amendment overturned the 1857 decision that denied citizenship to Black people. Scholars say President Trump’s proposal betrays that history.
A state legislative committee has advanced a resolution asking that the power to regulate marriage be returned to the states.
The proposal to create the nation’s first religious charter school paid for by taxpayer funds could move the line between church and state in education.
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.