President-elect Donald Trump's recent defeat at the Supreme Court tells us important things about the high court.

When the Supreme Court justices first shared an inaugural stage with Donald Trump, they heard the new president deliver a 16-minute declaration against the country and vow, “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

The Supreme Court decided, by a scant 5–4 margin, that President Donald Trump would have to (virtually) sit through a sentencing hearing.

The Supreme Court seemed likely to uphold a new law that could force TikTok to shut down in the U.S., with conservative and liberal justices alike expressing skepticism about the legal challenge.

The Supreme Court is under great stress, if not in crisis. So says Chief Justice John Roberts in his annual report. In important respects, Roberts is surely correct. The public’s trust in the ...

"Allowing the sentencing to proceed reaffirms the principle that the legal process must apply equally to all citizens," said Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

The Roberts court used a novel doctrine to blunt or undo many of Biden’s policy initiatives. But the president-elect was left curiously untroubled by this de facto judicial veto during his last term.

Lower courts ruled that a task force that determines which treatments must be covered at no cost had not been validly appointed.

The Supreme Court appeared to favor the government's national security claims over TikTok's 1st Amendment argument.

He grew up in Long Beach, Indiana. As an attorney for the government and in private practice, he argued 39 cases before the US Supreme Court and won 25 of them. Chancellor of the Smithsonian Institution. Roberts is the youngest chief justice since John Marshall in 1801.

Two Republican appointees, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, joined the court’s three liberals in ordering the president-elect to face sentencing on Friday.

The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to reject an appeal from President Trump that sought to block his sentencing Friday in the hush-money case.