Last month, President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. We reviewed several of Barrett’s writings to glean what they might reveal about her views on issues important to Lawfare readers.
Latest in U.S. Supreme Court
Why has it taken until now for a Supreme Court justice to pay attention to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act?
The opinions reveal a Supreme Court grappling with the implications of the inseparable duality of the individual president and the institutional presidency.
The decision carries implications for the rights of asylum-seekers facing expedited removal, the purpose of the writ of habeas corpus and the judiciary’s role in checking executive power.
The Supreme Court cites past examples to justify its decision to postpone oral arguments. But those past postponements were different in key ways.
How have federal courts adjusted to navigate the COVID-19 outbreak?
Chief Justice John Roberts is a complex and subtly innovative jurist. The Supreme Court’s census decision revealed his skills, particularly seen against the backdrop of the gerrymandering case decided the same day. His ruling against the executive may actually strengthen deference to executive discretion when wielded by a future normal presidency, but in his decisive opinion (joined in full by no other justice), Roberts also refined a neglected counterdeference tool—pretext analysis.
The Supreme Court’s March 19 decision on in Nielsen v. Preap rejected challenges to mandatory detention of certain noncitizens—“aliens” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Generally speaking, mandatory immigration detention is an exception to the rule that confinement requires an individualized showing of flight risk or dangerousness.
On Feb. 27, the Supreme Court issued a 7-1 opinion in Jam v. International Financial Corporation, deciding that international organizations have the same level of immunity from lawsuits granted to foreign governments.