The Supreme Court told citizens to improve the country’s democracy by passing ballot initiatives. They tried.

The question is less whether the Supreme Court will affirm the right to same-sex unions than how it will choose to do so.

Is racism in deliberations any less toxic than racism in open court?

Both gun-rights advocates and educational equity activists use similar legal strategies. Why does the Supreme Court treat them so differently?

Whatever conservative ethos of restraint there once was has vanished.

Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joins with conservatives Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas to urge the court to take up a drug-sentencing case.

More than 80 years ago, the Court decided that it didn’t need to settle whole cases, but could limit its review to specific questions it liked.

Whatever its merits, the methodology could not have existed until modern times.

Adding more justices to the bench might be the only way to stop them.