This piece has been updated throughout to reflect breaking news in advance of the president's 11 a.m. speech.
Interview: A key NSA reform panelist explains their recommendations
Interview: A key member of the panel advising Obama about NSA surveillance reform says Uncle Sam needs to get out of the metadata-storage business
The fatal flaw in the Obama administration's defense of metadata collection.
Never say never: The Supreme Court is an unpredictable body.
A ruling on the Obamacare contraception mandate could give corporations all kinds of new powers.
Religious supremacy may be on the rise at the Supreme Court
Justice Elena Kagan framed the stakes in Town of Greece v. Galloway, the church-state case that the Supreme Court heard Wednesday, at the very beginning of the oral argument. “Suppose that as we began this session of the Court, the chief justice had called a minister up to the front of the courtroom, facing the lawyers, maybe the parties, maybe the spectator,” she said.
On the second day of the Supreme Court term, the justices debated whether limits on aggregate campaign contributions were necessary to prevent individual donors from corrupting politicians through quid pro quo gifts.
Last week, with little fanfare, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) released a previously secret opinion upholding the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance of telephone metadata. The opinion, which deserves more attention than it has received, is a cavalier piece of work. Judge Claire Eagan fails even to consider, let alone to rebut, the strong arguments suggesting that the NSA programs violates both the U.S.
The Supreme Court has played whack-a-mole with the Voting Rights Act: Strike down one part of the law, encourage people to use another part of it, then strike that part down. The Texas lawsuit gives them another whack.