In the feud between President Trump and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, both are wrong. Judges aren’t partisan hacks, but they do have different approaches to jurisprudence.

Brett Kavanaugh takes his seat amid debates about the Supreme Court’s ‘legitimacy,’ with substantial portions of the population thinking he’s a rapist.

Libertarians aren’t going to agree with Kavanaugh on everything—we don’t agree on everything ourselves!—but he’s a big step forward for constitutional liberty.

My wife simply can’t take nearly a week off work to complete the mandatory training Virginia social services is contemplating for parents who want to help at their kids’ preschool.

Despite the brouhaha and suspenseful plot twists, the president went with what can in this context be called the conventional conservative choice.

There is literally nothing in his record that justifies the smears and demagoguery he’s about to face.

The food fight over Masterpiece Cakeshop shows how pivotal the next Supreme Court vacancy will be.

On the cases with less political valence the justices can ‘nerd out’ on legal theories and reveal their jurisprudential minds when they know their decisions won’t make the front pages.

A protestor’s sign put it, ‘Rule of law = white supremacy, violence against [people of color], violence against immigrants.’ These were law students protesting the rule of law.

Luckily, the festival delivered again, with a disorienting mix of trendy tech panels and sweaty queues to nowhere.

Everyone always tries to draw larger geopolitical conclusions from the Olympics, but it’s really just about the sports.

The justices shouldn’t extend law enforcement’s reach beyond our borders. More importantly, Congress needs to update a 30-year-old law for the digital age.

We have divergent interpretive theories that map onto ideologically sorted parties, so is it any surprise that elections are high-stakes for judges?

The case involves sports betting in New Jersey, of all things, and it could have ramifications for the regulation of everything from marijuana and guns to immigration and health care.

Every four-year term, a president appoints around a fifth of the judiciary. They continue shaping our world long after the president who appointed them has left the White House.

Even if a savvy prosecutor can fit this reign of terror into a proper criminal indictment, why would he? Besides, doesn’t the FBI have better things to do with its time?

In a unanimous ruling Tuesday that splintered on its reasoning, the high court correctly held that the “disparagement clause” of federal trademark law violated the Constitution.

This week, in an echo of the 21 contenders for the Supreme Court rolled out during the campaign, 11 would-be black-robers join last month’s stellar list of 10 lower-court nominees.

This seems to be all just one more episode of Trumpian signaling or, as the court narrated, using a ‘bully pulpit to highlight a changed approach to immigration enforcement’ in the future.

Eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees was the natural culmination of a tit-for-tat escalation by both parties. The brinksmanship is all symptomatic of a much larger problem.