The hottest Supreme Court Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Top U.S. Politics Topics
TK News by Matt Taibbi • 14141 implied HN points • 18 Mar 24
  1. The New York Times published a controversial piece about the Twitter Files and its connection to a Trump ally, which the author argues is a misrepresentation of reality.
  2. The Supreme Court case _Murthy v. Missouri_ is significant, as it involves challenges to government monitoring of online content and potential infringement on First Amendment rights.
  3. The article discusses the implications of exposing censorship programs and suggests a potential motive behind the Times' piece as a distraction tactic during the historic case.
Robert Reich • 21187 implied HN points • 16 Jan 24
  1. The Chevron doctrine allows agencies to interpret laws to protect the public, but it's under threat
  2. Challenges to the Chevron doctrine could give judges, not experts, power to invalidate regulations
  3. Corporate interests are pushing to end the Chevron doctrine to increase profits and reduce public protections
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:
The Status Kuo • 14662 implied HN points • 10 Jan 24
  1. The panel was skeptical of Trump's absolute immunity claim, even a Republican appointee was doubtful.
  2. Allowing presidential immunity from prosecution could lead to dangerous outcomes, like enabling the president to order assassinations.
  3. The Judgment Impeachment Clause argument is weak, as it does not provide absolute immunity from prosecution for a president.
Today's Edition Newsletter • 9276 implied HN points • 09 Feb 24
  1. The Supreme Court is likely to rule in favor of Trump despite engaging in insurrection, showcasing a pre-determined outcome seeking a rationale.
  2. States enforce various qualifications for presidential candidates, but the Supreme Court hesitates when it comes to insurrection disqualification, revealing hypocrisy.
  3. To address issues in the Court, expand it to diminish the influence of certain justices by retaining key political positions.
The Status Kuo • 11910 implied HN points • 18 Jan 24
  1. The Supreme Court case challenges the 'Chevron Doctrine' and could potentially shift regulatory power to judges.
  2. Conservative justices on the Supreme Court seem ready to overturn the established 'Chevron Doctrine' that's been in place for 40 years.
  3. Overruling the 'Chevron Doctrine' could lead to judicial activism, with impact on regulatory powers and potential legal chaos.
Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 4001 implied HN points • 01 Mar 24
  1. Trump is leading in swing state polls, but it's not a clear-cut victory yet.
  2. Some Michigan voters chose 'uncommitted' in protest, hinting at dissatisfaction with Biden's policies.
  3. The Supreme Court granting Trump's argument for 'total immunity' may delay prosecution until after the election.
Today's Edition Newsletter • 8078 implied HN points • 18 Jan 24
  1. Supreme Court might overturn Chevron deference doctrine, changing how US economy is regulated
  2. Conservatives aim to diminish power of executive branch and Congress, while empowering the courts
  3. Federal regulations in the US ensure safety, honesty, transparency, and accountability in the large economy
TK News by Matt Taibbi • 5328 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
  1. The Supreme Court is reviewing Colorado's decision to remove Donald Trump from the ballot, drawing attention from the press.
  2. There are delusions and strong opinions surrounding Trump's response and the impact it may have on society, as reflected in media coverage.
  3. The case about Trump's ballot access is a topic of discussion and analysis in current news.
Lucian Truscott Newsletter • 3419 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
  1. The Supreme Court is debating the 14th Amendment and its application to disqualify individuals from office.
  2. The argument of whether the 14th Amendment is self-actuating faced skepticism and challenges during the court proceedings.
  3. There is uncertainty on how the Supreme Court will rule regarding the interpretation of the 14th Amendment and its implications for future cases.
All in Her Head by Jessica Valenti • 3125 implied HN points • 30 Jan 24
  1. Hospital flagged patient for using the word 'abortion', showing the anti-choice movement's impact on healthcare language.
  2. Republican strategy includes bills like the 'Abortion is not Health Care Act' to restrict abortion access.
  3. Legal battles and state rulings are shaping the future of abortion rights in different states.
2nd Smartest Guy in the World • 3262 implied HN points • 26 Jan 24
  1. Texas and 25 other red states are joining forces to secure their southern borders against the federal government and the Supreme Court
  2. The Cloward-Piven Strategy aims to destabilize society through overwhelming bureaucracy and unfettered immigration
  3. Texas is defying the captured Supreme Court and ramping up efforts to stop the border invasion
Lucian Truscott Newsletter • 3400 implied HN points • 20 Jan 24
  1. Trump's appeal to the Supreme Court regarding his ban from Colorado is seen as surreal because it interprets the 14th Amendment in a peculiar way.
  2. Legal scholars argue that the 14th Amendment should bar insurrectionists from office, without the need for them to hold office first.
  3. Trump's appeal presents a bizarre argument that attempts to sidestep the 14th Amendment's provisions regarding disqualifying insurrectionists.
New Means • 2810 implied HN points • 26 Jan 24
  1. Texas Governor Greg Abbott is defying federal government rulings at the border with razor wire.
  2. Multiple Republican governors are supporting Texas in its defiance, escalating tensions.
  3. The situation highlights a constitutional crisis and the rise of fascist ideologies in politics.
The View from Rural Missouri by Jess Piper • 1532 implied HN points • 29 Feb 24
  1. Many people don't consider the importance of the Supreme Court and its impact on their daily lives.
  2. Understanding the power and influence of the Court, and discussing it with friends and family, is crucial to being prepared and knowing how to fight back against potential threats.
  3. Educating others on the potential harm of a captured court, and working together with those around us, is key to protecting our future.
Human Flourishing • 2122 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
  1. Governments throughout history have tried to control speech and communication channels.
  2. Technological advancements have made censorship more personal and affect the tools we use every day.
  3. The outcome of Missouri v. Biden case in 2024 will determine the scope of government censorship and impact fundamental rights.
AND Magazine • 1808 implied HN points • 25 Jan 24
  1. The crisis regarding access to the Texas-Mexican border has escalated into a direct confrontation between Washington and Austin.
  2. The federal government must operate within the limits set by the Constitution and for the benefit of American citizens, which seems to be disregarded in the current situation.
  3. Texas has chosen to defy what it views as blatantly unconstitutional orders by the President and the Supreme Court.
Stark Realities with Brian McGlinchey • 1999 implied HN points • 15 Jan 24
  1. The intensity of the division in American politics arises from the federal government operating beyond the limits of the Constitution.
  2. The federal government's involvement in various aspects of American life is mostly unconstitutional based on the limited powers granted by the Constitution.
  3. The Supreme Court has played a significant role in expanding federal powers through broad interpretations of clauses like the General Welfare and Commerce clauses.
The Status Kuo • 10554 implied HN points • 21 Jun 23
  1. Justices like Alito coming under scrutiny for undisclosed relationships with billionaires and potential influence on Court decisions
  2. Alito went on a fishing trip to Alaska with a billionaire, Paul Singer, who had cases before the Supreme Court, raising concerns about impartiality
  3. Attempts by Alito to defend his actions and relationship with Singer through an OpEd seem unconvincing and raise doubts about ethical conduct
The Popehat Report • 6541 implied HN points • 08 Aug 23
  1. Being a public legal commentator can mean describing law impartially or advocating based on personal beliefs.
  2. The National Review has been spreading misinformation about fraud charges against Donald Trump.
  3. Andrew C. McCarthy and the National Review may be presenting advocacy as neutral legal analysis.
Striking 13 • 3014 implied HN points • 17 Nov 23
  1. The government in Rwanda is attempting to implement controversial policies, but they are facing significant challenges and obstacles at every step.
  2. The plan for dealing with asylum seekers is chaotic and unrealistic, resulting in confusion and uncertainty for all parties involved, including potential legal consequences.
  3. There are complex legal, constitutional, and parliamentary hurdles that the government needs to overcome in order to push through their proposed legislation, indicating a tough road ahead if they intend to proceed.
TK News by Matt Taibbi • 1236 implied HN points • 27 Jan 24
  1. The Supreme Court allowed border control agents to remove razor wire Texas installed at the Mexico border due to obstruction issues.
  2. The story only pertains to the specific technique of using razor wire at the border and not Texas' broader efforts to secure it.
  3. The Biden administration argued that the razor wire hindered agents' duties, making it harder to enforce the law and control irregular migration.
The New Urban Order • 179 implied HN points • 15 Apr 24
  1. The U.S. Supreme Court will decide on whether homelessness can be considered a crime, impacting how cities handle homeless individuals.
  2. Many cities fail to provide the necessary housing and services to keep people off the streets, leading to homelessness being criminalized.
  3. Jailing homeless individuals further exacerbates their situation, making it harder for them to transition out of homelessness.
Richard Hanania's Newsletter • 4071 implied HN points • 29 Jun 23
  1. The Supreme Court's decision in SFFA v Harvard impacts how universities can consider race in admissions.
  2. The ruling challenges universities to maintain diversity without directly using race as a factor.
  3. The shift may lead to changes in university cultures and missions, impacting the demographics of top schools.