The legal question was about prosecutors withholding evidence about another suspect, but the argument was dominated by an effort to reconstruct what happened decades ago.
The justices ruled in favor of five New York businesses that wanted to inform their customers that they imposed a surcharge for the use of credit cards.
Texas is condemning intellectually disabled people using an outdated and unscientific test. The justices were right to strike it down.
The Supreme Court has rejected the test Texas uses to determine who should be spared execution because of an intellectual disability, continuing a trend toward limiting capital punishment.
With more than 40 percent of patent suits filed in a federal court in East Texas, justices are weighing whether to limit the places where defendants in such cases may be sued.
Senate Democrats say they will filibuster the nomination, daring the Republicans to change the rules to get their man on the bench.
Judge Neil M. Gorsuch appears to be short, at least for now, of the eight Senate votes he must earn from the Democratic caucus to reach the 60-vote threshold.
Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, the Supreme Court nominee, went through three days of hearings that left the Senate Judiciary Committee about where it began.
The justices seemed to sharply disagree on the relevance of the Los Angeles County police’s lack of a warrant in the civil suit of a man wounded in a raid.
Senate Democrats made an issue of a unanimous Supreme Court ruling on Wednesday that rejected the approach Judge Gorsuch had taken in a different case.
Full-length accounts of how Senate hearings for Clarence Thomas, Robert H. Bork and others were turned into spectator sport.
A reader says hearings should not be held for the nominee of a president under a cloud of suspicion. Another suggests not fighting the nomination.
The justices said schools should not be satisfied with minimal educational progress for disabled students, a standard Judge Neil M. Gorsuch has been criticized for using.
Republicans have elevated the practice of gentle questioning of a preferred Supreme Court nominee to high art — even when confirmation appears assured.
Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s choice for Supreme Court justice, adheres to originalism, a judicial approach that would deeply affect how he would make decisions from the bench.
Judge Gorsuch’s preferred theory of constitutional interpretation is self-undermining.
Democratic senators were frustrated in the first round of confirmation hearings for Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, who offered little insight on his thoughts on contentious legal matters.
President Trump was at it again Tuesday night at a fund-raising dinner, calling out a federal court judge in Hawaii who placed a stay on his second travel ban.
The Supreme Court nominee also repeated his earlier private criticism of the president’s attacks on judges who rule against him.
The justices ruled that a 1998 law on federal appointments meant a nominee to a position cannot hold it on an acting basis.
Senate Democrats grilled Judge Neil M. Gorsuch about torture and presidential power, and the exchanges revived an unresolved dispute from George W. Bush’s presidency.
The Supreme Court nominee explored the issue in a book, making it fair game for senators. The answer could tell us a lot about his take on Roe v. Wade.
With 30 minutes of questioning allotted to each senator, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch ventured into unscripted territory on Tuesday.
Here’s a good question for Judge Gorsuch: Why are you here? There’s only one honest answer: “I shouldn’t be.”
Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, appeared prepared for criticism that his rulings have tilted toward corporate interests.
The court’s decision not to hear the case of Senator Robert Menendez, who faces eight bribery charges, sets the stage for a trial this fall.
Jake Silverstein and Emily Bazelon of the Times Magazine join Adam Liptak, The Times’s Supreme Court correspondent, to discuss the court’s future.
To confirm Judge Neil Gorsuch before the current Supreme Court term ends, Senate Republicans will have to move with exceptional speed.
At the hearing for Mr. Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Senator Richard J. Durbin addressed “a courtesy which Senate Republicans denied” to Judge Merrick B. Garland.
He is rightly skeptical about federal agencies making rules by interpreting laws passed by Congress.
A rhetorical version of dodge ball is a favored tactic for nominees regardless of their position on the political spectrum.
As the country prepares for the confirmation hearings of Judge Neil Gorsuch, Retro Report explores how the bitter hearings over Judge Robert Bork changed the way nominees answer questions.
As Judge Neil M. Gorsuch prepares for his Supreme Court hearing, he may take a page from the playbook of some who went before him.
The senators will face pressure to vindicate their parties’ views both of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch’s worthiness to join the Supreme Court and of the process leading him there.
Not all conservatives are originalists, nor are all originalists conservative.
Judge Gorsuch’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, starting Monday, is likely to reflect the brutal politics of a polarized era. As he himself wrote, it wasn’t always this way.
Liberal groups are promising a furious fight against Judge Neil M. Gorsuch that they say will rival the most memorable clashes over candidates to the highest court.
Judge Gorsuch’s hearing next week will test whether the modern confirmation process can succeed in eliciting a nominee’s views. Here are a few questions.
More than 150,000 pages of newly released documents detail the work Judge Gorsuch did for the Justice Department.
Mr. Gorsuch, President Trump’s Supreme Court pick, represented the mogul Philip F. Anschutz as an outside counsel and has links to other executives at his companies.
The Supreme Court nominee, Neil M. Gorsuch, is a critic of Chevron deference, a doctrine that says courts should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of the law.
At a Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Democrats are expected to draw attention to instances they say highlight Judge Neil M. Gorsuch’s tendency to favor the powerful.
Sixteen-year-olds who are tried as juveniles are less likely to be rearrested than those tried as adults.
The state has scheduled a killing spree because its batch of lethal-injection drugs is expiring.
Liberal groups are alarmed at what they see as muted opposition from Senate Democrats to Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, and at the prospect of his lifetime appointment.
The Supreme Court may have turned down my case, but the larger movement is very much alive.
A transgender student calls the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear a case on use of school bathrooms “unfathomable.”
Did a Supreme Court ruling reject only a “tangible” benefit requirement, or did it mean to get rid of the reference to “meaningfully close” relationship, too?
Jury discussions should not remain private if evidence emerges that they were affected by racial or ethnic bias, the Supreme Court ruled.
The justices vacated an appeals court decision in favor of a transgender boy, Gavin Grimm, and sent the case back for further consideration.
An assertion in a 2003 ruling that there is a “frightening and high” risk of recidivism among sex offenders has been exceptionally influential, despite a lack of evidence.
It could have altered the national discourse on race decades ago.
People for the American Way writes that the Supreme Court nominee is hardly mainstream.
Neil M. Gorsuch worked as a law clerk for two justices, including Anthony M. Kennedy, in the early 1990s, giving him a privileged look at the court’s workings.
Dozens of companies, including Amazon and Apple, signed on to a brief in support of Gavin Grimm’s fight against his school district over which bathrooms he may use.
The appalling case of a prisoner who starved to death shows how dependent we are on our judges’ willingness to call out injustice.
The court tried to clarify the role race can play in drawing districts but left it to the trial court to apply a slightly refined definition of racial gerrymandering.