Free Republic

President Donald Trump remade the Republican Party in his own MAGA image. Will he now do the same to the conservative legal movement? During his first term, Trump benefited immeasurably from his association with Leonard Leo, the former Federalist Society official whose advice on judicial nominations helped Trump to transform the U.S. Supreme Court into a conservative legal juggernaut that eliminated the constitutional right to abortion, overturned affirmative action in higher education, and expanded the right to keep and bear arms. Such rulings will likely be remembered as Trump's most far-reaching accomplishments as president. Yet now, Trump is denouncing both...

"you know it's not my style to criticize people in the conservative movement and I'm not going to do it in this video by name but I will say that there's a group of people out there that are very angry with Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett and I think that's really not warranted and arguably a big mistake from the perspective of saving our Second Amendment rights and our constitution"

The Supreme Court has denied the Trump administration’s request to block a lower court ruling that forces the State Department to pay out $2 billion in foreign assistance, despite concerns that the order was legally dubious and that much of the money would be unrecoverable.Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, dissented forcefully, warning that the ruling gives an unchecked district judge the power to compel massive taxpayer-funded payments with no higher court review.”I am stunned,” Alito wrote, calling the lower court’s actions a “lawless order” that disregarded sovereign immunity and basic judicial restraint.Additionally,...

Amy Coney Barrett strikes again—alongside Justice Roberts. However, by now, Roberts’ betrayals have become pretty much predictable, but many had high hopes for Barrett, given her history as a clerk for Justice Scalia, one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices of our time. In fact, she was once hailed as “Scalia’s heir.” ... Sadly, that claim couldn’t be further from the truth. In what many conservatives are calling an outright slap in the face, Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice Roberts dealt a blow to President Trump and the US Constitution. They got political, sided with the progressives, and ruled...

The United States Supreme Court has denied President-elect Trump's petition to block his Friday sentencing in New York v. Trump. Trump needed five votes in order to have his request granted. The note on the order suggests Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett voted with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Katanji Brown Jackson. Trump's sentencing is now expected to move forward, with the president-elect expected to appear virtually for the proceeding, scheduled for 9:30 am Friday

WASHINGTON, DC – Arizona can continue requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote while legal challenges continue in court, but once registered, people can still vote in presidential elections or vote by mail without such proof, a fractured Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. Election law in Arizona has required proof of citizenship since 2004. A divided Supreme Court held in 2013 that a federal law allowing people to register to vote with a federal form that does not require citizenship proof overrides state law, including Arizona’s. Since then, registrants using a standard registration form must present proof, but applicants...

The Supreme Court Trump v. United States ruling that former presidents are entitled to some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution has significant implications for the ongoing legal battles surrounding Donald Trump. This ruling, widely perceived as a victory for Trump, has nuanced elements that warrant closer scrutiny, particularly in the comments made by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.The Court’s decision confirmed that presidents are protected from prosecution for official actions extending to the "outer perimeter" of their office, while unofficial conduct remains vulnerable to legal scrutiny. This distinction is crucial, as it provides a pathway for prosecutors to refocus their...

On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Fischer v. United States that a federal obstruction law does not apply to January 6 protesters. The case affects hundreds of individuals who participated in the mostly peaceful "breach" of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Those sentences will all need to be reviewed now. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion. Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissented, joined by Sotomayor and Kagan. Plaintiffs argued that prosecutors misused a felony law, 18 U.S. Code § 1512, which involves tampering with a witness, victim, or informant against J6 suspects. The law was used...

DAVID HARSANYI FROM THE FEDERALIST 1:00 PM on October 28, 2022... More than 350 literary workers—agents, editors, publicists, and writers—have signed an open letter demanding Penguin Random House drop publication of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s upcoming book. It should be noted, that there are some legitimate editors on the list, but many signees –-“Leslie” and editorial interns and so on –- are not exactly Nan Talese. And yet, the document, brimming with nonsensical, contradictory, confusingly reasoned claims, is a useful window into the increasingly authoritarian mindset of the cultural American left. The letter argues that Random House has...