Top Stories Daily Listen Now
RawStory

Supreme Court

Supreme Court could upend midterms by tossing GOP a political 'lifeline': expert

The U.S. Supreme Court could upend the midterm elections this year by striking down a key provision in the Voting Rights Act.

Republicans face long odds against maintaining its narrow House majority with President Donald Trump dragging down GOP approval with his own negative performance ratings, and no party successfully holding on to unified control of both houses of Congress and the White House in a midterm election since 1978, but the Supreme Court could offer a glimmer of hope, reported Bloomberg.

Keep reading... Show less

Supreme Court's 'nastiest' decision of 2025 pinpointed by expert — and it's a shock

Each year, legal commentators Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern review the Supreme Court's most problematic decisions — and their choice for 2025's most egregious comes as a surprise.

Writing in Slate, Lithwick declared the case NIH v. American Public Health Association as the year's worst ruling, citing it as emblematic of broader institutional dysfunction.

Keep reading... Show less

Legal experts warns 'disingenuous' Supreme Court tactic is 'producing permanent effects'

Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck sounded the alarm this weekend over the Supreme Court and its increasing use of what legal scholars have dubbed the “shadow docket,” a process by which the court institutes rulings unsigned, and without oral arguments, explanations or written opinions.

The Supreme Court has utilized the shadow docket well over a dozen times since President Donald Trump retook the White House in January, at least 14 of which were in cases that tested the president’s power, with the court siding with Trump in the vast majority of its rulings.

Keep reading... Show less

FBI should 'have a chat with Trump' after new post admits Epstein knowledge: ex-prosecutor

A former federal prosecutor said Saturday that, if she were still in her old role, she would "send out two FBI agents to have a chat with" Donald Trump after the president signaled he knows more than he previously suggested about Jeffrey Epstein's activities.

Ex-prosecutor Joyce Vance, who recently tied a New York Times report about Trump being Epstein's "wingman" to the botched rollout of DOJ's Epstein files, over the weekend wrote a piece on Substack called "He Looks Like A Witness To Me." In the essay, the legal expert noted that Trump had revealed himself to be a witness, and said she would want the FBI to interview the president.

Keep reading... Show less

Experts warn Supreme Court tried to rein Trump in but accidentally gave him his next move

The Supreme Court's decision blocking President Trump from deploying the National Guard into American cities has alarmed legal experts who fear the ruling may inadvertently create a pathway for the administration to invoke the Insurrection Act.

Trump and his aides have repeatedly suggested they would invoke the rarely used law, which would be politically unpopular but give him broad authority to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a footnote that the court's opinion "could cause the president to use the U.S. military more than the National Guard," reported CNN.

Keep reading... Show less

Trump Supreme Court battle could be dismantled by Congress members' own history

New evidence is emerging that could deal a major blow to President Donald Trump's case for stripping birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants.

The president has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to restore “the original meaning” of the 14th Amendment, which his lawyers argued in a brief meant that “children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens by birth," but new research raises questions about what lawmakers intended the amendment to do, reported the New York Times.

Keep reading... Show less

'Very bright red line': Trump legal ally panics over Supreme Court's 'crucial' next choice

A Donald Trump-associated legal ally on Sunday warned the Supreme Court about a "very bright red line" it must not cross in connection with "the most crucial case of the term."

Former GOP staffer Mike Davis, who has made headlines for his social media comments in the past, and was rumored to be on Trump's list for attorney general, chimed in on social media about the case he sees as a priority for the top court.

Keep reading... Show less

Trump allies likely headed for major Supreme Court disappointment — for once: analysis

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a major case for the Trump administration — and The New Republic's Matt Ford lays out some reasons why he believes this case may not go Trump's way.

"The Supreme Court appeared uncertain about whether it would strike down a major campaign-finance restriction during oral arguments on Tuesday, with some of the Court's conservative members questioning a right-wing push to do so," Ford wrote.

Keep reading... Show less

​Sonia Sotomayor hits Elon Musk with 'quid pro quo' accusation

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested that billionaire Elon Musk had a "quid pro quo" relationship with President Donald Trump after donating millions to get him re-elected.

During a Tuesday hearing on campaign finance laws, Sotomayor made the suggestion to an attorney for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, who was arguing to further cut back campaign finance limitations.

Keep reading... Show less

Sonia Sotomayor thumps Trump DOJ for 'asking us to destroy the structure of government'

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused President Donald Trump's Department of Justice of asking the high court to "destroy the structure of government" by overturning 90 years of legal theory on who the president could fire.

During a hearing on Monday, Solicitor General John Sauer argued that a 90-year precedent on who the president can remove "must be overruled." The hearing comes after Trump tried to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Federal Trade Commissioner appointed by Democrats.

Keep reading... Show less

Supreme Court on verge of using flawed theory to grant Trump unprecedented power: expert

The Supreme Court is poised to hear Trump v. Slaughter, a case that could fundamentally reshape the balance of power between the presidency and Congress.

At issue is whether President Donald Trump can fire the heads of independent federal agencies at will — a power the Constitution does not explicitly grant and which the Supreme Court unanimously rejected nearly a century ago, wrote New York Times columnist Kate Shaw, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

Keep reading... Show less

New Supreme Court case could bring 'dramatic change' in how the government works: analysis

During Donald Trump's second presidency, many of his critics, both left and right, are warning that he is failing to respect Congress as a "coequal branch of government." But New York Times columnist David French, a Never Trump conservative and scathing Trump critic on the right, dislikes that phrase — arguing that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress even more power than it gives presidents in the United States' system of checks and balances.

Quite a few MAGA Republicans, in contrast to French, are pushing the Unitary Executive Theory — a far-right legal theory claiming that the Constitution gives presidents sole authority over the federal government's executive branch and that Congress has no business limiting presidential authority.

Keep reading... Show less

Supreme Court poised to either make Trump 'king' or 'lame-duck' in 'coming weeks': report

With the Supreme Court poised to make rulings in several major cases testing the president’s authority, the nation’s highest court will ultimately decide “in the coming weeks and months” whether President Donald Trump ends his second term as a “king,” or as a “lame-duck president facing obstacles to his reign,” the Intelligencer reported Sunday.

“In a very real sense, the Supreme Court will determine in the coming weeks and months whether a president determined to act outside traditional executive boundaries can or cannot be meaningfully restrained by Congress or the judiciary,” writes Intelligencer columnist Ed Kilgore. “As Christian Farias put it in New York, if the Court acts quickly and decisively in Trump’s favor, it could in just three months effectively make him king.”

Keep reading... Show less