US/Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the United States of America aka SCOTUS, USSC

About

The Supreme Court of the United States is the final arbiter in matters of interstate law in the US.

During the first Trump administration, Republicans -- for a number of arbitrary reasons -- held up Supreme Court judicial nominees advanced by the Democrats, and then later rushed their own appointments through (even though the same objections should have applied), resulting in an unbalanced 6-3 conservatist majority where before there had been a more balanced 4-5 split. This majority has continued into the second Trump administration, with the majority returning increasingly far-right decisions and even overturning some of their own prior decisions -- again, for arbitrary reasons.

Links

Reference

• Wikipedia
• Conservapedia
• dKosopedia
• SourceWatch
• RationalWiki
• ScotusWiki: wiki for case details (not accessible on 2026/03/29)

News

• 2026-03-26 05:40 UTC [L..T] Sonia Sotomayor Just Issued a Stirring Defense of One of Trump’s Biggest Targets «This week, the Supreme Court effectively shielded the nation’s law enforcement from consequences when it treats journalism as a crime. In rejecting an appeal in Villarreal v. Alaniz, the court has allowed local officials in Texas to remain immune from prosecution for arresting a journalist who published information she received from a government official. This case presented a strikingly simple question: Does it violate a journalist’s First Amendment rights if they are arrested for requesting and publishing information that a government employee willingly hands over? A lower court split sharply over the answer, but this Supreme Court, given the opportunity to weigh in to help settle the law and protect the freedom of the press all over the country, decided that the best answer was no answer at all, refusing to take up the case. In response, a single justice, Sonia Sotomayor, wrote a scathing critique of the court’s decision...»
• 2020-09-28 [L..T] How A Conservative 6-3 Majority Would Reshape The Supreme Court «...Supreme Court experts [..] stress that we’re likely to see the legal conservative movement seize this moment, and as such, we should brace for a wave of rulings that move the law fundamentally to the right – on everything from hot-button cultural issues like gun rights and abortion to more legalistic, but nevertheless important, topics like the power of the executive branch.»
• 2020-09-18 [L..T] Murkowski: 'Fair is fair,' no Supreme Court confirmation before the inauguration. Who's joining her? «Remarkably, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, just told Alaska Public Media on Friday afternoon that she would not confirm a new Supreme Court justice before next year's inauguration. "Fair is fair," she said speaking hypothetically before the announcement of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's passing.»
• 2014-04-23 [L..T] US Supreme Court Rules Rick Scott's Drug Testing of State Employees Unconstitutional «The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down Florida Governor Rick Scott's petition to reevaluate its May 2013 ruling that drug-testing state employees is a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. This decision comes on the heels of a study that shows that drug testing welfare recipients actually cost the Sunshine State more money than it saved – over $45,000, in fact.»
• 2014-04-22 [L..T] The End Of Affirmative Action? «The Supreme Court did what I expected they would do today; killed affirmative action in college admissions. I'm going to say something controversial now; I'm not actually for affirmative action, especially in college admissions. Let me explain. Affirmative action is a bad solution to a really bad problem. It's a terrible solution because it doesn't address the root cause of the problem, it merely attempts to course correct after the problem occurs.»
• 2014-04-07 [L..T] U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear NSA surveillance case «The court, without comment, denied the request by activist and former federal prosecutor Larry Klayman, along with Charles and Mary Strange, to immediately hear their case against U.S. President Barack Obama, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, NSA Director Keith Alexander, Verizon Communications and Roger Vinson, the judge who signed the order allowing the surveillance.»
• 2014-02-27 [L..T] Astonishingly awful Supreme Court decision lets the government seize all your assets before trial «I'll just defer [to] what others have already said about the court's ruling in Kaley v. U.S. this week.»
• 2009-05-05 [L..T] Ginsburg: Court needs another woman «Three years after Justice Sandra Day O'Connor left the Supreme Court, the impact of having only one woman on the nation's highest bench has become particularly clear to that woman – Ruth Bader Ginsburg.»
• 2008-10-04 [L..T] The Philip Berg lawsuit against Barack Obama appeals to Supreme Court links and analysis of Philip Berg's lawsuit contending that Barack Obama is not eligible to serve as President of the United States
• 2007-11-14 [L..T] 1.8 million pages of federal case law to become freely available (press release) «Public.Resource.Org and Fastcase, Inc. announced today that they will release a large and free archive of federal case law, including all US/|Courts of Appeals decisions from 1950 to the present and all Supreme Court decisions since 1754. The archive will be public domain and usable by anyone for any purpose.»
• 2007-09-21 [L..T] Supreme Court author: Justice Souter wept when he thought of Bush v. Gore «Justice Souter was so upset about the result in Bush v. Gore that not only did he almost resign the Court because he was so upset, but there were times when he thought about the case and he wept.» – Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court
• 2005-06-24 [L..T] High court OKs personal property seizures «The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses – even against their will – for private economic development. ... The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas. .. As a result, cities have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes to generate tax revenue. .. Local officials, not federal judges, know best in deciding whether a development project will benefit the community, justices said.»