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
What a TikTok Ban Could Actually Mean, and More
The New York Times, April 24, 2024
Plus, clashes over Donald Trump’s gag order.
The Supreme Court Should Not Come Between Trump and Voters
The New York Times, April 24, 2024
The court’s delay may have stripped citizens of the criminal justice system’s most effective mechanism for determining disputed facts: a trial.
Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration
SCOTUSblog, April 23, 2024
Monday’s argument in Smith v. Spizziri was this month’s case under the Federal Arbitration Act. This one explores what a trial court can do when it refers a pending suit to arbitration. Section 3 of the FAA says that if the court refers the case... The post Justices dubious about dismissing suits while waiting for arbitration 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
