Pull to refresh
Logo
Daily Brief
Following
Why Ranks Sign Up
Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Federal court

Appears in 21 stories

Stories

The immigration judges’ gag-rule case hits the Supreme Court—and the justices refuse to freeze it

Rule Changes

Refused to halt remand; kept door open to pause discovery later

Immigration judges say the Justice Department has effectively muzzled them: speak publicly about immigration and you need permission, and what you say can be steered into "agency talking points." The Trump administration's response has been procedural. You don't get federal court—go through the civil-service machinery first.

Updated Yesterday

Supreme Court weighs Louisiana challenge to mifepristone mail-order rules

Rule Changes

Deliberating on stay and merits

The Supreme Court has until Thursday at 5 p.m. ET to decide whether mifepristone can keep shipping by mail. Alito's stay, expiring May 14, is all that blocks a May 1 Fifth Circuit ruling that would end telehealth prescribing and mail delivery of the drug nationwide.

Updated 3 days ago

Iran tariffs threaten to unravel the U.S.-China trade truce

Rule Changes

Ruled 6-3 on February 20 that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs, voiding all emergency-based trade duties including the Iran secondary levy

The legal foundation for Trump's tariff strategy collapsed on February 20 when the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs. The decision voided both the 25% Iran secondary levy and other emergency-based duties on China. Trump signed a 10% global replacement under Section 122 of the Trade Act within hours, dropping China's effective rate from 47% to about 35%.

Updated 5 days ago

U.S. walks away from its flagship FIFA TV bribery case

Rule Changes

Issued rulings tightening corruption law; now asked to send Lopez–Full Play case back for dismissal

U.S. prosecutors spent years proving that Hernan Lopez, a former Fox International Channels CEO, and the sports marketing firm Full Play bribed South American soccer officials to lock down lucrative TV rights. A Brooklyn jury convicted them in 2023.

Updated 6 days ago

Trump’s unitary-executive showdown with independent agencies

Rule Changes

Hearing and shaping core precedent on presidential power over independent agencies

In 2025, President Donald Trump challenged the 1935 Humphrey's Executor precedent by firing and removing independent agency officials before their terms expired.

Updated 6 days ago

Trump’s birthright citizenship order heads to the Supreme Court

Rule Changes

Oral arguments scheduled for April 1, 2026, in Trump v. Barbara

On January 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14160, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." The order denies automatic citizenship to U.S.-born children when the mother is unlawfully present or on a temporary visa and the father is neither a citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. It challenges 125 years of legal consensus (grounded in the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court's 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark) that nearly all children born on U.S. soil are automatically citizens.

Updated 6 days ago

Trump's mid-decade redistricting push reshapes the 2026 map

Rule Changes

April 29, 2026 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais effectively gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, removing the primary federal check on racially drawn congressional maps

Congressional maps are normally redrawn once a decade, after the Census. In August 2025, Texas broke that convention at President Trump's urging—redrawing its map to target five Democratic-held seats. The move triggered a chain reaction. Then, on April 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court's 6–3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais effectively gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act—the main federal tool used to block racially discriminatory maps—removing a key legal shield that had constrained Republican legislatures for decades. Within days, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a new congressional map targeting four incumbent Democrats, Alabama's governor called a special redistricting session, Louisiana suspended its upcoming primaries to allow a full map redraw, and Tennessee's House passed a bill splitting Memphis into three Republican-leaning districts.

Updated May 7

Supreme Court weighs the future of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais

Rule Changes

Callais ruling final as of May 6, 2026; denied motion to recall; issued forthwith order May 4 making decision immediately operative

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on April 29, 2026, in Louisiana v. Callais that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965—the main federal tool minority voters have used for four decades to challenge racially discriminatory maps—now requires plaintiffs to prove intentional discrimination before courts can order a remedy. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion; Justice Elena Kagan dissented for the three liberal justices, writing that the ruling makes Section 2 'all but a dead letter' and marks 'the latest chapter in the majority's now-completed demolition of the Voting Rights Act.' On May 4, the Court ordered its judgment to take effect immediately, bypassing the usual 25-day window for rehearing requests; on May 6, it denied civil rights plaintiffs' motion to recall the ruling, making the decision final and operative.

Updated May 7

Texas mid-decade redistricting battle

Rule Changes

Issued stay reinstating the Texas map

States usually redraw congressional districts once a decade, after the census. Texas just redrew its map four years early—and the U.S. Supreme Court has now cleared it for the 2026 midterm elections.

Updated Apr 27

Supreme Court narrows military contractor immunity in Bagram bombing ruling

Rule Changes

Issued controlling opinion April 22, 2026

For nearly four decades, military contractors have enjoyed broad immunity from injured service members' lawsuits under a doctrine extending the federal government's battlefield protections to its private partners. On April 22, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the shield has limits: when the government doesn't order or authorize the conduct that caused the injury, the contractor is on its own.

Updated Apr 23

America's oil squeeze on Cuba

Force in Play

IEEPA tariff ruling anticipated post-February 20 recess

The United States has imposed economic pressure on Cuba for 64 years. Now, for the first time, Washington is threatening to punish any country that sells oil to the island. President Trump's January 29 executive order creates a tariff mechanism targeting third countries that supply Cuban fuel—a significant escalation that goes beyond traditional bilateral sanctions to coerce allies and trading partners into joining an energy blockade. The strategy has proven devastatingly effective: Cuba's national power grid collapsed entirely on March 17, 2026, leaving approximately 10 million people without electricity and triggering ten consecutive days of street protests—the most visible civil unrest in years. Partial restoration occurred on March 18 after 29 hours, but the blackout deepened shortages of food, medicine, and water, and included the vandalization of a Cuban Communist Party provincial office in Morón, signaling fractures in state control. On March 21, Cuba blocked a US Embassy request to import diesel for generators, escalating diplomatic tensions amid ongoing rolling blackouts.

Updated Mar 21

Supreme Court tests whether marijuana users can own guns

Rule Changes

Hearing the case; ruling expected by June 2026

Since 1968, federal law has barred anyone who uses illegal drugs from owning a firearm. On March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court heard arguments over whether that ban violates the Second Amendment—a question that could reshape gun rights for the roughly 50 million Americans who use marijuana in states where it is legal under state law but still illegal under federal law.

Updated Mar 2

Trump's assault on federal reserve independence

Rule Changes

Hearing Trump v. Cook; decision expected by July 2026

No president has fired a sitting Federal Reserve governor in the central bank's 112-year history. Donald Trump is trying to be the first—and to replace the Fed chair with a loyalist. His August 2025 attempt to remove Governor Lisa Cook over unproven mortgage fraud allegations escalated into a Supreme Court showdown that exposed the fragility of Fed independence. In a striking January 21, 2026 hearing, all nine justices—including three Trump appointees—expressed skepticism about Trump's removal claims, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh warning the administration's position "would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve." Fed Chair Jerome Powell attended the arguments and later called the case "perhaps the most important legal case in the Fed's 113-year history." Nine days later, Trump nominated Kevin Warsh, a 55-year-old former Fed governor and longtime Trump ally, to replace Powell when his term expires in May 2026.

Updated Feb 5

Supreme Court to define who counts as a 'consumer' under video privacy law

Rule Changes

Reviewing VPPA consumer definition

Congress passed the Video Privacy Protection Act in 1988 after a reporter published Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork's video rental history. Thirty-eight years later, the law has become the basis for hundreds of class action lawsuits against media companies using tracking pixels on their websites—and the Supreme Court just agreed to decide who can sue under it.

Updated Jan 31

Troops in American cities

Force in Play

Blocked Chicago deployment 6-3

The last time a president invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy federal troops in American cities was 1992, during the Los Angeles riots. President Trump has deployed over 10,000 National Guard troops and active-duty Marines to six cities since June 2025—without invoking that law. The Congressional Budget Office now reports the seven-month operation cost taxpayers $496 million, with ongoing deployments projected to add $93 million monthly.

Updated Jan 29

Supreme court rules restitution is criminal punishment

Rule Changes

Issued ruling

For decades, federal courts disagreed on a fundamental question: Is court-ordered restitution a criminal punishment or a civil remedy? The distinction matters because the Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause bars retroactive increases in criminal punishment—but not civil obligations. On January 20, 2026, the Supreme Court unanimously answered: restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act is plainly criminal punishment, and defendants cannot be held to payment terms that didn't exist when they committed their crimes.

Updated Jan 21

The Second Amendment after Bruen

Rule Changes

Set Bruen precedent; hearing two more gun cases in 2026

The Ninth Circuit just struck down California's ban on openly carrying guns in urban areas, ruling that a law affecting 95% of the state violates the Second Amendment. Judge Lawrence VanDyke wrote that open carry was widely protected at America's founding—exactly the kind of historical analysis the Supreme Court demanded in its 2022 Bruen decision. The ruling creates a circuit split with the Second Circuit, which said states can ban one form of carry as long as they allow the other.

Updated Jan 21

Louisiana's $745 million coastal verdict hangs on WWII contracts

Rule Changes

Deciding jurisdictional question

A Louisiana jury ordered Chevron to pay $745 million in April 2025 for wrecking coastal wetlands through decades of oil drilling. Now the Supreme Court will decide if that verdict stands—or if Chevron can escape to federal court by claiming it was acting under federal orders when it refined aviation fuel during World War II. The catch: the lawsuit concerns oil production, not refining, and much of the damage happened decades after the war ended.

Updated Jan 14

Supreme Court takes up transgender sports bans

Rule Changes

Hearing oral arguments; decision expected by June 2026

The Supreme Court heard over three hours of oral arguments on January 13, 2026, in two cases that will determine whether states can bar transgender students from competing on sports teams matching their gender identity. During the proceedings, the Court's conservative majority signaled strong support for upholding state restrictions, though several justices appeared wary of issuing an overly broad ruling. The cases—Little v. Hecox from Idaho and West Virginia v. B.P.J.—challenge laws under both Title IX and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

Updated Jan 13

Supreme Court opens prison gates wider for federal inmates

Rule Changes

Issued 5-4 ruling expanding federal prisoner habeas rights

The Supreme Court just handed federal prisoners a major win, ruling 5-4 that they can challenge their convictions repeatedly—something most courts have blocked for decades. Michael Bowe, serving 24 years for armed robbery, asked to revisit his case based on new legal precedent. The Eleventh Circuit said no. On January 9, 2026, the Supreme Court said yes, declaring that a key provision of the 1996 anti-terrorism law applies only to state prisoners, not federal inmates.

Updated Jan 11

Trump's expanding travel ban: from seven countries to thirty-nine

Rule Changes

2018 ruling in Trump v. Hawaii established broad presidential authority over immigration

Trump signed his first travel ban seven days into his presidency, blocking entry from seven Muslim-majority countries and igniting protests at airports nationwide. Courts blocked it within a week. Eight years later, after Supreme Court victories, a Biden reversal, and a return to power, Trump's December 2025 expansion restricts entry from 39 countries—affecting one in eight people worldwide and eliminating exemptions that previously protected immediate family members of U.S. citizens.

Updated Dec 28, 2025