The hottest Supreme Court Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics

Today’s Censorship Is Personal

Human Flourishing • 2122 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

On Today’s Absurd New York Times Hit Piece

TK News by Matt Taibbi • 14141 implied HN points • 18 Mar 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

Most Folks Don't Think About the Supreme Court

The View from Rural Missouri by Jess Piper • 1532 implied HN points • 29 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

Rwanda: This is what happens next

Striking 13 • 3014 implied HN points • 17 Nov 23
🌍 World Politics Supreme Court
  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.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Is There Anyone Trump Can’t Fire?

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 352 implied HN points • 09 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court may remove the legal limit that keeps presidents from firing officials of independent federal agencies, threatening agency independence.
  2. The case began when Trump tried to oust FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and directly challenges a 90-year-old precedent that allowed removal only for cause.
  3. If the Court overturns that precedent, presidents could replace commissioners for political reasons and fundamentally reshape the administrative state.

God Bless Texas

AND Magazine • 1808 implied HN points • 25 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

February 20, 2026

Letters from an American • 30 implied HN points • 21 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court found that the president did not have authority under the IEEPA to impose broad tariffs, so those tariff measures were unconstitutional.
  2. Those tariffs functioned like taxes on American businesses and households, raising prices and contributing to slower economic growth and job losses.
  3. The administration used emergency powers to bypass Congress, sparking concerns about executive overreach and prompting calls for refunds and political pushback while the president seeks other ways to impose tariffs.

This Supreme Court Term Proves the System Still Works

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1456 implied HN points • 02 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court had notable victories for conservatives this term, including key rulings supporting Trump's policies. This shows a strong conservative majority in the Court.
  2. Some people, especially progressives, are upset about the Court's decisions, claiming they create confusion and support unlawful actions.
  3. Overall, the term demonstrated that the Supreme Court remains active and influential, not easily swayed by political pressure.

Burn Down the Admissions System

Persuasion • 2358 implied HN points • 30 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The end of affirmative action could lead to a crucial change in the flawed admissions system.
  2. Elite colleges might exploit loopholes to maintain unjust practices like legacy admissions, donor preferences, and subjective personal statements.
  3. The personal statement component of admissions can perpetuate privilege, as it is subjective and prone to manipulation, undermining the fairness of the system.

Affirmative Action's Demise and Higher Education

Glenn’s Substack • 2260 implied HN points • 29 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court ruling against Harvard and UNC impacts diversity and affirmative action practices in higher education.
  2. The Court previously deferred to universities on the compelling interest of diversity, but now requires limits within the constitution.
  3. Higher education's declining reputation may lead to less favorable treatment in the judiciary system.

The Texas Gerrymander Isn’t About Race. It’s About Raw Politics.

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 227 implied HN points • 08 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court put an emergency stay on a lower court’s ruling, making it likely Texas’s new Republican-friendly congressional map will be used in the 2026 midterms.
  2. Although the maps are framed as racial gerrymanders, the central fight is really about raw partisan advantage—how many seats Republicans can win—not primarily about race.
  3. The Court split along ideological lines, highlighting how redistricting fights force judges to balance legal principles against intense political pressure.

Are White People a Protected Class Now?

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1340 implied HN points • 08 Jun 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court has ended affirmative action, which changes how universities and companies can consider race in hiring and admissions.
  2. After the George Floyd protests, many companies reportedly hired very few white individuals, focusing more on diversity and inclusivity.
  3. New court rulings now state that certain diversity hiring practices could be seen as discrimination, which raises questions about fairness in hiring.

Did the Supreme Court Just Clear the Way for the Trump Agenda?

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1163 implied HN points • 29 Jun 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court recently ruled on nationwide injunctions, which are legal orders that can block government actions across the country. This decision may have a big impact on President Trump's agenda and his policies.
  2. President Trump celebrated the ruling as a major win for the Constitution, stating it helps support his presidency. In contrast, some justices believe this ruling poses a serious threat to the rule of law.
  3. This case could shape how future challenges to laws and executive orders are handled in courts, which affects who gets to decide what laws apply across the nation.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Glastonbury and the Purge of the Jews. Plus. . .

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1136 implied HN points • 30 Jun 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. At Glastonbury, a major music festival, anti-Israel chants were heard, raising concerns about rising hate against Jews. This incident reflects a bigger movement that aims to cleanse culture from Jewish presence.
  2. The Supreme Court made a significant ruling recently that impacts nationwide injunctions, which could benefit Trump's agenda. This decision has been met with both praise and criticism, highlighting a divide in opinions about its implications.
  3. Arthur Brooks shared insights on living a good life, discussing how happiness is linked to both personal experiences and societal factors. His take on the differences in happiness between liberals and conservatives stirred interesting conversations.

Racial Preferences May End, but the Fight Will Continue

Glenn Loury • 3551 implied HN points • 18 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court is expected to end racial preferences in college admissions, but the fight for racial equality will continue.
  2. Advocates suggest shifting preferences from race to socioeconomics to better address disparities in access to education.
  3. Maintaining racial preferences based on outdated assumptions about disadvantages faced by black students may actually hinder progress towards equality.

Have You Heard the Good News? Plus. . .

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 1057 implied HN points • 02 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Political populism is on the rise, with figures like Zohran Mamdani gaining popularity by speaking directly to 'the people.' This reflects a trend where both left and right populists focus on connecting with everyday concerns.
  2. Despite claims that life is getting worse for the average American, some experts argue that data shows things are actually not as bad as many believe. They suggest that both sides create imaginary problems to push their agendas.
  3. Tyler Cowen shares tips on how to enjoy vacations better, drawing from his extensive travel experience. Simple strategies can make travel more fulfilling and enjoyable.

Trump’s Tariffs at the Supreme Court

David Friedman’s Substack • 278 implied HN points • 14 Nov 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Trump's tariffs might not deliver the economic benefits he claims and could actually make people poorer. The reasons supporting the tariffs don't fully grasp trade economics.
  2. Congress, not the president, has the power to impose tariffs, and Trump’s emergency claims for them don't seem to meet legal standards. A long-term trade deficit isn't really an unusual threat.
  3. The court may rule against Trump because the tariffs he imposed likely aren’t allowed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. They don't fit the definition of emergencies stated in the law.

BREAKING: Gorsuch Rule on Lockdowns and Mandates

COVID Reason • 3132 implied HN points • 18 May 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch speaks out against lockdowns and mandates, highlighting the erosion of civil liberties during the Covid era.
  2. Gorsuch consistently defended the Constitution and challenged Covid restrictions on religious liberty.
  3. Gorsuch's opinions underscore the need to balance public health concerns with protecting individual freedoms and the importance of robust debate in decision-making.

AHM v. FDA reaches the Supreme Court

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 499 implied HN points • 28 Mar 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Plaintiffs in the case lack standing, which weakens their argument. They need to show personal harm, not just philosophical opposition.
  2. Even if plaintiffs had standing, their claims fail on the merits. The FDA's decisions were well-reasoned and based on evidence, debunking plaintiffs' objections.
  3. Banning mifepristone won't help the plaintiff-doctors study it; rather, it will hinder data collection. The FDA's evaluation of studies appears rational and reasonable.

Actual Malice

Glenn’s Substack • 1513 implied HN points • 02 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court's decision in New York Times v. Sullivan constitutionalized the law of libel.
  2. The case highlighted the importance of the 'actual malice' standard in libel cases, requiring proof of knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth.
  3. The Sullivan case had a significant impact by protecting the press from libel suits, but also raised concerns about media responsibility and trust over time.

Narrow decisions, broad goals

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 239 implied HN points • 29 May 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The South Carolina redistricting case was decided 6 to 3, with a majority opinion written by Republican-appointed Justices and a dissent by Democratic-appointed Justices, showing a split along party lines.
  2. The decision-making in cases like _Alexander_ and _Cromartie II_ was influenced by the broader legal context surrounding partisan and racial gerrymandering issues, leading to close calls among the Justices.
  3. Judges tend to apply their ideological views to non-ideological issues when those issues are close, as seen in the standing decisions related to ideological issues in cases like the student loan disputes and _Alexander_.

Letters to the Editor: The Fight over Conversion Therapy

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 185 implied HN points • 26 Nov 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. A Supreme Court case is testing whether state bans on conversion therapy for minors are constitutional, with therapists saying bans limit speech and states saying they regulate professional conduct.
  2. Survivors and advocates warn conversion therapy causes deep harm to LGBTQ youth, and if bans are struck down therapists could legally subject minors to those practices without risking their licenses.
  3. The dispute turns on legal distinctions and consent claims from some therapists who say they offer voluntary counseling, and it reflects wider cultural debates about gender, sex, and parental rights.

Trump's Ballot Access Case On Trial

TK News by Matt Taibbi • 5328 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

Google Censors are Still Waging the Transgender Culture War

Handwaving Freakoutery • 690 implied HN points • 10 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Google can censor information by removing articles that go against their policies, especially on sensitive topics like transgender issues. This shows how big tech can influence discussions by limiting access to certain viewpoints.
  2. There are ongoing debates about the impact of transgender medical treatments on minors, with concerns over whether such decisions may lead to regret later in life. It's important to weigh the risks and benefits carefully.
  3. Recent court decisions suggest that beliefs held by many about the necessity of medical transitions for youth may lack scientific backing. This raises questions about the assumptions driving these discussions.

Here’s My Exchange With Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern About ‘United States v. Skrmetti’

Singal-Minded • 718 implied HN points • 03 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The discussion around laws affecting gender treatment for minors can be complex. It's important to talk about these issues calmly and with respect for different viewpoints.
  2. Legal arguments regarding gender discrimination often hinge on how laws classify individuals based on sex. Understanding these classifications helps illuminate the legal reasoning in cases like 'Skrmetti.'
  3. There are differing opinions about the implications of laws like SB1. While some see them as discriminatory, others argue they follow acceptable legal frameworks that don't classify treatment based solely on sex.

What I Saw on an ICE Operation. Plus. . .

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 820 implied HN points • 09 Jun 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. There were big protests against ICE raids in Los Angeles, with clashes happening between protesters and law enforcement. The situation has highlighted strong feelings about immigration policies in the area.
  2. In a notable Supreme Court decision, the court made a ruling that could change how discrimination laws work in America, questioning the idea of protected groups. This could have major implications for affirmative action.
  3. New proposals in New York aim to fast-track assisted dying laws, raising concerns about making it too easy for individuals to choose death. This has sparked a debate about the ethics of such legislation.

In praise of robotic judging

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 239 implied HN points • 13 May 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. In judicial decision-making, applying precedent like a robot can lead to simple and predictable case resolutions.
  2. Civil asset forfeiture cases can be complex, leading to unfair outcomes for innocent owners, with issues such as timing, burden of proof, and lack of initial judicial oversight.
  3. While some judges have specific judicial philosophies, there is an argument for mindlessly applying precedent to simplify and predict case outcomes, potentially reducing division and making the judicial process less dependent on individual justices.

It's on, baby!

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 698 implied HN points • 09 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Constitution does not require states to include currently ineligible candidates on the ballot, even if they may become eligible in the future.
  2. Allowing ineligible candidates on the ballot can lead to confusion for voters and cause controversy if an ineligible candidate wins the election.
  3. Interpreting the Constitution requires sticking to the text rather than overly creative lawyering to avoid confusion and promote understanding among citizens.

Minor Mifepristone Ruling is Major

SHERO • 648 implied HN points • 17 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. A Trump-appointed judge's ruling in Texas allows more states to join a lawsuit against restrictions on the abortion pill Mifepristone.
  2. The Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal to preserve broad access to the Mifepristone abortion pill, delaying potential restrictions.
  3. The legal battle surrounding Mifepristone highlights the impact of standing in court cases and raises questions about judicial legitimacy.

The Supreme Court's Holding Action Against Autocracy

Gideon's Substack • 11 implied HN points • 23 Feb 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court ruled that the president cannot unilaterally impose or remove tariffs by declaring an emergency, and tariff power properly belongs to Congress so courts will read broad delegations narrowly.
  2. The Roberts Court pairs strong presidential control inside the executive with a strict approach to congressional delegations on major questions, forcing the executive to get clear authorization from Congress for big policy moves.
  3. In practice, partisan Congresses may refuse to reassert their authority, leaving the Court only able to veto and causing paralysis or temporary executive actions that businesses treat as law until voters and lawmakers fix it.

Is the Supreme Court seriously going to disqualify Trump? (Redux)

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 659 implied HN points • 21 Dec 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Chances of the Supreme Court disqualifying Trump are low but improving, now estimated at around 20%.
  2. The conventional wisdom leans towards the Supreme Court reversing the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, considering factors like democratic norms and legal arguments.
  3. There is a small chance, about 15%, that the Supreme Court might affirm the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to disqualify Trump, based on the quality of legal reasoning in the case.

Supreme Court Vacates NY Ruling That Amish Cannot Have an Exemption to Vaccination Requirements

Injecting Freedom • 99 implied HN points • 11 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Second Circuit’s decision in Miller v. McDonald and sent the case back for reconsideration, which affects whether New York can enforce vaccine requirements against the Amish.
  2. The legal fight focuses on New York fining Amish schools for refusing mandated vaccines and whether compelling vaccination violates the community’s sincerely held religious beliefs.
  3. It is asserted that the Amish children in this matter have lower rates of chronic health issues than nearby vaccinated populations, and litigation is ongoing to defend their claimed right to avoid vaccination.

Can bereaved families sue doctors?

A Lawyer Writes • 530 implied HN points • 09 Jan 24
🏥 Health Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court was ruling on cases involving psychiatric injury from clinical negligence involving close relatives
  2. Historically, court rulings have shaped the law on negligence and compensation for secondary victims of medical errors
  3. The recent Supreme Court decision clarified that doctors do not owe a duty of care to close family members for illness caused by witnessing a relative's death due to medical negligence