Latest in U.S. Supreme Court
The Supreme Court’s June decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency drastically limits the agency’s regulatory authority to curtail the effects of the climate crisis and stands in jarring contrast to recent actions of the executive and legislative branches.
Republicans have long advocated against platform censorship, while Democrats have favored more restrictions on speech. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision, both parties are now pushing speech policies they once argued against.
In Torres v. Texas Dep’t of Public Safety, the Court held that private suits against states are authorized under Congress’s war powers, carving out a new structural waiver exception to state sovereign immunity.
The Supreme Court may overturn one of its most important free speech rulings of all time, but legislators and state courts can blunt the harms.
In emergencies, federal agencies can avoid cumbersome rulemaking procedures. Uses of the “good cause” exception following 9/11 and the outbreak of the coronavirus offer insights relevant to the current cybersecurity threats to critical infrastructure.
In February, President Biden nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court. We reviewed several of Jackson’s opinions to see what they might reveal about her views on issues relevant to Lawfare readers.
The presumption of regularity is an important principle that courts use in cases regarding executive discretion. However, failure to codify this principle has led to dozens of different interpretations and inconsistent application.
One reason why Van Buren is good news for cybersecurity is that companies will actually need to improve the security of their systems, instead of hoping the threat of CFAA lawsuits or prosecutions will rescue them from their mistakes.
A win for civil libertarians does not mean a loss for data owners.
The Supreme Court issued a decision in Van Buren v. United States, a case involving the Computer Frauds and Abuses Act.