I have always assumed that judges, particularly SCOTUS judges, would know better than to deny facts, but I guess I was wrong.

It’s obvious that the Court isn’t actually trying to come up with a legal rule that makes sense.

Lawmakers are calling on President Trump's cabinet and Congress to boot him from office using a never-before-invoked ...

The video is the latest example of federal immigration authorities labeling anyone who opposes them a "domestic terrorist." ...

Several Democratic lawmakers are urging President Donald Trump's cabinet to invoke a never-used constitutional provision to ...

The state requires carry permit holders to obtain advance permission before bringing firearms onto private property open to ...

The Supreme Court’s review of United States v. Chatrie puts geofence warrants and mass digital data seizures under Fourth Amendment scrutiny, raising urgent questions about particularity, AI-driven ...

Events like this, where eyewitness video and independent reporting contradict the government’s account, highlight the importance of press freedom.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared to side with a group of Maui gun owners in their challenge to a Hawaii law restricting ...

Even if the governor’s proposal becomes law, there’s a good chance it’ll be blocked in federal court, just as similar laws ...

Several legal experts say they haven’t seen any evidence to support the allegation that several Minnesota officials obstructed recent federal immigration enforcement as members of the Trump ...

Trump’s purposefully unspecific proclamation is yet another example of American politicians whitewashing, sanitizing, or ...