• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • supreme court

    PODCAST: Obamacare's Supreme Court Challenge

    In this week’s Heritage in Focus, Carrie Severino, Chief Counsel and Policy Director of the Judicial Crisis Network, discusses her work on the Supreme Court challenge to Obamacare being argued next week. Click here to listen. What’s the likely breakdown of the decision going to be? Is the individual mandate … More

    Supreme Court Rules EPA Orders Are Subject to Judicial Review

    In a landmark decision for property rights law, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that alleged violations of the Clean Water Act are not precluded from judicial review. The decision will allow an Idaho couple to challenge a ruling from the Environmental Protection Agency that sought to fine the … More

    Obamacare Debate Comes to Heritage

    In an opinion piece over the weekend, Washington Post Supreme Court reporter Robert Barnes posits that the government may be able to “lure” eight of the nine justices to uphold the Affordable Care Act.  Barnes asserts that even conservative bastion Antonin Scalia might agree with the government that Congress’s power … More

    Morning Bell: Obamacare Is A Cancer That Must Go

    Fellow Americans: It has been two years this week since the passage of Obamacare, and the firestorm it ignited has not abated but only spread and intensified. Most Americans have already made up their minds, understanding that until it is completely removed, the cancer of Obamacare threatens not only our … More

    Strategy Memo Details Liberal PR Plan to Promote Obamacare

    The White House and its liberal allies are planning a comprehensive public-relations campaign for the second anniversary of Obamacare and the Supreme Court oral arguments that will take place later this month. A four-page strategy memo obtained by The Heritage Foundation outlines the strategies and messaging planned for the coming … More

    Morning Bell: A Troubling Trend in the Courts

    Should judges act based upon reasoned legal arguments, or based upon their personal feelings and media coverage?  A controversial recent “statement” made by Justices Ginsburg and Breyer in a case that was the legal equivalent of a slam dunk raises serious questions about what really guides some judges. In the … More

    The Way to Stop Discrimination Is to Stop Discriminating

    In what is most likely a positive development, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Fisher v. University of Texas, a lawsuit filed by Abigail Fisher, whose application to UT Austin was rejected in 2008. As I explained in an article at National Review, Fisher would almost certainly have been … More

    Landmark Supreme Court Ruling on Technology and the Fourth Amendment

    On Monday, the Supreme Court issued an important ruling on the subject of surveillance in light of today’s technologies. Its opinion in United States v. Jones makes the rules for surveillance much less clear, which perhaps is not surprising given the rapid technological change and the need for further legislative … More

    First Amendment Does Not Protect Camping, as Park Service Claims

    Testifying on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, the National Park Service made clear its legal position for declining to enforce laws against camping on federal land with respect to the Occupy DC protest group. But the Supreme Court has already weighed in on a near-identical case and found that enforcing laws … More

    Is the Supreme Court Obliged to Follow Its Own Precedents?

    Certain Supreme Court cases haunt the American people. When particular issues land on the Court’s docket, some Americans proclaim that, of course, the Court will rule this way because, don’t you know, there is a precedent for that. Free speech, free exercise, the Commerce Clause, and abortion—these are only a … More