Civil

The Worst Supreme Court Case You’ve Never Heard Of, and Its Implications for Immigration Enforcement

by

The Supreme Court has been the battleground for many controversial cases throughout American history, shaping the legal landscape in profound ways. One such case, often overlooked in discussions of civil rights and immigration, is Prigg v. Pennsylvania. This 1842 decision not only reflects the tumultuous relationship between state and federal authority but also offers a lens through which to examine contemporary immigration enforcement under the Trump administration. The case centers around the lives of Margaret and Jerry Morgan, a free Black couple whose story illuminates the complexities of citizenship and legal status in America. Background … Read more

Court Wrestles with Past Conviction and Future Relief

by

The recent case of Olivier v. City of Brandon, Mississippi, has captured the attention of legal experts and civil rights advocates alike. The Supreme Court’s deliberation centers on the implications of a past conviction on an individual’s ability to challenge the constitutionality of a law they have violated. This case raises significant questions about the intersection of law enforcement practices, constitutional rights, and the principle of justice in a democratic society. The Background of the Case The conflict originates from a local ordinance in Brandon, Mississippi, which imposes specific restrictions on demonstrators wishing to protest … Read more

Justice Jackson’s Dissents: A Critical Examination

by

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court, has quickly become known for her incisive and often pointed dissents. In a court that is predominantly conservative, her dissenting opinions serve not only as legal rebuttals but also as statements on the broader implications of the court’s decisions. This segment explores her approach to dissent, particularly in the context of civil rights and democratic engagement. The Role of Dissent in Justice Jackson’s Jurisprudence Justice Jackson’s dissents reflect a deep commitment to the principles of justice and equality. Unlike her colleagues … Read more

Challengers to Texas Redistricting Map Urge Justices to Strike It as Racially Discriminatory

by

Civil rights groups and Texas residents have raised significant concerns regarding the new congressional map adopted by the Texas Legislature in August. They argue that this map is racially discriminatory and violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause. The challengers, including the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, have urged the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling from a three-judge district court that prohibited the state from using the map in the upcoming 2026 elections. Background of the Redistricting Controversy The dispute over the Texas congressional map has its roots in a directive from President Donald Trump, who … Read more