Noah Feldman

The Supreme Court's decision this week to allow Alabama to use a congressional map that the lower courts had twice overturned as racially discriminatory

The Supreme Court’s decision this week to allow Alabama to use a congressional map that the lower courts had twice overturned as racially discriminatory marks an important stage in the evolution of the court as an institution — and of the US as a democracy. The ruling sends all Americans, as voters and citizens, a clear message: When it comes to ensuring fair elections, we’re on our own.

By allowing a racially discriminatory map in Alabama, the justices have signaled they are effectively exiting the business of policing our voting rights

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow Alabama to use a congressional map that the lower courts had twice overturned as racially discriminatory marks an important stage in the evolution of the c

Think the Supreme Court is hopelessly divided? As it turns out, there is an issue that can produce unanimity among the justices: Using marijuana every other day isn’t a sufficient reason for the government to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to bear arms.

Think the Supreme Court is hopelessly divided? As it turns out, there is an issue that can produce unanimity among the justices: Using marijuana

Think the Supreme Court is hopelessly divided? As it turns out, there is an issue that can produce unanimity among the justices: Using marijuana every other day isn’t a sufficient

In an era when the US routinely flouts international law by arresting or killing foreign leaders, at the direction of the president and with the acquiescence of Congress, the Supreme Court today ruled that the courts should not participate in the project of protecting human rights abroad. Thus is the American government’s abandonment of the cause of international human rights complete.

In an era when the US routinely flouts international law by arresting or killing foreign leaders, at the direction of the president and with the acquiescence of Congress, the Supreme Court today ruled that the courts should not participate in the project of protecting human rights abroad. Thus is the American government’s abandonment of the cause of international human rights complete.

In a decision that redefines what it means to be heartless, the Supreme Court has held that by stopping asylum seekers from crossing the border, the US can avoid ever having to determine whether their lives are in danger if they return home. The majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, is a case study in the absurdities of legalism, and why it has been condemned since the days of Jesus of Nazareth.