Trump’s executive order looks to redefine the constitutional right of birthright citizenship to exclude the children of noncitizens. In your opinion, does he have any legal ground to stand on? No. Now,

In the few days since he returned to the White House, President Donald Trump’s sweeping executive orders and mass pardons have shattered political and legal norms. But one order is in a category of its own.

Attorney Alan Dershowitz said Monday that one question can help the U.S. Supreme Court avoid striking down President Donald Trump’s

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether states may reject religious charter schools from receiving public funding, agreeing to hear arguments in an appeal out of Oklahoma involving the first such school in the nation.

In an unsigned opinion, the Court sided with the national security concerns about TikTok rather than the First Amendment rights. There were no noted dissents.

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld a law that would ban the wildly popular social media platform in the United States on Sunday if the parent company does not sell it. Minutes before the court released its decision, Trump said on social ...

After hearing arguments on Friday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to uphold the law, meaning that TikTok will be banned effective if the parent company ByteDance does not sell the company by Sunday.

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to consider whether the state of Oklahoma may fund a proposed religious charter school, the first of its kind in the country

Sam Feder’s documentary 'Heightened Scrutiny' follows an ongoing Supreme Court case regarding transgender rights.

A state legislative committee has advanced a resolution asking that the power to regulate marriage be returned to the states.

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. So at the last conference, the Supreme Court acted on a ton of relists.

In 2006, Idaho voters passed an amendment to the state Constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, though the Supreme Court’s ruling nearly a decade later found that such laws violate the 14th Amendment’s equal protection and due process guarantees.