top of page
Read the latest cases...


Trump v. Cook
In August 2025, President Trump announced that he was firing Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, saying he had cause to remove her. His reasoning was a claim that she made false statements on mortgage paperwork before she joined the Fed. The accusation came days after the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Bill Pulte, publicly shared a letter to the attorney general accusing Cook of mortgage fraud. Cook has denied the allegations, and
Oct 62 min read


The 'Vampire" Rule
After the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision recognized a right to carry handguns in public for self-defense, Hawaii passed a 2023 law with a new default rule: licensed concealed-carry permit holders could not bring a gun onto private property that is open to the public, such as a restaurant or store, unless the owner expressly gave permission. Gun-rights advocates nicknamed it the “vampire rule,” because, like a vampire, a gun carrier needed an invitation to come in. Violat
Sep 252 min read


A National Controversy: Voting Ballots
Mississippi lets voters who can’t be at the polls, like college students away from home and senior citizens, vote absentee in federal elections. Under state law, those ballots count as long as they are postmarked by Election Day and reach the registrar within five business days afterward. In 2024, the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and several individuals sued state election officials, arguing that federal law doesn’t allow it. Their position
Sep 102 min read


Guns Prevail
In 2022, FBI agents investigating Ali Hemani, a Texas man suspected of terrorism ties, searched his family’s home and found a Glock 9mm handgun, about 60 grams of marijuana, and 4.7 grams of cocaine. Hemani cooperated, admitting that he smoked marijuana about every other day. The terrorism suspicions went nowhere, but in 2023 a grand jury indicted him under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which makes it a felony for an “unlawful user” of a controlled substance to possess a firearm. Th
Aug 223 min read


Rutherford v. United States
In 2003, Daniel Rutherford robbed a Pennsylvania chiropractic office at gunpoint twice within five days, and was convicted of two counts of using a firearm during a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). At the time, a second such conviction automatically triggered a stacked, consecutive 25-year mandatory sentence on top of the first, contributing to a total sentence of nearly 42 years. In 2018, Congress's First Step Act eliminated that stacking requirement going forwar
Aug 62 min read


Havana Docks Corp. v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd
In 1928, a U.S. company called Havana Docks Corporation acquired a right from the Cuban government to develop and operate docks at the Port of Havana, a right set to expire in 2004. In 1960, Cuba's revolutionary government seized the docks without compensation. Decades later, Congress passed the Helms-Burton Act, letting U.S. nationals with claims to property confiscated by Cuba sue anyone who later "traffics in" that property. Between 2016 and 2019, four major cruise lines,
Jul 312 min read


District of Columbia v. R.W.
At around 2:00 a.m. on a winter morning in Washington, D.C., a Metropolitan Police officer responded to a dispatch call about a suspicious vehicle at a specific apartment building. As his marked patrol car pulled into the lot, two passengers immediately jumped out of the only occupied car there and ran off without any apparent provocation, leaving a door open. The 15-year-old driver, identified in court papers only as R.W., then began backing the car out of its space with th
Jul 112 min read


Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana
Since 2013, Louisiana's coastal parishes have sued oil and gas companies in state court under a 1978 state law requiring permits for activities in the state's coastal zone, seeking damages for decades of erosion and land loss. Plaquemines Parish's suit against Chevron reached back to the company's crude-oil production practices during World War II, when Chevron's predecessor drilled using earthen pits and canals rather than steel tanks and roads. Chevron wanted the case move
Jun 262 min read


Louisiana v. Callais
After the 2020 census, Louisiana redrew its congressional map with only one majority-Black district out of six, even though Black residents made up roughly a third of the state's population. A federal court ruled in a related case, Robinson v. Ardoin, that the map likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voting power, so the legislature drew a new map, SB8, adding a second majority-Black district: a sprawling, oddly-shaped district stretching some
Jun 52 min read


Hencely v. Fluor Corp
In 2016, military contractor Fluor Corporation hired Ahmad Nayeb to work at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan as part of "Afghan First," a Pentagon program requiring contractors to employ local Afghans to help stabilize the country's economy. Nayeb was secretly a Taliban operative, and he carried out a suicide bombing on the base that killed five people and wounded seventeen. Army Specialist Winston Hencely suffered a fractured skull and brain injuries while helping stop Nayeb
May 232 min read


Urias-Orellana v. Bondi
Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, his wife, and their young child entered the United States without authorization in 2021, fleeing El Salvador after two of his half-brothers were shot by an associate of a local drug trafficker who Urias-Orellana testified was also targeting him. An immigration judge found his testimony credible but still denied asylum, ruling that what he described didn't legally rise to the level of "persecution" or a "well-founded fear" of future persecutio
May 92 min read


Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp
In August 2018, Cedric Galette was riding in a car stopped on a Philadelphia street when a New Jersey Transit bus struck the vehicle, injuring him. Around the same time, a similar collision in Midtown Manhattan injured Jeffrey Colt. Both men injured in the accident sued NJ Transit in the respective courts of the states where each man was injured: Galette in Pennsylvania and Colt in New York. NJ Transit moved to dismiss both suits, arguing that as an "instrumentality" of New
Apr 292 min read


Zorn v. Linton
In 2015, during the inauguration of Vermont’s governor, a group of protestors staged a sit-in at the state capitol, advocating for universal healthcare. When the building closed for the night, police warned the group they would be arrested for trespassing if they didn't leave. In compliance with the police, most protestors left for the night. However, protestor Shela Linton did not follow these orders. After repeated verbal warnings, Sergeant Jacob Zorn took Linton's arm, pla
Apr 102 min read


Olivier v. City of Brandon, Mississippi
Born in Bolton, Mississippi, Gabriel Oliver is a street preacher who liked to share his religious messages on the sidewalks near an outdoor amphitheatre in Brandon, MS. In 2019, lawmakers in Brandon passed an ordinance that confined protests and “demonstrations” to certain areas whenever the amphitheatre was hosting an event. In 2021, Gabriel Oliver was arrested for violating this mandate; he pleaded no contest and paid a $304 fine. Later, Oliver sued the city, citing federal
Mar 312 min read


GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal
From June to September 2014, detainees at a privately run ICE detention facility in Colorado, operated by GEO Group under a federal contract, underwent a mandatory unpaid “sanitation policy” that stated those who refused to clean would be subjected to solitary confinement. Eventually, in October, GEO was sued for this policy. GEO attempted to get the case thrown out before trial, citing “derivative sovereign immunity”: the idea that because the group was following government
Mar 262 min read


Villarreal v. Texas
David Villareal was on trial for murder and bravely took the stand as his only defense witness. By 1 pm, Villareal had testified for a little over an hour. In an unusual sequence of events, the judge assigned to the trial had to call an early recess, instructing members of the jury, prosecution, and defense to return the following morning. This early recess raised problems with Villarreal’s trial. Before adjourning for the day, the judge instructed Villarreal and his attorney
Feb 282 min read


Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
On February 20th, the Supreme Court Ruled 6-3 against the President of The United States of America. This ruling was not significant because it involved the President but rather because it answered a question with trillion-dollar stakes. Early in his second term, President Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify two waves of tariffs. Trump used the act, passed in 1977, to target duties linked to fentanyl trafficking from countries suc
Feb 262 min read


Gerrymandering in Texas
The recent redistricting dispute in Texas has drawn significant national attention because of the legal situation it poses in American politics, its broader implications for democratic representation, and because of the questions it raises regarding constitutional authority. However, the situation also raises serious concerns regarding election law and judicial oversight. The controversy does not only center on partisan outcomes, but also continues to develop through the fede
Jan 83 min read


Trouble in Venezuela
The recent U.S. operation involving the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has drawn significant international attention because of the novel situation it poses in international politics, its unprecedented nature, and because of the questions it raises in terms of diplomacy. However, the situation also raises questions regarding domestic and international law. The incident not only centers on U.S. criminal jurisdiction in a foreign setting, but also will continue
Jan 63 min read
The Bandwidth Breakup: How One Court Told the FCC to Stop Pretending 1934 Could Run the Internet
In early 2025, inside a Sixth Circuit courtroom far from the noise of Silicon Valley, a case unfolded that would quietly rewrite the rules of America’s digital future. For years, the Federal Communications Commission had tried to fit broadband internet into a regulatory category designed for rotary phones, treating it as a “telecommunications service” so it could enforce the familiar principle of net neutrality. But in Ohio Telecom Association v. FCC , the court delivered a m
Dec 1, 20252 min read
The Case of the Vanishing Right: When the Supreme Court Redefined Choice by Erasing It
In 2025, the Supreme Court found itself untangling a puzzle that barely made headlines until the moment it reshaped the country’s healthcare landscape. The case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic , began with what looked like an unremarkable question: does a Medicaid patient have the right to choose their own qualified healthcare provider? It was the kind of question that usually gets answered quietly in lower courts. And yet, once it reached the justices, it reveal
Nov 22, 20252 min read


When algorithm went to court
In 2023, the Supreme Court found itself examining one of the most defining questions of the digital era: could a website be held responsible for what its algorithm recommends? The case, Gonzalez v. Google, arose from the tragic death of Nohemi Gonzalez, a 23-year-old American student killed during the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. Her family argued that YouTube, owned by Google, had indirectly helped ISIS spread propaganda by promoting extremist videos through its recommen
Nov 14, 20252 min read


A Case of Innovation
In 2024, a quiet dispute from Texas reached the Supreme Court and ended up saying a great deal about how government power touches ordinary lives. The case, DeVillier v. Texas, began when a group of landowners claimed that a highway project had flooded their property. By raising and altering a road, the state allegedly turned once-dry fields into basins for stormwater. What looked like a simple local complaint soon grew into a constitutional test. At the center of the dispute
Oct 22, 20252 min read


A National Controversy
“Controversial” and “historic” are words still used to describe Roe v. Wade , one of the most divisive Supreme Court decisions in...
Sep 27, 20252 min read
bottom of page