Supreme Court (SCOTUS)

After the Supreme Court limited IEEPA tariff authority, the Trump administration turned to Section 301, raising new questions about executive power, trade law, and delegation.

SCOTUS oral arguments on aiding and abetting liability for US companies that facilitate atrocities abroad highlighted cross-cutting legal views amongst the Justices

The Supreme Court should dismiss the case of Blanche v. Lau as improvidently granted. The stakes are too high, and the facts are mismatched to the legal question at hand.

The Supreme Court should dismiss cert in Cisco to avoid immunizing U.S. corporations who actively aid and abet atrocities.

Presidents have complied with the Act without serious objection, and there is essentially no scholarly or other commentary questioning the Act’s constitutionality.

Recent state-led cases against the federal government demonstrate the range of injuries that states are successfully asserting under the current doctrines of state standing.

A 1983 Supreme Court ruling eviscerated the law allowing Congress to end war. The Iran strikes make that a five-alarm emergency.

The most comprehensive study of court cases involving the Trump administration from January 20, 2025 to present

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights' recent advisory opinion addresses the obligations of States and private actors to prevent and combat illicit trafficking of firearms.

Former senior officials explain why the Trump administration's argument in Noem v. Al Otro Lado is morally troubling and legally wrong.

​In Al Shimari,​ the Fourth Circuit affirmed ​two Alien Tort Statute claims: conspiracy to commit torture and conspiracy to commit cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

The SCOTUS decision on Trump's tariffs, and the president’s subsequent reaction, leave many questions about tariff rates and what comes next.