In the last month, we have gained additional insight into the future of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) ...

The NBA is urging the Supreme Court to give a definitive interpretation of a law enacted to protect video rental and viewing ...

A federal court has ruled that a Mississippi law that requires social media users to verify their ages can go into effect ...

The Frost v. Lion Brand Yarn Co. ruling highlights a new reality: Businesses are expected, both from a legal and ethical ...

In letters made public via the Freedom of Information Act, Attorney General Pam Bondi argued the president has the authority ...

A recent Supreme Court case marks the end of America’s three-decade experiment with extreme leniency.

The court’s rules require many litigants to submit 40 copies of their briefs, resulting in millions of pages printed each term. Critics call the process outdated and wasteful.

The conservative-dominated Supreme Court’s decision to hear the cases comes two weeks after it upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical treatment for transgender minors.

Share on Twitter Share by Email Share Back to top Digital health companies increasingly rely on AI-powered messaging platforms, chatbots, and virtual ...

Unfortunately for TikTok, the Supreme Court didn't take the bait ... Joel Thayer is president of the Digital Progress Institute and an attorney based in Washington, D.C. Zephyr Teachout is a Law ...

The U.S. Supreme Court concluded a consequential week by issuing several significant rulings that touched upon religious freedom in public education, the scope of nationwide injunctions, and the ...