The hottest Supreme Court Substack posts right now

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

What Happened Was...

SHERO • 452 implied HN points • 28 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. There were eight separate mass shooting incidents in the United States last week.
  2. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis suspended his presidential campaign and endorsed Donald Trump.
  3. The United States Supreme Court allowed federal immigration agents to remove razor wire set up by Texas state officials along the US-Mexico border.

Texas Governor Risks Lives for Political Points, Despite Supreme Court Ruling

SHERO • 412 implied HN points • 25 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Texas Governor Greg Abbott refuses to remove razor wire at the US-Mexico border despite Supreme Court ruling
  2. Conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously blocked the federal government from removing the razor wire initially set up by National Guard soldiers
  3. Supreme Court ruling in favor of federal government was a major victory for the Biden administration

Trust the Border Patrol

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 359 implied HN points • 06 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, vacated an injunction that restricted the Border Patrol from cutting a fence near the Rio Grande. Governor Abbott disagreed with the decision, claiming Texas's constitutional authority above federal statutes.
  2. Texas put up concertina wire fences near the border to stop illegal immigration, leading to clashes with Border Patrol officials who cut the fences. Issues arose as to whether cutting the fence was justified in enforcing federal immigration law.
  3. The Fifth Circuit granted an injunction to Texas to stop the cutting of the fence, but the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 vote, vacated this injunction without providing any explanation, sparking disagreement and criticism.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Huge Wisconsin race...Chicago mayor...Live Trump coverage tonight...

Bad News • 668 implied HN points • 04 Apr 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Wisconsin state Supreme Court race could have major impact on abortion rights, future control of House, and 2024 presidential election.
  2. Conservatives currently hold a 4-3 majority on the Wisconsin state Supreme Court.
  3. Chicago mayoral election features a progressive candidate facing an eccentric conservative, with significant implications for working class Black voters and progressive movement.

Why SFFA v Harvard Matters

Richard Hanania's Newsletter • 4071 implied HN points • 29 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

The Supreme Court Will Decide if Homelessness is a Crime

The New Urban Order • 179 implied HN points • 15 Apr 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

Jed Rubenfeld: The Supreme Court Flubs a Pro-Trump Ruling

Common Sense with Bari Weiss • 319 implied HN points • 17 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to fire many Department of Education employees, but they didn't explain why. This lack of reasoning leaves people confused about their decision.
  2. Usually, the Supreme Court provides clear reasoning for its rulings, but recently, many of their decisions favor the government without proper explanation. This trend is concerning for legal transparency.
  3. The article suggests that while large-scale layoffs are allowed by law, the court's lack of communication about its reasoning raises questions about the fairness of the process.

Is the Supreme Court seriously going to disqualify Trump?

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 619 implied HN points • 03 Sep 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. There is a 10% chance that the Supreme Court finds Trump ineligible for the Presidency under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment.
  2. Legal challenges to Trump's eligibility would have to navigate multiple obstacles, including Supreme Court acceptance and factual interpretation of the insurrection on January 6, 2021.
  3. The legal argument that the 1872 and 1898 Amnesty Acts remove Section Three's prohibition may present a significant threshold objection to Trump's disqualification.

Stop Praising the Supreme Court

SHERO • 589 implied HN points • 28 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The recent Supreme Court rulings show the conservative majority pushing a political agenda that undermines civil rights.
  2. The Court's refusal to set limits on state courts reviewing certain election issues highlights the importance of the Supremacy Clause over state laws.
  3. While some recent Court decisions may seem reasonable, they could be more about self-protection for the justices than genuine jurisprudence.

Ruminating with Hillary Clinton

OLD GOATS with Jonathan Alter • 569 implied HN points • 27 May 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Hillary Clinton remains optimistic while acknowledging worries about the current state of the world
  2. Analysis of Trump's influence and tactics in politics, his impact on the Republican Party, and the importance of truth in democracy
  3. Reflection on women's empowerment, political engagement, and the challenges of perfectionism in today's society

True Threats And American Cultural Gulfs

The Popehat Report • 3630 implied HN points • 27 Apr 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. American society is diverse and faces challenges in applying legal standards like the reasonable person test across different cultures.
  2. Cultural context plays a significant role in determining what constitutes a true threat in First Amendment cases.
  3. To strike a balance between free speech and protection from threats, considering the intended audience's cultural context in true threats analysis could be a valuable approach.

On keeping Trump off the ballot

steveinskeep • 255 implied HN points • 02 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The 14th Amendment may be used to keep Trump off the ballot in Colorado.
  2. Historians argue the amendment applies to former rebels from the Civil War and also to the president.
  3. The decision on disqualifying Trump centers on interpreting the amendment and the concept of popular sovereignty.

Americans Are Fighting For Control Of Federal Powers That Shouldn’t Exist

Stark Realities with Brian McGlinchey • 1999 implied HN points • 15 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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.

Race, Sex, and the Limits of Definition

Journal of Free Black Thought • 17 implied HN points • 16 Jan 26
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court is being pushed to define "sex" for Title IX sports, which forces courts to decide what counts as male or female and how that should be enforced.
  2. There is a core legal tension between upholding sex‑segregated athletics generally and allowing as‑applied challenges when a state's fairness justification might not apply to a specific athlete.
  3. Every possible path—an explicit biological definition, minimalist guidance, state variation, or individualized review—comes with heavy administrative and equality tradeoffs, so the law may not be able to provide a clean, final answer about identity categories.

Contrived cases make bad law, part 2

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 379 implied HN points • 15 Jul 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. In legal cases like 303 Creative, contrived situations can lead to unsatisfactory outcomes.
  2. The Supreme Court's debate over government's power to compel individuals to act against their beliefs reveals a complex tension.
  3. The lack of genuine, high-stakes conflicts between same-sex couples and opponents of same-sex marriage post-Obergefell shows unexpected harmony.

Supreme Court Roulette

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 339 implied HN points • 04 Aug 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. One proposed idea is Supreme Court Roulette, where a randomly selected Justice's view becomes the opinion of the Court.
  2. The current system of majority rule in the Supreme Court does not necessarily guarantee better or more reasoned decisions.
  3. Implementing Supreme Court Roulette could lead to more moderate decisions reflective of the country and improve incentives for the Justices.

December 26, 2025

Letters from an American • 25 implied HN points • 27 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court signaled that the president likely lacked authority to federalize the National Guard in Illinois, stressing that domestic military use is tightly limited by law and generally requires using regular forces first.
  2. A Justice emphasized that immigration stops must meet Fourth Amendment standards and cannot be based on race or ethnicity, but immigration enforcement has still led to wrongful detentions and reports of racial profiling.
  3. The slow release of Epstein-related documents has revealed material linking powerful people — including repeated mentions and flight logs involving Trump — prompting congressional demands and increasing political pressure while Trump’s defensive posts deepen divisions in his support.

The court's colorblindness scam

Science Forever • 318 implied HN points • 03 Jul 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The recent affirmative action decision by the US Supreme Court has both short-term and long-term damaging effects, particularly impacting students of color and their academic performance.
  2. The court's ruling did not invalidate admission preferences for legacy applicants, athletes, donors' children, and faculty members' children, which predominantly benefit white applicants.
  3. The decision raises questions about the inconsistency in the application of color blindness, as it critiques race-based preferences for some applicants while not addressing others.

Transcript: America This Week, Episode 73, January 26, 2024

TK News by Matt Taibbi • 1236 implied HN points • 27 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  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 Amar Brief

Imperfect Information • 157 implied HN points • 28 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Akhil Reed Amar has a strong reputation and is respected across different ideologies.
  2. The amicus curiae brief filed by Amar in the Trump v. Anderson case could be influential.
  3. The Amar brothers argue that different states can have varying procedures in implementing Section Three of the Constitution.

Why does doctrine get so complicated?

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 359 implied HN points • 08 May 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Legal disputes can often involve convoluted procedural issues and complex legal analysis, even when the underlying dispute is simple.
  2. The legal system is structured to balance respect for state courts and federal rights, leading to a complex web of conflicting doctrines that can make cases like 'Reed v. Goertz' seem arbitrarily complex.
  3. Path dependence and accretion of legal doctrines contribute to the complexity of the legal system, as past cases and precedents shape the development of law over time.

Does standing follow the merits?

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 359 implied HN points • 30 Apr 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Plaintiffs need to establish standing to file lawsuits in federal court, showing a concrete injury caused by the defendant.
  2. In the Supreme Court, controversial cases may involve standing disputes unrelated to the main merits issue, like determining if plaintiffs have the right to sue.
  3. Justices' views on standing may not always align with their views on the case's merits, leading to intriguing discrepancies in their decisions.

‘I Would Prefer Not To’...

Breaking the News • 1603 implied HN points • 29 Jul 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. James Fallows prefers not to sign up with Threads due to reasons like ownership concerns, user interface preferences, and lack of critical mass in comparison to other platforms.
  2. James Fallows prefers not to write further about the 'Lab Leak', citing coverage by David Quammen in the New York Times Magazine on Covid's origin mysteries and the importance of the origin question.
  3. James Fallows prefers not to write about where the economy is headed or media coverage related to the economy at this time.

Sometimes you just have to muddle through

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 219 implied HN points • 24 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court deals with cases in various ways, from overturning prior decisions to affirming them, based on the current Court's stance and interpretation of the law.
  2. The application of laws, especially when dealing with Congressional spending conditions and private plaintiffs suing states, can result in complex legal interpretations and require balancing conflicting interests.
  3. Legal tests and interpretations sometimes need to be messy and leave doors partially open when history and constitutional ambiguity make clarity difficult to achieve.

The least significant cases of the decade

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 239 implied HN points • 28 May 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court ruled on cases that were deemed to be the least significant of the decade, based on various factors like legal issues, difficulty, and practical impact.
  2. The cases analyzed had low scores for interesting facts, law, and difficulty, with some even receiving a total score of zero for insignificance.
  3. Specific cases like 'Kloeckner v. Solis' were highlighted for being particularly unremarkable in terms of facts, law, significance, and practical impact.

A sword of Damocles over the administrative state

Bruce Fein's Pioneering Lyceum • 117 implied HN points • 19 Jan 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court may change the rules for federal rulemaking, impacting how executive branch regulators interpret laws.
  2. Congress needs to take responsibility for writing clear laws to prevent excessive regulatory power.
  3. Requiring Congress to vote on all regulations would increase accountability and reduce the size of the administrative state.

Supreme Court: Will the Tariffs Survive?

The Reactionary • 32 implied HN points • 07 Nov 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. President Trump's tariffs have aimed to improve trade and strengthen the US's position in negotiations. They've also aimed to stop illegal drugs and boost American manufacturing.
  2. Many countries have responded to these tariffs, showing that they can be an effective tool in trade discussions, especially with China agreeing to reduce its tariffs on US goods.
  3. The Supreme Court isn't debating if tariffs are a good idea, but rather if the way tariffs were set up follows the law and the limits of authority.

Richard Glossip: Meet the Face of America's Death Penalty Depravity

The Medicine & Justice Project • 79 implied HN points • 01 Feb 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. Richard Glossip's case highlights the shaky nature of some murder convictions, with his conviction based primarily on unreliable testimony and lacking physical evidence.
  2. The Supreme Court's stance on the Eighth Amendment in Glossip's case underscored a prioritization of upholding the death penalty despite concerns about potential cruelty in lethal injection procedures.
  3. Despite new revelations challenging Glossip's conviction, legal proceedings suggest that finality of judgments often outweighs potential miscarriages of justice in the context of death penalty cases.

America's Rogues in Robes

Diane Francis • 599 implied HN points • 27 Jun 22
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. America's Supreme Court is seen as biased and out of touch with public opinion, especially regarding issues like abortion and gun control. Many Americans support these rights, but the Court's decisions reflect political gains instead.
  2. The Supreme Court's recent rulings are causing concern over social unrest and safety, as they may encourage more gun carry rights while limiting abortion access. This creates a more dangerous environment for individuals in the country.
  3. There's a growing divide in America, with differing access to abortion based on state laws. Many people feel frustrated and are encouraged to vote for candidates who support their rights, hoping to change the current direction.

VSRF LIVE TONIGHT: Episode 215: Leslie Manookian

Steve Kirsch's newsletter • 1 implied HN point • 19 Feb 26
🏥 Health Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Health Freedom Defense Fund's challenge to LAUSD's COVID-19 vaccine mandate has reached the Supreme Court, which could lead to a major national decision on school vaccine mandates.
  2. Advocacy groups are pushing Medical Freedom Acts in multiple states and coordinating federal litigation to limit or overturn vaccine mandates and represent affected people.
  3. Parallel federal lawsuits and emergency motions, including attempts to intervene in disputes over the childhood immunization schedule, are active and could shape U.S. vaccine policy for years.

What is a Machine Gun?

The Apéritif • 19 implied HN points • 15 Jun 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court has ruled that bump stocks are not classified as machine guns, allowing them back on the streets. This decision is based on a specific interpretation of what a machine gun is according to a 1934 law.
  2. Bump stocks help a shooter fire quickly by using the rifle's recoil, but the definition of automatic firing depends on how the trigger is activated. The ruling claims that using a bump stock requires a different method than what is defined as automatic firing.
  3. The debate over bump stocks raises important questions about defining objects in law. It highlights the need to consider how items are used rather than just their physical parts, especially when it comes to safety and regulation.

The Court Can't Heal Itself.

Breaking the News • 974 implied HN points • 15 Apr 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Supreme Court
  1. The Supreme Court needs to be brought under the rule of law like any other institution.
  2. Trust in institutions is maintained through a combination of internal standards and external enforcement.
  3. Some Supreme Court members, like Clarence Thomas and John Roberts, face ethical challenges that can erode public trust in the Court.