Plus, have we reached peak human life span?
At issue was how the Biden administration had interpreted a federal statute to regulate kits that could be assembled into homemade guns, skirting background checks.
Both sides told the Supreme Court that long-suppressed evidence about the state’s star witness undermined the case against the inmate, Richard Glossip.
The administration said a state abortion law conflicted with a federal law requiring emergency care. The court similarly sidestepped a case from Idaho in June.
The justices considered a routine case on unemployment benefits in characteristic style, peppering the lawyers with questions and dropping hints about their views.
The number of untraceable homemade guns recovered at crime scenes has fallen since the enactment of rules restricting the sale of the weapons, according to law enforcement statistics.
If it loses its institutional credibility, it will be powerless when it matters most.
Will the court resume or refrain from injecting itself into the country’s culture wars?
Aside from major disputes on issues like transgender rights and guns, the docket is fairly routine. That could change fast if the presidential race is contested.
Three cases all stem from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, which often finds itself to the right of the Supreme Court.
Republican-led states and industry groups argued that the Environmental Protection Agency had moved too fast and imposed onerous regulations.
The justices will consider whether a 2005 law that gives gun makers broad immunity applies in the case, which accuses them of complicity in supplying cartels with weapons.
When prosecutors admit they were wrong in a death penalty case, courts should listen.
El fiscal especial aportó nuevos detalles que buscan sustentar que Donald Trump intentó mantenerse en el poder, y expuso su argumento para que el caso sobreviva a la decisión de inmunidad presidencial de la Corte Suprema.
The special counsel provided new details that help flesh out how Donald Trump sought to remain in power, while setting out his argument for the case to survive the Supreme Court’s immunity decision.
How does the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling apply to former President Donald J. Trump’s election-interference case? Here’s how Judge Tanya S. Chutkan will decide.
Judge Tanya Chutkan made public portions of a filing by prosecutors setting out their argument for why the case should go forward despite the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity.
By recounting stories of women who have suffered dire health consequences since Roe’s overturning, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota embraced a Democratic strategy as he argued for abortion rights.
Federal civil rights investigators will review the events surrounding the race massacre for a public report under the department’s Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act.
One senator’s vision for Supreme Court accountability.
The candidate had asked the justices to intervene after a state judge found that he had used an improper home address in election paperwork.
Jack Smith is seeking to disclose quotations from secret grand jury testimony and interviews, but is proposing to shield witness identities.
Prosecutors filed a sealed brief showing what they learned in the investigation. The former president’s lawyers say it amounts to a premature special counsel report that could hurt him before Election Day.
Are we ever going to take civil rights laws at face value?
The folly of the Electoral College creates too many points where history could turn on narrow outcomes.
Las encuestas han demostrado que el expresidente está teniendo dificultades para obtener el apoyo entre las mujeres, para quienes el derecho al aborto sigue siendo un tema prioritario.
Federal prosecutors can come ahead with a lengthy filing containing evidence backing their argument that the indictment of the former president can survive the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
“You will be protected, and I will be your protector,” said former President Donald J. Trump. Polls have shown he is struggling to cultivate support among women, for whom abortion rights remain a top issue.
In June, the court tried to explain its new history-based approach to the Second Amendment. But judges said the latest decision “offered little instruction or clarity.”
The next fights over health care won’t be legislative brawls or executive actions — they will be a deluge of battles in the courts.
Readers discuss a story about the chief justice’s role. Also: Loving children who are not your own; college football madness.
Democrats had argued that Ms. Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate, was ineligible because the party had failed to submit a required statement.
Testing procedure, and perhaps the judge’s patience, the former president’s team sought to short-circuit a process to consider how much of the indictment can survive the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.
It remained unclear whether the man, Panos Anastasiou, came close to carrying out his threats, and public records indicate that he is not affiliated with any political party.
In the world of political fund-raising, there is hard money, soft money, dark money and Leonard Leo money.
As a young conservative, David Brock smeared Hill, who accused the Supreme Court justice of sexual harassment. Now, in a new book, Brock is denouncing Thomas and the court’s rightward tilt — and contending with his own complicated past.
Behind the scenes, the chief justice molded three momentous Jan. 6 and election cases that helped determine the former president’s fate.
Here is what we know about the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision curtailing race-based admissions at selective universities. And why many experts and administrators are baffled.
The case argues the government violated young people’s constitutional rights by failing to curb the use of fossil fuels. A lower court had thrown it out.
The Supreme Court justice has been drawn to American history and books about the “challenges and triumphs” of raising a neurodiverse child. She shares that and more in a memoir, “Lovely One.”
La princesa Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, conservadora, dijo que Alito y su esposa eran sus amigos y no respondió si había hecho otros regalos al juez. La pareja se quedó en el castillo durante un festival musical en julio de 2023.
Defying expectations, a Supreme Court decision curtailing race-based admissions still had a relatively small impact at some highly selective schools like Harvard, even as other schools saw big changes.
Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis said Justice Alito and his wife were guests at St. Emmeram Palace for a summer music festival. She called the couple her “friends” and the justice “a hero.”
The justice said the Supreme Court’s reasoning in the Dobbs case called into question access to contraception as well as gay and interracial marriage.
Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, a former 1980s party girl and art collector who is now known for her connections to far-right conservatives, told a German news organization the Alitos were “private friends.”
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.