On Wednesday, April 24, 2024, President Joe Biden signed legislation requiring Chinese tech firm ByteDance to divest itself of the TikTok app or face a ban in the United States. Read More.
Featured Stories
The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that employees are not required to show significant harm in federal discrimination lawsuits involving job transfers. Read More.
President Biden is expected to veto a resolution disapproving a rule that expands the definition of joint employers under federal labor law. Read More.
Recently Featured Dockets
Santos v. Kimmel et al (filed 2/16/24)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Other Legal News
Dozens of Protesters Call for Justice Outside Trump’s Trial in Manhattan
The New York Times, April 25, 2024
Marchers closed down a street calling for the former president to face justice.
Trump Visits a Construction Site in Manhattan Before His Trial Resumes
The New York Times, April 25, 2024
The early morning campaign stop exemplifies the balancing act required for a candidate who is also a criminal defendant.
Justices appear likely to side with Starbucks in union organizing dispute
SCOTUSblog, April 25, 2024
The oral argument Tuesday in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney was surprisingly one-sided, as the justices seem to have come to the bench settled on the view that the lower court’s ruling could not stand. The basic issue in the case is what the National Labor... The post Justices appear likely to side with Starbucks in union organizing dispute appeared first on SCOTUSblog.
Questions About Assassinations Test the Limits of Trump’s Immunity Claim
The New York Times, April 15, 2024
Three Supreme Court briefs from former military leaders and intelligence officials explore whether presidents may be prosecuted for ordering unlawful killings.
Recent Headlines Confirm the Inadequacy of the Supreme Court’s Reasoning in Trump v. Anderson
Justia's Verdict, April 12, 2024
UC Davis Law professor Vikram David Amar discusses how the decentralized nature of the U.S. presidential election system allows individual states to have varying rules that can significantly impact the overall outcome, as illustrated by recent examples from Ohio, Nebraska, and the Supreme Court case Texas v. Pennsylvania. Professor Amar argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Anderson, which emphasized the need for uniformity in presidential candidate ballot access across states, was not adequately defended by the Justices, as it failed to address why the Constitution permits such consequential disuniformity in election administration among states.
AO Director Announcement
Supreme Court of the United States, January 23, 2024
