Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. on Monday sent a strong message to state courts and prosecutors that racial bias in jury selection is unacceptable.
- As the Supreme Court Weighs Immigration Plan, a Texas Judge’s Order Causes a Big Stir
- An Untainted Right to Counsel: Unresolved Questions in 'Luis v. United States'
- Did the Justices Send a Message to the EEOC in a Legal-Fee Case?
- 'Don’t Scream,' and Other Advice for Appellate Lawyers and Law Students
- Justices Issue Narrow Rulings on Path to Consensus
- Supreme Court Specialists, Mostly Male, Dominated Arguments This Term
Before former U.S. solicitor general Seth Waxman rose to argue his 75th case before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, it seemed to some that this milestone would be an uphill battle.
When he served as U.S. attorney for South Dakota and chairman of the U.S. Justice Department’s Native American Issues subcommittee, Brendan Johnson learned firsthand the quality of Indian tribal courts. Today, he doesn’t like the picture of tribal justice that a multibillion-dollar corporation is painting for the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court may soon be confronted with calls to overturn decades-old precedent that permits the pretrial freeze of tainted assets.
For the second time this term, the U.S. Supreme Court will put tribal courts under its microscope, this time in a case pitting the right to counsel against an epidemic of domestic violence.
The Federal Trade Commission has finally prevailed in a long-running dispute with POM Wonderful over allegedly misleading claims about the health benefits of the company’s pomegranate products.
Prosecutors are barred from freezing criminal defendants’ assets unconnected to their alleged crimes and needed to hire defense counsel of choice, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday in a decision that crossed its liberal-conservative divide.
Writing about the U.S. Supreme Court—both fiction and nonfiction—is a growing genre, but it has its pitfalls and challenges. Five authors gathered recently to discuss their work and experiences. Georgetown's Supreme Court Institute hosted the event, and C-SPAN's Book TV aired the panel discussion on April 23.
It was a David versus Goliath battle on the field of copyright law. David emerged victorious with a little help from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. Now David wants more than $2 million in attorney fees. The biblical analogy came from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg during Monday's high court arguments in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons. And just like three years ago, the justices did not seem satisfied with either argument.