Tag: Barrett, Amy Coney

Why an Immunity Ruling in Trump’s Favor Might Not Alter the Shape of His Trial

If the Supreme Court rules that Donald J. Trump is immune from being charged with crimes over official actions he took as president, it would be a momentous decision for the future of executive power and American-style democracy. But it is far from certain that such a ruling would derail the election subversion case against […]

Read More

How ‘History and Tradition’ Rulings Are Changing American Law

In November 2022, a group of L.G.B.T.Q. students at West Texas A&M University started planning a drag show for the following spring. They wanted to raise money for suicide prevention and stand up for queer self-expression at a time when conservatives in Texas, in the name of protecting children, were mobilizing to shut drag shows […]

Read More

How a Supreme Court Immunity Ruling Could Affect Trump’s Election Case

If the Supreme Court’s hearing on Thursday about former President Donald J. Trump’s claims of executive immunity is any indication of how the court might ultimately rule, the justices could end up helping Mr. Trump in two ways. The justices signaled that their ruling, when it comes, could lead to some allegations being stripped from […]

Read More

Conservative Justices Take Argument Over Trump’s Immunity in Unexpected Direction

Before the Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday on former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution, his stance was widely seen as a brazen and cynical bid to delay his trial. The practical question in the case, it was thought, was not whether the court would rule against him but […]

Read More

Takeaways from Supreme Court Arguments on Trump’s Immunity Claim

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday about Donald J. Trump’s claim that the federal charges accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election must be thrown out because he is immune from being prosecuted for any official act he took as president. Here are some takeaways. Several justices seemed to want to define […]

Read More

Takeaways From the Supreme Court Argument on Idaho’s Abortion Ban

The abortion case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday featured vigorous questioning and comments, particularly by the three liberal justices. At issue is whether Idaho’s near-total ban on abortion is so strict that it violates a federal law requiring emergency care for any patient, including providing abortions for pregnant women in dire situations. A ruling […]

Read More

Supreme Court Arguments on Idaho’s Abortion Ban: 5 Takeaways

The abortion case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday featured vigorous questioning and comments, particularly by the three liberal justices. At issue is whether Idaho’s near-total ban on abortion is so strict that it violates a federal law requiring emergency care for any patient, including providing abortions for pregnant women in dire situations. A ruling […]

Read More

Supreme Court Justices Say They Get Along. Should We Care?

The Supreme Court is hurting. I can say that with confidence — not based on any inside information but on the external evidence of how hard some of the justices are working to show that everyone on the court really does get along. “When we disagree, our pens are sharp, but on a personal level, […]

Read More

Why Is Adeel Mangi’s Confirmation Still in Jeopardy?

In 1999, a Florida lawyer, Anuraag Singhal, represented a man convicted of gunning down a police officer. Singhal had to somehow persuade a jury that his client, Jeffrey Lee Weaver, should face life in prison rather than the electric chair, the punishment the hard-charging prosecutor sought. “I hope you can find some love in your […]

Read More