Supreme Court

Paxton Decision Affirms State Power to Shield Kids from Online Pornography

An Originalist Victory in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, 606 U.S. ___, upheld Texas’s H.B. 1181, a law requiring age verification for websites with material deemed “obscene for minors.” From an originalist perspective, interpreting the Constitution by its 1791 public meaning, this ruling affirms state authority to protect societal welfare while honoring the First Amendment’s core protections. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, applied intermediate scrutiny, aligning with the Founding-era…

Continue ReadingPaxton Decision Affirms State Power to Shield Kids from Online Pornography

A Victory for Parents Rights

Parental Rights Upheld: An Originalist Victory in the Landmark Mahmoud v. Taylor In its landmark 6-3 decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025), the Supreme Court bolstered parental rights under the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, shielding families from state-mandated curricula that clash with their religious beliefs. From an originalist perspective, interpreting t Like this post? Become a Citizen Producer! he Constitution by its 1791 text and public meaning, this ruling echoes the Framers’ commitment to protecting religious liberty from government overreach. Yet, it also sparks debate about balancing individual rights with state authority over education-a tension rooted in Founding-era principles. Drawing…

Continue ReadingA Victory for Parents Rights

Trump v. CASA, Inc. is an Originalist Triumph

The Supreme Court’s Rebuke of Universal Injunctions: An Originalist Victory in Trump v. CASA, Inc. On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, decisively curtailed the use of universal (nationwide) injunctions in legal challenges to President Trump’s Executive Order No. 14160, which seeks to redefine birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. From an originalist perspective, rooted in the Constitution and statutes like the Judiciary Act of 1789, this ruling stands as a triumph for confining judicial remedies to their historical limits, thereby preserving the separation of powers envisioned by…

Continue ReadingTrump v. CASA, Inc. is an Originalist Triumph

An Originalist Perspective on Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic

An Originalist Perspective on Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic: State Sovereignty Triumphs in Medicaid Funding Dispute On June 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a 6-3 decision in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, upholding South Carolina’s authority to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program without facing private lawsuits under 42 U.S.C. §1983. From an originalist perspective, the ruling reflects a faithful adherence to the original public meaning of §1983 (enacted in 1871) and the Spending Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution), reinforcing state sovereignty, judicial restraint, and legislative authority. This column explores the…

Continue ReadingAn Originalist Perspective on Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic

An Originalist Analysis of United States v. Skrmetti

An Originalist Analysis of United States v. Skrmetti Balancing Constitutional Text and State Authority Introduction On June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision in United States v. Skrmetti, upheld Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which bans gender-affirming medical treatments, such as puberty blockers and hormones, for minors with gender dysphoria. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, applied rational basis review, finding the law constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by classifying based on age and medical purpose, not sex or transgender status. Concurring opinions by Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Alito, and…

Continue ReadingAn Originalist Analysis of United States v. Skrmetti

Supreme Court Roundup

Supreme Court Roundup, 6/5/2025 In a series of landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions in 2025, the Court addressed critical issues of discrimination, liability, religious liberty, jurisdiction, and class-action certification. In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the Court unanimously struck down the Sixth Circuit’s “background circumstances” rule, affirming that Title VII protects all individuals from workplace discrimination equally, regardless of majority or minority status. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos saw the Court uphold the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, dismissing Mexico’s lawsuit against U.S. gun manufacturers for failing to prove intentional aiding and abetting…

Continue ReadingSupreme Court Roundup

Pending Supreme Court Cases

Supreme Court October 2024 Term Major Cases Awaiting Decision   Below is the updated list of major outstanding Supreme Court cases for the 2024-2025 term, as of June 1, 2025, with each case linked to its respective SCOTUSblog page for detailed information. The list reflects cases still awaiting decisions, based on SCOTUSblog, with approximately 33 opinions in 39 cases pending. Each case includes a brief description, key issues, potential impact, status, and a direct link to SCOTUSblog’s case page. United States v. Skrmetti Issue: Does Tennessee’s S.B. 1, banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors (e.g., puberty blockers, hormone therapy), violate…

Continue ReadingPending Supreme Court Cases