'Too Much Law' Gives Prosecutors Enormous Power To Ruin People's Lives
In a new book, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch describes the "human toll" of proliferating criminal penalties.
In a new book, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch describes the "human toll" of proliferating criminal penalties.
Insofar as the justices split, it was due to long-standing disagreement over the nature of the Court's original jurisdiction.
Joan Biskupic reports that the justices were initially inclined to back Idaho in the EMTALA case, until they realized the case was messier than they had thought.
Activists and politicians look for almost any excuse to claim that judges should withdraw from cases. Their calls for recusal may be frivolous, but it gives them an opportunity to criticize judges they don't like.
We need not conjure "extreme hypotheticals" to understand the danger posed by an "energetic executive" who feels free to flout the law.
Plus: A listener asks whether Bruce Springsteen's song Born in the U.S.A is actually patriotic.
Contrary to progressive criticism, curtailing bureaucratic power is not about protecting "the wealthy and powerful."
By requiring "absolute" immunity for some "official acts" and "presumptive" immunity for others, the justices cast doubt on the viability of Donald Trump's election interference prosecution.
The decision also negates two counts of the federal indictment accusing Donald Trump of illegally interfering in the 2020 presidential election.
The Court says Chevron deference allows bureaucrats to usurp a judicial function, creating "an eternal fog of uncertainty" about what the law allows or requires.
The justices are rushing to close out the term before the end of June.
The case hinged on the ATF’s statutory authority, not the Second Amendment.
Plus: A listener asks the editors about the Selective Service.
Six justices agreed that federal regulators had misconstrued the statutory definition of a machine gun.
Plus: A single-issue voter asks the editors for some voting advice in the 2024 presidential election.
Plus: The L.P. candidate for president, flooding in Brazil, TikTok influencers going after rich husbands, and more...
There was a glaring mismatch between the charges against the former president and what prosecutors described as the essence of his crime.
To convert a hush payment into 34 felonies, prosecutors are relying on a chain of assumptions with several weak links.
Some interesting comments at the Fifth Circuit Judicial Conference
The district court recognizes that the plaintiffs lack standing, but grants them leave to amend.
A civil discussion on the U.S. Supreme Court and its role in American life, past and present.
A unanimous panel orders dismissal of Juliana v. United States, bringing this zombie litigation to a close.
The two are not the same, and may sometimes be in conflict with each other.
Most of the justices seem skeptical of granting Donald Trump complete immunity from criminal prosecution for "official acts."
The Supreme Court will decide whether former presidents can avoid criminal prosecution by avoiding impeachment and removal.
The leading possibilities are all problematic in one way or another.
A welcome paper analyzing the practice of en banc review on the federal circuit courts.
The justices reframed the question presented in the case and expedited its consideration.
Several justices seemed troubled by an ATF rule that purports to ban bump stocks by reinterpreting the federal definition of machine guns.
The Supreme Court snubbed Sidney Powell and a court orders Mike Lindell to pay up.
The essence of the case, the Manhattan D.A. says, is that Trump "corrupt[ed] a presidential election" by concealing embarrassing information.
The appeals court says it "cannot accept that the office of the Presidency places its former occupants above the law for all time thereafter."
The Justice Department is wasting no time seeking to put this zombie litigation out of its misery, and the plaintiffs are not happy about it.
A watchdog group cites ATF "whistleblowers" who describe a proposed policy that would be plainly inconsistent with federal law.
Under the Controlled Substances Act, the agency does not have the discretion to "deschedule marijuana altogether."
The new libertarian president believes in free markets and the rule of law. When people have those things, prosperity happens.
Some candid remarks at the University of California at Berkeley
Will Judge Aiken finally accede to the law and allow this particular climate case to end?
His understanding of effective leadership and policing should repel anyone who cares about civil liberties and the rule of law.
The justices seem inclined to revise or ditch a 1984 precedent that requires deference to executive agencies' statutory interpretations.
Excessive judicial deference gives administrative agencies a license to rewrite the law in their favor.
That's bad news for Americans.
As one appeals court judge pointed out, Trump's defense could literally let a president get away with murder.
Judge Aiken's reckless defiance of legal rules is turning the "Kids Climate Case" into a zombie climate case.
The former Attorney General disagrees with me on whether state and local government climate change lawsuits belong in federal court.
His lawyers say no jury can ever consider charges based on his "official acts" as president, which include his efforts to reverse Joe Biden's election.
Yet another federal circuit court of appeals rejects energy company removal claims.
Another climate change lawsuit filed on behalf of children, this time against the Environmental Protection Agency.