Deadline: Legal Blog

The legal losses are piling up at the high court for the infamous Trump antagonist who represented Stormy Daniels.

The Republican nominee invoked a wartime law from 1798 for use against migrants, but there isn’t legally a war. The Supreme Court could get involved.

The Deadline: Legal Newsletter wrap up looks at the debates over executions and "ghost guns," as well as more bad news for the reputation of the court.

“Deadline: White House” legal reporter and former prosecutor Jordan Rubin answers your questions about the Supreme Court, Trump’s trials and other legal issues.

The state argues its ban isn’t discriminatory in one of the most closely watched cases of the new Supreme Court term. The ruling could have nationwide impact.

Even Oklahoma’s Republican Attorney General says death row prisoner Richard Glossip should get a new trial. But at this Supreme Court, it’s not that simple.

Stephen S. Trott, a senior judge on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, wrote in an op-ed that the decision in Trump v. United States has left us “a kingdom within our republic.”

The chief justice and the Trump appointee sided with the government in earlier litigation on regulating the weapon kits. They might do so in the final ruling, too.

On Tuesday, the justices will hear arguments about whether federal law regulating firearms can apply to kits for making untraceable weapons at home.

The disgraced singer made a statute of limitations argument in an attempt to overturn his convictions. The government didn’t even respond to it.

Unanswered questions about Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas linger as a new Supreme Court term begins.