A D.C. group pushed voter suppression measures then spent millions to elect the North Carolina Supreme Court justices hearing lawsuits against these changes.
A ruling against disparate impact analysis would be a blow to the nation’s larger civil rights laws and to some of its most vulnerable populations.
Overly broad state religious freedom restoration acts, or RFRAs, threaten true religious freedom and could have far-reaching negative consequences.
By upholding Florida’s ban on judges directly seeking campaign cash, the Supreme Court recognizes money’s corrosive effect on judicial elections.
Legal disputes over gun violence, money in politics, and voting rights illustrate the profound impact that U.S. federal courts have on the lives of all Americans.
Elected judges in Alabama cater to their conservative constituents by defying marriage equality and sentencing convicts to death.
King v. Burwell has the potential to undo all of the significant improvements to health care in America by creating a death spiral of higher premiums for fewer, sicker customers.
A ruling for the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell would take away quality, affordable health care from millions of Americans.
This new minidocumentary from Legal Progress showcases the real human impact of special interest money that is infiltrating judicial elections by featuring one North Carolina family’s story of how coal ash pollution poisoned their community.
U.S. Supreme Court Could Allow Judges in 30 States to Solicit Campaign Contributions from Wealthy Donors
Most states ban the personal solicitation of campaign cash, but the U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide whether these laws violate judicial candidates’ free speech rights.