In a precedent-based legal system, you can’t know what the law is if you don’t have judicial opinions explaining why the courts have reached their conclusions.

The Supreme Court ruling allows for Trump to fulfil campaign promises while he faces controversy because of attorney general Pam Bondi's Epstein document response.

Rashida Tlaib, a left-wing Democrat from Detroit, scolded the Supreme Court for allowing President Donald Trump to proceed, ...

After hearing oral arguments Tuesday, justices voted 6-3 to issue an injunction prohibiting the courts from being formed in ...

In an era when the judiciary is often seen as a battleground for ideological warfare, the recent rulings from the Supreme ...

The judicial branch has teamed with the Domestic Violence Fatality Review Committee to examine the decisions that led to ...

NPR's Steve Inskeep speaks with Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck about a recent pattern within the Supreme Court majority: issuing rulings with no written opinion.

A murder-suicide July 6 in a Berlin restaurant ending in the death of its popular manager and circumstances leading to the ...

Union Government files review petition against Supreme Court ruling on IPS deputation in CAPFs, impacting cadre structure and ...

While the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority is pushing the law rightward, the justices appointed by GOP presidents don't always row in sync.

The Supreme Court announced on Thursday that next term it will hear two cases on state bans on transgender athletes in ...

A memo from the Justice Department and FBI said that a systematic review of the case involving Jeffrey Epstein "revealed no ...