Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2025): The Authority to Tariff
This article examines Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2025), a constitutional challenge to President Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose sweeping tariffs without direct congressional authorization. It explores the historical limits of executive tariff authority, the lower courts’ rejection of this unprecedented use of emergency powers, and the broader implications for separation of powers as the case awaits Supreme Court review.
Trump v. Vance (2020) clarified that a sitting president is not immune from state criminal subpoenas.
The Supreme Court ruled 7–2 that neither the Constitution nor the Supremacy Clause grants absolute presidential immunity, reinforcing that the president must comply with lawful judicial process like any other citizen.
Drawing on precedents from United States v. Burr, United States v. Nixon, Clinton v. Jones, the decision reaffirmed the principle that no one is above the law.
This case marked a significant moment in defining the limits of executive privilege and accountability.
This article discusses the landmark 1989 Supreme Court case in which Gregory Lee Johnson’s act of burning an American flag during a political protest was ruled as protected expression under the First Amendment. It explains how the Court’s 5-4 decision affirmed that the government cannot prohibit speech simply because it offends others. The piece also explores the aftermath of the ruling. Overall, the article highlights how Texas v. Johnson strengthened constitutional protections for symbolic and expressive conduct. This article examines how gerrymandering continues to shape American politics, focusing on Texas’ controversial new congressional map and the ongoing case, League of United Latin American Citizens v. Abbott. It traces the history of redistricting cases, and explores how the Supreme Court’s shifting stance on partisan and racial gerrymandering could redefine fair representation in future elections. In 1963, the United States Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that fundamentally transformed the American criminal justice system: Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). The Court considered whether the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel applies to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment’s right to due process clause. Carson v. Makin asks whether Maine’s tuition-assistance program violates the Constitution by excluding religious schools from public funding. The case, argued before a conservative-leaning Supreme Court, could set a nationwide precedent on government aid for sectarian education and its limits under the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. The European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (E.T.S.) uses a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, driving industries to become cleaner and more efficient. This article examines its successes, inefficiencies, and the political and cultural reasons the United States has not adopted a similar approach. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) redefined U.S. libel law by holding that public officials must prove “actual malice” to win defamation suits, a standard later extended to all public figures. While this landmark decision safeguarded press freedom and democratic accountability, critics argue its broad reach can unfairly limit private citizens’ ability to recover damages when thrust into the public eye. Non-state actors engaged in espionage and hostile intelligence activity present unique challenges for U.S. national security, as they often fall outside traditional legal and policy frameworks. This article argues that WikiLeaks should be classified as a “non-state hostile intelligence service,” enabling the government to respond under existing counterintelligence authorities without additional approvals, and urges Congress to formalize this approach. The role of religion in public education has long sparked legal battles over parental choice and constitutional limits. This article reviews cases from Engel v. Vitale to Espinoza v. Montana and predicts the Supreme Court will side with parents in the current Carson v. Makin dispute over tuition assistance for religious schools. This article examines the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020), which held that Congress never disestablished Creek Nation land, placing much of eastern Oklahoma under tribal jurisdiction. The ruling reflects a broader judicial shift toward honoring historic treaties and restoring Native American sovereignty over reservation lands.Corporate Accountability: Investigating the Dangers of Everyday Consumer Products
This article analyzes the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Moore v. Johnson & Johnson and its far-reaching impact on corporate accountability, consumer safety, and industry regulations. It traces the evidence of long-standing asbestos contamination in talc products, connects Moore to earlier high-profile lawsuits, and explains how the ruling has reshaped legal standards, strengthened regulatory oversight, and pushed corporations toward greater transparency in product testing and marketing.Engel v. Vitale (1962): Drawing the Line Between State and Religion
This article examines the landmark Supreme Court decision Engel v. Vitaleand its enduring impact on the separation of church and state in public education. Through a close analysis of the Court’s reasoning and the historical context surrounding the case, the piece highlights how this ruling continues to shape constitutional debates over religious expression, government neutrality, and First Amendment protections in schools.Breaking the Glass Gavel: Addressing Gender Gaps in Elite Law Firms
This article examines why women remain underrepresented in elite law firms despite increasing entry into the legal profession. It explores how implicit and explicit bias, structural barriers, and caregiving responsibilities limit women’s advancement, and it evaluates potential reforms, such as anonymous hiring, flexible work policies, and bias training, to promote greater gender equity in leadership roles.U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995): The End of the Term-Limit Debate?
This article examines the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995), which held that states cannot impose term limits on members of Congress beyond those outlined in the U.S. Constitution. The article also explores the Court’s reasoning, Justice Thomas’s dissent, and the historical and modern debates surrounding congressional term limits. The piece connects the case’s constitutional implications to ongoing public opinion and legislative efforts, highlighting how the decision continues to shape discussions on democratic accountability and the balance of power in American politics.Birthright Citizenship: Defining Citizenship Under the Constitution
This article examines United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the landmark Supreme Court case that defined birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. It explains how the Court’s decision affirmed that anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ nationality, is automatically a U.S. citizen. The article connects this ruling to present-day debates on immigration and citizenship, highlighting how the precedent continues to shape constitutional interpretation and national identity discussions today.Speech First, Inc. v. Sands (2023): A Doctrinal Crossroads for Campus Speech
This article talks about how Speech First, Inc. v. Sands (2023) raises important questions about whether college bias response systems can discourage students from speaking freely, even without formal punishment. It explains how the Fourth Circuit upheld Virginia Tech’s policy, while the Sixth Circuit took the opposite approach in a similar case, creating a divide in how courts view “chilled speech.” The article connects this case to earlier First Amendment decisions and shows how campuses are now struggling to balance inclusivity with open dialogue. Ultimately, it highlights that the legal boundaries around free speech on campus are still unsettled and increasingly important.The Gravity of Trump v. Vance (2020)
Texas v. Johnson (1989): Defining the Limits of Free Speech
Gerrymandering: Drawing the Lines That Divide Us
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) & Modern Legal Counsel
Prediction Post: Carson v. Makin
The E.U's Emissions Trading Scheme
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)
Spying on Non-Spies
Religious Freedom in Educational Institutions
McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020)