The Supreme Court will have a chance to decide whether lawmakers went too far in regulating the industry.

The recent Texas razor-wire case highlights the way the justices can use the so-called “shadow docket” to resolve disputes while obfuscating their rationale.

The Satanic Temple is helping students form after-school clubs, and parents are furious—but they’re blaming the wrong people.

The high court’s new guidelines have come in for a lot of criticism, but they’re the perfect platform for reformers to keep applying pressure.

An appeals panel led by a Trump appointee is giving the Supreme Court the chance to gut one of the few major provisions remaining in the law.

The New York lawmaker’s biggest mistake was not mastering the way the get-rich-quick game is played in Washington.

Originalism is all the rage on the right, but a gun case at the Supreme Court is exposing its absurdity—even to the conservative justices.

The justices heard a case challenging a federal law restricting guns for domestic abusers—and saw an opportunity to clean up the mess their previous gun ruling has caused.

Justices Roberts and Barrett joined the liberals to uphold federal regulations on so-called “ghost guns.”

Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are defiant, the rest are varying levels of quiet.

The Roberts court made a rare ruling in favor of voting rights back in July, but a later decision may have given state lawmakers a winning hand to play.

Instead of greeting the most recent set of decisions from the Roberts Court with downcast disses, critics should recognize—and celebrate—the way they influenced the results.

A federal appeals court ruling could have a massive impact on the future of gun safety in America.

The Federalist Society’s leader is hoping to pluck a “get out of jail free” card from Donald Trump’s back pocket.

Critics of the liberal justices’ ethical lapses aren’t trying to make the case for reform—they’re trying to kill it.

The ahistorical dishonesty of the Supreme Court justice’s concurrence in the Harvard and UNC cases exposes the originalism fraud.

The Supreme Court justice’s buckraking hardly compares to that of her conservative colleagues. But it still says a lot about how much Washington has changed.

The affirmative action ruling doesn’t end the diversity debate so much as push it into new areas.

The conservative justice is on course for an originalist fight with Neil Gorsuch.

It does illustrate the judicial ethics system’s blind spots, however.