Tag: constitutional law

The United States Supreme Court's recent engagement with cases involving former President Donald Trump has reignited debates surrounding the extent of presidential immunity and the balance of powers within the federal government. Notably, the Court's intervention in halting the deportation of Venezuelan migrants under the Alien Enemies Act marked a significant moment in the judiciary's assertion of authority over executive actions. This development underscores the ongoing tension between safeguarding national security and upholding constitutional protections.

In the aftermath of the 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court election, a contentious legal battle unfolded, challenging the very foundations of electoral integrity and constitutional adherence. Democratic Justice Allison Riggs secured a narrow victory over Republican challenger Jefferson Griffin, leading by a mere 734 votes out of over 5.5 million cast. Despite the closeness of the race, the election results were confirmed through two recounts, affirming Riggs' win. However, Griffin contested the outcome, raising concerns over the validity of certain ballots, particularly those from overseas and military voters.

Introduction In early 2025, President Donald Trump issued a series of executive orders—Trump executive Orders 14151, 14168, and 14173—that significantly curtailed federal support for diversity,...

In April 2025, President Donald Trump introduced a series of sweeping policy measures that have significantly impacted both domestic and international landscapes. These measures include the imposition of extensive tariffs on foreign imports and a stringent crackdown on sanctuary cities within the United States. The tariffs, announced on April 2, 2025, and referred to by the administration as "Liberation Day" tariffs, aim to protect American manufacturing and address trade imbalances, particularly with China. Concurrently, the administration has intensified efforts to enforce federal immigration laws by targeting sanctuary jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

On April 23, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order titled "Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy," effectively eliminating the federal government's use of disparate-impact liability in enforcing civil rights laws. This legal doctrine, established by the Supreme Court in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), allows courts to challenge policies that disproportionately harm protected groups, such as racial minorities, women, and the disabled, even without evidence of intentional discrimination. The executive order directs federal agencies to deprioritize enforcement of such regulations and calls for repealing parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, citing alleged conflicts with merit-based practices and constitutional protections.

On the 100th day of Donald Trump's return to the White House, former Vice President Kamala Harris delivered a sharp rebuke of the administration's policies during a keynote speech at Emerge America’s 20th anniversary gala. Framed not merely as political dissent, her remarks tapped into deeper legal and constitutional anxieties about the trajectory of executive power, civil liberties, and democratic accountability in the United States.