The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday dismantled affirmative action in a 6-3 majority opinion which held that race-based admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Law360 senior Boston courts reporter Chris Villani joins us to discuss the monumental ruling and its sweeping implications for academia and a potentially broad swath of the workforce. Also this week, we welcome Columbia law professor and voting rights expert Richard Briffault to discuss Tuesday’s blockbuster election law opinion ..read more

The U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on a pair of important immigration questions Friday morning, deciding in one opinion to uphold a federal law that makes it a crime to encourage illegal immigration, and in another opinion reviving the Biden Administration’s selective deportation policy over challenges from the state of Texas and others. On this week’s episode of The Term we welcome Law360 senior immigration reporter Britain Eakin who spent the day getting reactions from the immigration law community about what these opinions mean moving forward. Also this week, two big administrative law rulin ..read more

The Indian Child Welfare Act, a 1978 federal law designed to stop the state and federal practice of removing Native American children from their communities, survived the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday after a 7-2 majority held that the law does not illegally tread on state authority in regulating child custody programs. The justices stopped short of deciding the question of whether the law discriminated against non-native parents, but the opinion was hailed nonetheless as a major victory for Native American rights. On this week’s episode of The Term, we welcome Law360 reporter Caleb Symons wh ..read more

In one of the blockbuster voting rights cases of the Supreme Court term, a five-justice majority on Thursday concluded that an Alabama congressional map drawn following the 2020 census diluted Black voter representation in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.  Alabama’s electoral map packed a large number of Black voters into a single district, and the state argued it could not be redrawn to add a second majority-Black district without making race the primary consideration, which it said violated the Constitution. But the majority rejected that argument and instead affirmed a ..read more

In one of the blockbuster employment cases of the term, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday gave companies the green light to sue over strikes that are structured to cause intentional damage to their property, dealing a blow to unions who argued that exposing strike actions to litigation could chill worker collective action. We talk you through the details and implications of this 8-1 opinion on this week’s episode of The Term.  ..read more

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday set out to clarify what constitutes “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act and, in the process, settled on a more narrow reading that will limit the federal government’s authority to regulate wetlands. On this week’s episode of The Term, Law360 environmental senior reporter Juan Carlos Rodriguez drops by to explain the opinion as well as the important consequences it will have for permitting and enforcement. Also this week, a 94-year-old woman whose condo was seized by the government wins an important case involving the takings clause.  ..read more

The U.S. Supreme Court finally chipped away at its mountain of outstanding opinions, releasing five decisions on Thursday. Among those, one upheld a California law banning in-state sales of pork products that come from animals kept in confined spaces, and another favored a trans asylum seeker who sought an appellate court review of their immigration proceedings. We talk through the justices’ latest round of writing and where they landed on these issues on this week’s episode of The Term ..read more

The U.S. Supreme Court took up a case this week that could be the end of the road for a nearly 40-year precedent requiring judges to defer to federal agencies when interpreting statutes that are ambiguous – otherwise known as Chevron doctrine. On this week’s episode of The Term, we talk through how the issue landed at the court, and how far it might go in rethinking the precedent. Also this week, partisan politics were on full display at a Senate Judiciary committee hearing on whether Congress should mandate formal ethics rules for the justices.  ..read more

The Supreme Court this week grappled with an important procedural issue – when legal issues need to be reasserted after trial for appeal – that’s a must-watch for trial attorneys everywhere. On this week’s episode of The Term we talk through the case’s oral arguments, including comments from justices who served as trial judges or practiced in the courtroom themselves. Also this week, big updates on the most recent high court ethics debacle– this one involving Justice Neil Gorsuch– news of which coincided with Chief Justice John Roberts declining to appear in Congress ..read more

When do menacing and unsavory statements cross the line from free speech to a "true threat" unprotected by the First Amendment? That’s the question the Supreme Court faced this week as they considered the case of a Colorado man convicted of stalking who says his First Amendment rights were violated when he was denied the right to explain the intent behind thousands of online messages he sent to a singer. We’ll talk through the questions the justices had at oral arguments, plus dive into the justices’ unanimous opinion allowing federal courts to hear challenges to the structure of government ag ..read more