The Supreme Court on Friday afternoon added four new cases, on topics ranging from the Fourth Amendment to federal preemption, to its Oral Argument Docket for the 2025-26 term. The […] ...

Montana officials defended the actions of law enforcement officers who did not have a warrant when they responded to a ...

The right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure had an up-and-down sort of year at the U.S. Supreme Court. Back in May, the Court delivered a 9–0 decision that left civil libertarians ...

The Fourth Amendment protects "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." When it comes to a person's home, that ...

For the U.S. Supreme Court majority, poor quality decisions are the new normal. They draft edicts on major issues — not opinions. Such is the case with their new shadow docket decision on racial ...

Last week, in an unsigned order issued without an explanation, and in direct defiance of the plain language of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States ...

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard nearly 2.5 hours of oral argument in the Voting Rights Act Case. Without even taking a break, the Court heard the second case, fittingly titled Case v. Montana.

This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court rendered obsolete the 4th Amendment’s prohibition on suspicionless seizures ...

The Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement boasts plenty of exceptions, and the practitioners must routinely ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the parameters of these exceptions. Continuing the ...

I revisit the crack-ridden, murderous capital of Indiana because while history isn’t repeating itself, it is rhyming.