The Trump administration has sued all 15 federal judges in Maryland over a court order that temporarily blocks the immediate deportation of immigrants seeking judicial review, arguing it infringes on executive authority. Read More.
Featured Stories
The federal appellate court ruled that the law violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. Read More.
Social media platform X filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, on June 17th, alleging that New York's "Stop Hiding Hate" Act violates the platform's free speech rights. Read More.
Recently Featured Dockets
Bodett et al v. G6 Hospitality LLC et al (filed 6/9/25)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Other Legal News
Appeals Court to Consider Trump’s Use of Alien Enemies Act
The New York Times, June 29, 2025
The case before one of the most conservative courts in the country is likely to be the first to reach the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice Roberts Urges Political Leaders to Tone Down Rhetoric
The New York Times, June 28, 2025
At a conference with federal judges, the chief justice did not mention the court’s decision sharply limiting their power, focusing instead on the danger of threats to the judiciary.
Closing the book on the term
SCOTUSblog, June 27, 2025
It was a bit of a shock on Thursday when Chief Justice John Roberts announced at the end of the session that the court would next sit on Friday and…
The Roberts Court Puts a Velvet Glove on the Iron Fist of Anti-Trans Backlash
Justia's Verdict, June 23, 2025
Cornell Law professor Michael C. Dorf examines the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Skrmetti upholding Tennessee’s SB1 law banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors. Professor Dorf analyzes the Court’s rejection of arguments that the law discriminates based on sex or transgender status and argues that while the Court’s opinion avoided overtly offensive rhetoric, it problematically sanitized anti-transgender legislation by treating it as legitimate medical regulation rather than acknowledging the discriminatory animus behind laws that explicitly aim to make minors “appreciate their sex” assigned at birth.
Trump’s Strategy in Law Firm Cases: Lose, Don’t Appeal, Yet Prevail
The New York Times, June 16, 2025
The handful of notable firms that were targeted by the president for punishment but chose to fight have uniformly won. Nine others have nonetheless pledged almost $1 billion in free legal work.
Statements from the Supreme Court Regarding the Death of Retired Associate Justice David Souter
Supreme Court of the United States, May 9, 2025
