Matt Ford

@fordm

Led by Clarence Thomas, the justices overwhelmingly rejected an outlandish conservative attempt to abolish the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Arizona wants to keep Lonnie Allen Bassett locked up for good—despite a Supreme Court ruling that abolished mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles.

The Supreme Court justice claims he can’t stand Washington, but he has the capital city to thank for all of those wealthy friends who have treated him to lavish trips and luxury goods.

The cases in Georgia and D.C. have been pushed back. Every delay is a victory for the former president.

Two little-noticed FEC decisions last week could both increase and obscure the money flooding into elections.

Thirteen conservative judges say they won’t hire from the university—a blatant abuse of their judicial office.

Protecting democracy isn’t just about holding elections. It means making the government responsive to the American people’s wishes.

A group of newspapers is suing OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing them of effectively stealing—and profiting from—journalists’ work. This could well be an existential legal fight.

The FTC is banning noncompete clauses for almost all American workers, and already corporate interests are challenging it in court.

The former president's lawyers mounted some bizarre arguments in defense of broad presidential power, and the justices seemed ready to step through the looking glass.

The Fifth Circuit's become little more than a junior varsity version of the Supreme Court. Sending some new judges to the Lone Star State will help put things right.

In oral arguments, the justices seemed highly reluctant to entangle themselves in a matter that many believe subject the neediest Americans to cruel and unusual punishment.

The gradual erosion of society’s barriers to gambling has pushed us to the brink of perpetual big-league betting scandals.

The high court’s decision to leave a controversial lower court decision intact does not necessarily spell doom for First Amendment rights.

Conservatives got their way when the Supreme Court ruled against Trump’s disqualification, but two red-state secretaries of state seem to be bent on retaliation anyway.

Special counsel Jack Smith has made it as easy as possible for the justices to rule against Trump. But we’ve seen this movie before.

The court, which Republicans expanded in 2016 to add two conservative justices, has revived a draconian law from 1864—nearly a half-century before Arizona even became a state.

In an unusual move, the Justice Department is pushing to participate in upcoming oral arguments in the hopes of influencing the high court to pick a less cruel fate for the most vulnerable Americans.

Calls are mounting for the liberal justice to take her leave. Instead, Democrats should focus on winning elections.

A worrisome case of misconduct is on the high court’s doorstep, creating the potential for a rollback of the power that district attorneys have long enjoyed.