The associate justice’s dissent in the tariffs case deserves some extra attention, because it is hopelessly uncoupled from law, history, and the Constitution.

It may look like the justices made a clean break with the president, but the mess the conservative bloc made for itself raises some major questions.

President Trump is pissed at the conservative justices who voted to strike down his tariffs.

Now that the Supreme Court’s conservative bloc is putting the unitary executive theory to the test, its cracks are beginning to show—and its proponents are flailing.

The justice has famously endeavored to do right by Native Americans and restore their place in the constitutional order. Here’s how that work is going.

At oral arguments in the tariffs case, the conservative justices seemed ready to hit the president with the legal rationale they used to bedevil Joe Biden.

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.

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.

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.

The Supreme Court’s burgeoning conflict with the lower courts is rooted in whether the courts should show fealty to law and legal precedent or to an authoritarian president.

The Show Me State’s ambitious attempt to nullify federal law may be several steps too far for many of the high court’s conservatives.

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.

The Supreme Court’s decision could empower multiple states to slash funding to the crucial health services provider.

Donald Trump tore into Leonard Leo, who recommended several of Trump’s Supreme Court picks.

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

The Native plaintiffs have won over a wide variety of allies to their case. But for some reason, the high court is dragging its feet in making a decision.

The Supreme Court has rebuffed these efforts before, but that was nearly a half-century ago. Today’s MAGA conservatives see a more favorable legal environment—and they might be right.

The high court’s 7-2 decision suggests broad agreement on a contentious issue. But if you read between the lines, there are fault lines everywhere.

Trump’s executive order stripping federal workers of legal protections is the most dangerous of his unlawful power grabs. But there is a way to win them back.

The high court appeared ready to deal a savage blow to the rights and livelihoods of a group that conservatives have spent the year targeting.