Matt Ford

@fordm

The high court catches a case that’s both dizzyingly complicated and relatively simple: Are tribal governments a legitimate part of the U.S. constitutional order?

A slew of ballot initiatives are allowing millions of Americans the chance to overhaul how their elections are run.

President Biden called on voters to reject election deniers next week. But not everyone has that power because our elections are getting less competitive.

After an epic day of oral arguments in two affirmative action cases, it’s clear that the conservative justices will do what they want regardless of facts, law, or precedent.

As the Supreme Court prepares to consider two affirmative action cases, originalism will be put to a test.

Not every state in the U.S. requires the fabled “12 angry men.” Some require as few as six jurors. Now the justices are being asked to rule on whether the number should be uniform.

The legislation, which passed the D.C. Council last week and awaits the mayor’s pen, is the wrong solution to the right problem.

It’s good news for financial predators as a trio of Trump-appointed judges tees up a chance for the Supreme Court to take the CFPB’s cops off the beat.

How John Roberts lost control of the Supreme Court

Republicans have been publicly proclaiming their intention to take the economy hostage for a long while. There may not be time to stop them now.

The former president seems to think the justices are going to help him. They keep showing him that they won’t.

A gaggle of bigoted municipal lawmakers have become unlikely—but effective—poster children for electoral reform.

Andy Warhol’s latest 15 minutes of fame came during oral arguments in a case that may determine the future of “fair use” transformations.

A pair of death penalty decisions reaffirms a sad fact about the high court: There is a majority of justices who want to keep the executions coming.

If the Mar-a-Lago affair has taught us anything, it’s that as long as Trump-appointed judges exist, all bets are off.

A recent spat between a judge and Yale Law School forces us to consider whether the federal judiciary should continue to be a spoils system for the well connected.

The Supreme Court is going to get a crack at Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—and the internet may never be the same.

The high court is set to hear two major cases that could allow the conservative majority to redefine the Equal Protection Clause.

A rather odd plaintiff—with some convoluted legal arguments—has emerged to sue the administration over its loan forgiveness proposal.

Americans’ antipathy toward the high court is deepening—and for the first time, a slim majority favors expansion.