“Supreme Court Grapples With Trump’s Plan to Revoke Deportation Protections; The case deals with Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians but could have implications for more than a million from troubled nations”: Ann E. Marimow of The New York Times has this report.
Julian Mark and Maria Sacchetti of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court wrestles with Trump effort to end temporary protections for migrants; The conservative justices appeared sympathetic to the administration’s contention that it can cancel humanitarian protections for Haitian and Syrian nationals.”
And Lydia Wheeler and James Romoser of The Wall Street Journal report that “Supreme Court Appears Divided on Allowing Trump to End Protections for Some Migrants; Several conservatives suggested courts have little power to review decisions about Temporary Protected Status program, but one appeared undecided.”
“Protected Speech Hurdle Complicates Charges Against Comey”: Celine Castronuovo of Bloomberg Law has this report.
“No en banc in Trump appeals of E. Jean Carroll verdict, $83 million judgment; The federal appeals court affirmed in a split decision Donald Trump’s liability for the $83 million civil judgment awarded to columnist E. Jean Carroll who says Trump sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s”: Josh Russell of Courthouse News Service has this report.
You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denying rehearing en banc, and the opinions concurring therein and dissenting therefrom, at this link.
“A Victory for Voting Rights at the Supreme Court; The Justices vote 6-3 to restrict the misuse of race to gerrymander Congressional districts”: This editorial will appear in Thursday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal.
Also in Thursday’s edition of that newspaper, Edward Blum will have an op-ed titled “The High Court Strikes a Blow Against Racial Gerrymandering; The Constitution ‘almost never permits a State to discriminate on the basis of race,’ the justices hold.”
“Some Thoughts About Callais”: Nicholas Stephanopoulos has this post at the “Election Law Blog.”
Also at that blog, Travis Crum has a post titled “The Callais Catastrophe.”
“Racial considerations in voting rights and immigration policy on the last day of oral argument”: Mark Walsh has this View from the Court post at “SCOTUSblog.”
“How a Supreme Court Fight Over Fish Oil Could Raise Your Prescription Drug Costs; The justices are set to hear Hikma v. Amarin, a battle over drug patents that could raise costs for patients and change the way generic companies do business”: Leslie Walker of Tradeoffs recently had this report.
“All Six Conservative Justices Attended Trump’s State Dinner; Their appearance seemed at odds with the chief justice’s oft-stated message that the court he leads avoids even the appearance of political splits”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report.
“Will Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric matter at the Supreme Court?” Joan Biskupic of CNN has this news analysis.
“Trump Is Going After Birth Control. Here’s Why. Contraception was politically untouchable — until now.” Law professor Mary Ziegler has this essay online at Politico Magazine.
“FLINCH: A friendly debate on Temporary Protected Status.” Adam Unikowsky has this post at his Substack site, “Adam’s Legal Newsletter.”
“The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Just Issued the Worst Ruling in a Century; This evisceration of the Voting Rights Act requires us to take SCOTUS reform more seriously”: Law professor Richard L. Hasen has this Jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“The Supreme Court Just Neutered the Voting Rights Act”: Law professor Noah Feldman has this essay online at Bloomberg Opinion.
“Supreme Court Deals Further Blow to Voting Rights Act; The court struck down Louisiana’s voting map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander in a move that could make it harder for lawmakers to create majority-minority voting districts”: Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times has this report.
Justin Jouvenal and Patrick Marley of The Washington Post report that “Supreme Court limits key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act; The decision could touch off a scramble by Republicans to redraw majority-minority congressional districts, especially in the South, that could cost many Black Democrats their seats.”
David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times reports that “Supreme Court limits Voting Rights Act in setback for Black Democrats.”
James Romoser of The Wall Street Journal reports that “Supreme Court Curbs Protections for Minority Voters in Election Maps; The 6-3 decision, involving two majority-Black districts in Louisiana, further weakens the Voting Rights Act.”
Maureen Groppe of USA Today reports that “Supreme Court sides against Black voters in blow to landmark civil rights law; The high court effectively struck down a Black majority congressional district in Louisiana and limited a landmark civil rights law passed to protect the voting power of racial minorities.”
And Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reports that “Supreme Court limits racial challenges under Voting Rights Act, hands GOP states new mapmaking power.”
“Donald Trump’s Pardon Economy: For some wealthy offenders, clemency is just a golf game — or a million-dollar plate at Mar-a-Lago — away.” Ruth Marcus has this article in the May 4, 2026 issue of The New Yorker.
“Supreme Court Deals Crushing Blow to the Voting Rights Act”: Ed Kilgore has this post at the “Intelligencer” blog of New York magazine.
“Kash Patel’s Implausible Lawsuit Against The Atlantic; The F.B.I. director’s lawyers seem to misunderstand how the law (or logic) works”: Fabio Bertoni has this essay online at The New Yorker.
“On 6-3 Party Line Vote, Supreme Court Drastically Weakens Voting Rights Act in Callais Case to Make It Much Harder for Minority Plaintiffs to Get Fair Representation in Redistricting”: Rick Hasen has this post at his “Election Law Blog.”
“Six Conservative Justices Make King Charles Dinner Guest List”: Seth Stern of Bloomberg Law has this report.
