CategorySupreme Court

Trump v. Hawai’i: A Legacy of Discrimination

T

By Lea Kayali (PO ’19) On June 26th, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down a decision on Trump v. Hawai’i, siding with the state on one of the most controversial actions of the Trump presidency: a progression of executive orders on immigration, known colloquially as the Muslim Ban. The decision to uphold the travel ban inspired an uproar among human rights advocates...

Key Anthony Kennedy Supreme Court Sports Law Decisions

K

By Cameron Miller (Stanford University ’16) Guest Contributor After over 40 years of service  on the federal judiciary – including 30 on the Supreme Court – Justice Anthony Kennedy plans to retire at the end of July 2018. During his tenure on the high court, Kennedy authored numerous influential opinions on issues including gay rights, civil rights, campaign finance laws, and abortion regulations...

Understanding Masterpiece Cakeshop

U

By Isaac Cui (PO ’20) The Supreme Court yesterday released opinions in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission,[1] a highly-anticipated case which seemed to pit the civil rights of gay people against the religious objections of others. While the holding of the case was nominally in favor of the petitioner, who sought protection for his religious objections against Colorado’s anti...

What Iowa’s “Heartbeat Legislation” Indicates About the Future of the Abortion Debate

W

By Allie Carter (CMC ’19) On May 4, 2018, the state of Iowa took a major leap towards enacting the nation’s strictest regulations on abortion. Colloquially referred to as the “heartbeat legislation,” abortions in Iowa are now prohibited once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which is typically six weeks into a pregnancy. Whether the legislation is constitutional is largely ambiguous, as most...

Trump’s Muslim Ban Reaches SCOTUS

T

By Bryce Watchell (PO ’21) Throughout his presidential campaign and administration, President Trump’s agenda has frequently featured anti-Islam rhetoric, which manifested itself in a “Muslim ban,” later renamed a “travel ban.” Following his initial mention of the ban, lawyers, judges, and politicians from across the political spectrum rejected the proposal on the constitutional basis of religious...

Redefining Voluntary: How Carpenter v. US Reveals Our Need to Reclaim Autonomy Over Our Data

R

By Frankie Konner (PZ ’21) Carpenter v. US is one of the most important cases regarding the Fourth Amendment that the Supreme Court has heard in decades. The case, most likely to be decided in June 2018, focuses on the government’s right to access cell phone location data. The discussion brought about by Carpenter v US includes important issues such as the role precedents from the last 50...

Actions of Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch Indicate Expansion of Judicial Engagement

A

By Elinor Aspegren (PZ ’20) The United States Supreme Court case Sessions v. Dimaya made headlines on Tuesday, April 17 when Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump nominee and noted conservative, sided with those more liberal in the decision that the Immigration and Nationality Act. This act defines a violent crime as eligibility for deportation, which is unconstitutionally vague under the...

Janus v. AFSCME and the Future of Unions

J

By James Dail (CMC ’20) Should someone be compelled to pay a fee to an organization whose values they do not agree with? This is the key question in the Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME, although its effects will be more far-reaching than only answering a question about freedom of speech. If the Court rules in favor of Janus, then this could cause the permanent decline of public sector...

The Power to Prevent Sports Betting: Christie v. NCAA

T

Dina Rosin (CMC ’20) After the 2016 Super Bowl, CBS aired a live version of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. There was a surprise appearance by then-President Obama, where he mentioned that after every Super Bowl he calls the winning team, and sometimes the losing team. “Especially if I bet on them,” he added. Colbert replied, “But Mr. President, betting is illegal,” to which Obama...

One Person, One Vote

O

Dina Rosin (CMC ’20) When America’s  founding fathers declared independence from Great Britain, they wrote that “all men are created equal,” and thus, all deserved a vote. Throughout U.S. history, voter eligibility has gradually expanded. The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, passed in 1868, granted equal protection of the law, which allowed for non-white men over 21 to vote. The...

Read the Latest Print Edition

Recent Posts

Contact Us