This opinion is a milestone in the rule of law and is regularly cited by conservative and liberal justices alike.

Constitutional rights have to be enforceable. They can’t rely on the goodwill of the government. This utter lack of ...

“Excalibur,” a massive sculpture by Beverly Pepper, has sat outside the Edward J. Schwartz Federal Building since 1976. Two ...

A protest can be a fine way to get people’s attention—particularly the attention of those in positions of power. But one of ...

When political speech is considered socially sensitive or politically dangerous, people are more likely to sit out protests, ...

Fernandez v. United States ... Issue: Whether a combination of “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c) (1) (A) can include ...

That lawyer’s name was William H. Rehnquist (the same William H. Rehnquist who Nixon would later nominate to the Supreme Court and Ronald Reagan would make chief justice of the United States).

Nixon and Watergate The Washington Post and other media exposed ties between President Richard Nixon’s associates and a break-in at Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel during the 1972 ...

Federal judges are ruling against some of President Trump's executive orders. But who enforces a judicial ruling against the president? NPR asks University of Texas law professor Tara Grove.

Under Trump v. United States, Nixon wouldn’t have had to worry about a pardon. He could have explained away all of these crimes as “official acts” he took using the powers of the presidency.

President Gerald Ford’s pardon of former President Richard Nixon 50 years ago is seen as a damaging precedent establishing presidential impunity. Now, the Supreme Court has affirmed that impunity.