U.S. Supreme Court

Rarely has a case had less legal meaning and greater moral weight.

The court swept aside a precedent that endangers countless regulations — and transfers power from the executive branch to Congress and the courts.

A second Biden term would be unusually dangerous for the country in a very significant way.

Four cases backed by conservative activists in recent years have combined to diminish the power of the Environmental Protection Agency.

In finding that prosecutors misused an obstruction law to charge rioters, the justices highlighted the lack of an established legal blueprint for addressing an attack on the foundations of democracy.

In states that have banned abortion, hospitals have struggled to treat pregnant women facing health risks. A Supreme Court decision this week did not help.

The Bible has a deep history in American classrooms, but the state’s provocative superintendent wants to broadly expand its influence.

Two rulings this week by the Republican-appointed majority add to its steady pursuit of enfeebling the ability of the administrative state to impose rules on powerful business interests.

Stephen Bannon will have to begin serving four months in prison on Monday, after the court turned aside his request to remain free while he appeals his conviction for contempt of Congress.

The combination of President Biden’s debate performance and adverse Supreme Court rulings left Democrats reeling and in despair with elections not far off.

Successive successes reinvigorated Donald Trump’s campaign a month after he became the first major party nominee convicted of a felony.

Everyone in our system, including judges and members of Congress, will be nudged to do their proper constitutional work.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has made it easier to sue agencies and get their rules struck down.

The decision overturning a longstanding precedent is likely to spawn challenges to dozens of tax regulations.

The decision overturning a precedent known as Chevron deference was celebrated by those who would target medication abortion and rights for transgender people.

Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices’ wives raised serious questions about their impartiality.

Challenges could range from whether tainted spinach can be traced back to a farm to a decision on whether drugs are safe and effective enough to be sold in the United States.

The decision is expected to prompt a rush of litigation challenging regulations across the entire federal government, from food safety to the environment.

The ruling that the Justice Department misused a 2002 law in charging a pro-Trump rioter who entered the Capitol could have an impact on hundreds of other cases, including one against Donald Trump.

A foundational 1984 decision had required courts to defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes, underpinning regulations on health care, safety and the environment.

The case is likely to have broad ramifications for how cities across the country respond to homelessness.

The court’s strategy of avoidance and delay cannot last and may have been shaped by a desire to avoid controversy in an election year.

El caso, uno de varios que se centran en cómo se aplica la Primera Enmienda a las plataformas tecnológicas, fue desestimado porque los demandantes carecían de pruebas para legitimar sus reclamos.

The Trumpist right is presenting aggressive legal theories that fail again and again.

A reporter observed a day of messages to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. She does not know the callers’ names, but she’ll never forget their stories.

It’s a busy time for a reporter on the Supreme Court beat, with momentous decisions coming down one after another.

Half of the water flowing through regional river basins starts in so-called ephemeral streams. Last year, the Supreme Court curtailed federal protections for these waterways.

We scrutinized the presidential candidates’ recent claims on abortion, health care, crime and climate change ahead of the debate.

Plaintiffs and the company vowed to renegotiate but the talks will be challenging after the court struck down a provision the Sacklers had insisted on in exchange for $6 billion.

A majority of the justices voted to dismiss the case, reinstating a lower-court ruling that paused the state’s near-total abortion ban. The ruling mirrored a version inadvertently posted a day earlier.

Common in executive agencies, such tribunals hear enforcement actions without juries — a practice the court’s conservative supermajority said violated the Constitution.

The justices rejected a bankruptcy settlement maneuver that would have protected members of the Sackler family from civil claims related to the opioid epidemic.

Three states challenged the administration’s “good neighbor” plan, meant to protect downwind states from harmful emissions.

Plus, is the future “made in India”?

A rare glimpse into where the country’s biggest legal cases unfold.

The court, which has limited the sweep of several anti-corruption laws, distinguished after-the-fact rewards from before-the-fact bribes.

Bloomberg published a copy of an opinion that appeared briefly on the Supreme Court’s website and seemed to concern an Idaho abortion case.

A document posted briefly to the court’s website suggested a majority of the justices would reinstate a lower-court ruling that paused the state’s near-total abortion ban.

The case, one of several this term on how the First Amendment applies to technology platforms, was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue.

It’s impossible to see the court’s decision upholding a law disarming domestic abusers as anything but an exercise in institutional self-preservation.

The deal brings an ambiguous end to a legal saga that has jeopardized the ability of journalists to report on military, intelligence or diplomatic information that officials deem secret.

The move comes as states around the country have pushed to curtail transgender rights.

A new study analyzed 50 years of friend-of-the-court briefs and found that abortion opponents were more relentless than their adversaries, with some reflected in the justices’ opinions.

An outside group supporting President Biden is embarking on a million-dollar campaign to focus voters’ attention on the makeup of the Supreme Court.

Modern American lawmakers are not limited by the colonial imagination.

Some major Supreme Court decisions this term, including a ruling that allowed the government to prohibit people subject to restraining orders from having guns, have underscored the pervasiveness of domestic violence.

The decision amounted to a retreat from what had been an unbroken series of major decisions expanding gun rights that started in 2008.

Stephen K. Bannon, the Trump ally convicted of contempt of Congress, is scheduled to start a four-month prison term on July 1 unless the justices intervene.

A narrow Supreme Court ruling left the door open for Congress to expand taxes on billionaires, but it’s not a guarantee.

Sylvia Gonzalez, a Texas city councilwoman, said officials violated the First Amendment by arresting her after she criticized the city manager.

Responses to Ross Douthat’s interview with Senator Vance. Also: Clarence Thomas and the Supreme Court’s reputation; hair loss; a perplexing headline.

The dispute, which was closely watched by experts, involved a one-time foreign income tax, but many saw it as a broader challenge to pre-emptively block Congress from passing a wealth tax.

Democrats sought to quickly reinstate a ban on gun bump stocks after a Supreme Court ruling. It was the latest Senate floor fight to end in a predictable stalemate.

The court’s decision has the potential to undercut President Biden’s efforts to restrict other gun accessories that enable semiautomatic rifles to fire at speeds rivaling those of machine guns.

It shouldn’t take so long for the justices to consider an outlandish claim.

Democrats failed in their effort to override last week’s Supreme Court ruling with legislation, but saw some political benefits to the clash.

In “The Indispensable Right,” Jonathan Turley argues that the First Amendment has been deeply compromised from the start.

Case after case challenging gun restrictions cites the same Georgetown professor. His seemingly independent work has undisclosed ties to pro-gun interests.

Responses to an essay about “no promise” graduates. Also: Justice Alito and “godliness”; Sudan’s tragedy; whistle-blower protections; dreading election night.

New challenges to the Supreme Court’s image of probity and detachment seem to keep coming.

To win a union campaign, workers need a strong organizing committee and a hammer to enforce the right to organize. The law is not that hammer.

Aunque la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos dictaminó la confirmación al acceso a la mifepristona, es probable que el caso sea reactivado por tres estados liderados por republicanos como demandantes.

A majority of the justices found that the government had fulfilled its duty to tell immigrants about their court dates, even when the information was incomplete.

Even as the size of its docket has shrunk, the court has deferred a larger share of its decisions to the very end of its term.

Responses to a column by David French and his former church. Also: An extremist Supreme Court; a “failing candidacy”; help after prison.

Machine guns on the street are now legal again.

The devices allow semiautomatic guns to fire more rapidly. They were banned after one of the deadliest mass shootings in modern U.S. history, at a Las Vegas concert in 2017.

Plus, New York targets rogue smoke shops.

There cannot be compromise on the question of American democracy.

Flags, financial disclosures and the fragility of SCOTUS.

A congressional committee released documents showing that Justice Clarence Thomas had not disclosed three private jet trips paid for by the Texas billionaire Harlan Crow.

The decision does not eliminate efforts to restrict the availability of the pill.

A ruling on technical grounds means a widely used drug will soon come under attack again.

The decision was unanimous but fractured in rationale, with several justices objecting to the majority’s use of a history-based test.

Though the Supreme Court ruled upheld access to mifepristone, the case is likely to be revived by three Republican-led states as the plaintiffs.

The opinion in the case focused entirely on standing, the legal doctrine that requires plaintiffs to show that they have suffered direct and concrete injuries in order to sue.

One-fifth of abortions are being done via telemedicine, nearly half in states with abortion bans or restrictions.

In a blow to the National Labor Relations Board, the justices made it more difficult to order employers to reinstate fired workers.

More than half of people who get legal abortions in the United States — and three-quarters in Europe — use medication abortion.

His remarks should not have been controversial.