-
Can a Judge Block a President? The Legal Clash Over Birthright Citizenship and Nationwide Injunctions
The Supreme Court’s Tangled Debate: Can Judges Halt Presidential Orders Nationwide? The Supreme Court recently heard high-stakes oral arguments that may shape the limits of judicial power and executive authority in one of the most contentious legal battles of the decade: President Donald Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship. While the Court avoided delving…
-
The Humane Heart of the Law: Lessons from Justice David Souter’s Supreme Court Legacy
In the often-sterile corridors of the legal world, where cold logic and black-letter law are hailed as the gold standard, one jurist stood out not just for his formidable intellect, but for his deep commitment to the human side of justice. In a heartfelt and profoundly reflective piece, Professor Allison Orr Larsen—former Supreme Court clerk…
-
Can the Supreme Court Set Deadlines for the President? A Constitutional Crossroads in Indian Federalism
In a significant and unprecedented move, President Droupadi Murmu has referred 14 constitutional questions to the Supreme Court of India under Article 143, igniting a high-stakes legal debate on the separation of powers, federalism, and constitutional accountability. At the heart of this reference lies a critical question: Can the judiciary impose timelines on the President…
-
When Law Meets Legacy: The Battle Over Birthright Citizenship and a Tribute to Justice Souter
From Universal Injunctions to Unforgettable Justice: SCOTUS Takes on Trump v. CASA Amid Reflections on Justice David Souter In a term packed with high-stakes constitutional questions, Trump v. CASA emerged as a defining moment—not only for what it said about executive power and nationwide injunctions but also for the unique blend of legacy and law…
-
Blood, Bias, and the Bench: Supreme Court Questions India’s Ban on LGBTQ+ Blood Donors
India’s Supreme Court has raised a powerful and long-overdue question that pierces at the heart of constitutional rights, public health policy, and institutional prejudice: Can the state justify excluding entire communities—like transgender individuals, gay men, and sex workers—from donating blood solely on the basis of their identity? The courtroom is now the battleground where outdated…
-
Competition vs. Compliance: Supreme Court’s Wake-Up Call on Overregulation in India’s Economic Ascent
India’s ambition to become a global manufacturing and technology powerhouse hinges not only on favorable trade policies or infrastructural development—but on a regulatory mindset that aligns with market realities. In a landmark judgment under the Competition Act, 2002, the Supreme Court of India has drawn a decisive line between legitimate market dominance and anti-competitive behavior,…
-
Red Cards at the Border: Human Rights vs. the 2026 World Cup in Trump’s America
The global excitement surrounding the 2026 FIFA World Cup — set to take place across the United States, Mexico, and Canada — is being sharply undercut by a growing human rights controversy. In a pointed letter to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has expressed “grave concerns” about the implications of U.S. immigration…
-
Tariffs, Power & the Constitution: Why State AGs Are the Last Line of Defense in Trump’s Trade War
In an era where the legal system is becoming the central battlefield for America’s political disputes, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield has stepped into the ring with bold resolve. Just months into his tenure, Rayfield is spearheading a 12-state coalition challenging former President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff policies, marking one of the most consequential constitutional…
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
lawrota.com 