Matt Ford

A legal battle between California Governor Gavin Newsom and the president will decide whether the president’s autocratic use of the National Guard is above board.

If a picture tells a thousand words, there’s no better testament to the rot and ruin of this administration than the demolished East Wing of the White House.

In another one of their “history and tradition” tests, the justices stand poised to upend laws all across the country.

The president’s latest bit of chicanery may seem relatively muted, but it is perhaps the most anti-constitutional thing he’s done.

The Roberts court has long had a monomaniacal obsession with gutting the laws that guarantee the right to vote. They are on the brink of getting their wish.

The right-wing majority has veered hard in the direction of the unitary executive theory—and a schism with conservative legal scholars is starting to widen.

Our Founders’ designs were studiously informed by the mistakes of King Charles I. Our president seems to want to repeat them.

At oral arguments, the high court’s conservatives seemed inclined to back gay conversion therapy. But they ultimately may not stop there.

The justices just took up a challenge to a Hawaii law that bars people from carrying guns on private property against the owner’s wishes.

A recent ruling takes a hammer to our constitutional order and empowers Trump above all else—including Congress.

The Roberts court has unerringly sided against anyone seeking to curb political corruption, and it would be a shock if it decided to switch sides now.

If things stay true to form, President Trump will benefit from the Roberts court’s generous takes on executive power. The rest of us may not be so lucky.

The president’s attempt to bind his political opponents legally is hitting roadblocks galore—and the social media meltdowns have begun.

Chief Justice John Roberts has now overseen 20 years of increasingly illiberal rulings by the Supreme Court.

While the Roberts court has issued a trove of suspect decisions over the years, the one area of the law in which it’s been consistently virtuous is the First Amendment.

Between a permissive Supreme Court and his own governing innovations, the president has greatly expanded executive power. Liberals, take note.

Justice Department lawyer Erez Reuveni admitted that the Trump administration had made a mistake when it deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salvador. He was fired.

If you’re wondering how the high court’s lawless sausage got made, we must turn to an obscure line from a long-forgotten 1977 case.

Whether motivated by animus or naïveté, the justice’s rationale for permitting law enforcement to racially profile suspects has dark implications for democracy.

If the chief justice was once a judicial institutionalist, he has become all too eager to cast norms and precedent aside in matters that benefit Trump.