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

Stopping and reversing the degradation of the Trump era will require a more radical strategy—and a bigger target.

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 court’s conservatives spent last term bailing out the administration with shadow docket shams. Now they must reckon with all the cans they kicked down the road.

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.

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.

Will they follow their own precedents and rule against the president, or twist themselves in knots to give him yet another win?

The most recent petition demanding a repeal of the landmark gay marriage law has lit headlines afire, but there are signs that the Supreme Court is not yet ready to do the deed.

For the court’s conservative bloc, the line between upholding the Constitution and serving as Donald Trump’s personal attorneys has all but disappeared.

The Roberts court majority seems bound and determined to undermine the American constitutional order.

The Roberts Court has asked for reargument in a key redistricting case, a move that strongly suggests the conservative majority is about to whack the Voting Rights Act again.

While the court’s ruling was not as immediately disastrous as it might have been, it sets the stage for a parade of horribles in the years to come.

The Roberts court will have to resolve a significant Fourth Amendment dispute next term. What they decide could potentially expand the “community caretaker” doctrine for police.

The high court is stretching an interpretive philosophy to the breaking point to avoid confrontations with Trump.

The chief Supreme Court justice only lightly pushed back on Donald Trump’s efforts to control the judiciary.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticized the president’s unsettling attacks on the judiciary.

The high court’s recent run at rewriting the Constitution has come for the establishment clause.