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
RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt
SCOTUSblog, April 26, 2024
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here. The Supreme Court is back in the relist business with a vengeance. On Monday, it granted review of the Biden... The post RICO injury, federal jurisdiction, and giving veterans the benefit of the doubt appeared first on SCOTUSblog.
Conservative Justices Take Argument Over Trump’s Immunity in Unexpected Direction
The New York Times, April 26, 2024
Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing was memorable for its discussion of coups, assassinations and internments — but very little about the former president’s conduct.
The Supreme Court and Presidential Immunity
The New York Times, April 26, 2024
Readers express concern about how the justices will rule on Donald Trump’s immunity claim. Also: An environmental decision for Alaska; Ralph Nader, on third parties.
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
