Amy Coney Barrett
Coverage of Amy Coney Barrett in the Nexus archive.
- Justices Kagan and Barrett on tap to testify on Capitol Hill next week
Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett will testify on Capitol Hill next week before the House and Senate Appropriations Committees regarding the Supreme Court's budget request. The court seeks a $14 million security increase for fiscal 2027, with the House proposing a $207 million funding level. Lawmakers aim to focus on operational expenses rather than pending cases.
- Is Chief Justice Roberts moderating from the front?
The article analyzes Chief Justice John Roberts' evolving role on the Supreme Court, noting his transition from a swing justice before 2020 to a moderate dissenter (2020-2022) and a 'moderator from the front' since 2023. It cites cases like the 2012 Affordable Care Act decision and the 2019 census case to illustrate his shifting approach, balancing conservative principles with institutional stability.
- MORNING GLORY: The Supreme Court officially closes the books on another term
The Supreme Court concludes its term, with increased ideological division in decisions noted by SCOTUSblog. The article highlights the gradual pace of constitutional law changes and the media's focus on the Court's impact on American citizens.
- MIKE DAVIS: Dissecting the Supreme Court's 'birthright' betrayal
The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment in Trump v. Barbara, a decision criticized as one of the court's worst. The ruling mandates citizenship for anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of parents' immigration status or intentions, sparking concerns about national security and the definition of American identity.
- Justice Barrett faces conservative ire, sexist attacks after birthright citizenship ruling
Justice Amy Coney Barrett is facing backlash from conservative lawmakers and pundits after voting to uphold birthright citizenship, which is seen as a severe blow to President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda.
- Justice Barrett faces conservative ire, sexist attacks after birthright citizenship ruling
Justice Amy Coney Barrett faces backlash from conservative lawmakers and pundits after voting to uphold birthright citizenship, which undermines President Trump’s immigration agenda. She joined Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and the court’s liberal justices in striking down Trump’s executive order.
- The 2025-26 term by the numbers
The 2025-26 Supreme Court term showed increased ideological division, with 28.8% of decisions split 6-3 along ideological lines, compared to 15.2% the previous term. The final week included deviations from the usual 6-3 pattern, including Trump v. Barbara, where all three liberal justices joined the majority. Other cases like West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Trump v. Slaughter followed predictable ideological splits.
- Closing out the term
The Supreme Court released three final opinions for the 2025-26 term, including striking down an executive order on birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara, upholding Title IX policies on sports teams in West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, and ruling against campaign spending restrictions in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC. The decisions involved multiple justices with varying concurrences and dissents.
- Amy Coney Barrett draws backlash from conservative critics who want her to be a Trump partisan
Amy Coney Barrett, a Supreme Court justice appointed by Donald Trump, faced criticism from conservative figures for rulings that opposed Trump's positions, including upholding a $5 million defamation judgment against him and rejecting his attempt to end birthright citizenship. Barrett joined the court's liberal justices in these decisions, prompting backlash from Trump allies who accuse her of political disloyalty.
- The divided Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision exposes sharp rifts among justices
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment regardless of their parents' immigration status, rejecting an executive order by President Donald Trump. The decision highlighted divisions among justices, including differing views between two Black justices and sharp disagreements over historical interpretations of the Citizenship Clause.
- Amy Coney Barrett Faces Right-Wing Ire Over Recent Rulings
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has drawn criticism from the right for aligning with liberal justices in several cases this year. The article notes her rulings have made her a target of right-wing backlash.
- How the Supreme Court justices ruled on birthright citizenship
A majority of Supreme Court justices upheld birthright citizenship, citing the 14th Amendment as enshrining jus soli. Chief Justice John Roberts and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined three liberal justices to strike down President Trump’s executive order attempting to limit birthright citizenship.
- Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Donald J. Trump exceeded his authority by attempting to end birthright citizenship via executive order, upholding the 14th Amendment. The majority opinion, led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, emphasized the constitutional right to citizenship, while dissenting justices argued the ruling expanded citizenship to include children of 'birth tourists.' Immigrant advocates highlighted the decision's importance for protecting children's rights and access to healthcare.
- READ: Supreme Court's opinion on birthright citizenship, including Thomas dissent
The Supreme Court struck down President Trump’s birthright citizenship restrictions, ruling the policy unconstitutional. The majority, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, included three liberal justices and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, while Justice Clarence Thomas dissented.
- Supreme Court rules Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions are unconstitutional
The Supreme Court ruled that President Trump’s birthright citizenship restrictions are unconstitutional, stating the 14th Amendment guarantees automatic citizenship for nearly all children born on U.S. soil. Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by three liberal justices and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, authored the decision.
- Supreme Court rules Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions are unconstitutional
The Supreme Court ruled that President Trump’s birthright citizenship restrictions are unconstitutional, stating the 14th Amendment guarantees automatic citizenship for nearly all children born on U.S. soil. Chief Justice John Roberts and three liberal justices, along with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, supported the decision.
- The final four
The Supreme Court announced its final four cases for the term, including Trump v. Barbara (birthright citizenship) and cases on transgender athletes and campaign finance. On Monday, the court issued rulings in four cases, including decisions on the FTC’s for-cause removal provision, the removal of a Federal Reserve Governor, mail-in ballot deadlines, and cellphone location privacy. Additional cases were added to the 2026-27 term docket.
- Justices’ financial disclosures reveal Bad Bunny concert tickets, plenty of travel in 2025
Justice Sonia Sotomayor received $4,333 in Bad Bunny concert tickets from Rimas Entertainment during a 2025 trip to Puerto Rico, while Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson received a $2,500 painting for her chambers. Financial disclosures revealed teaching earnings, book royalties, and travel details for multiple justices in 2025.
- Supreme Court upholds state law on late mail-in ballots
The Supreme Court upheld a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots postmarked on Election Day to be counted up to five days after, rejecting the Republican National Committee's challenge. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled federal law does not require votes to be received by Election Day, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the majority opinion. The ruling impacts 30 states and Washington, D.C., ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
- Mail-in ballots will keep their grace period under new Supreme Court ruling
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Mississippi's law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted up to five days after election day if postmarked by election day. The 5-4 ruling permits similar laws in 14 states and the District of Columbia. The Republican National Committee and President Trump opposed the measure, while voting rights groups supported it.
- Supreme Court rejects GOP mail ballot challenge, but Illinois Dems warn voting rights 'still under attack'
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Republican National Committee challenge to Illinois' mail-in ballot rules, allowing ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted even if received afterward. President Donald Trump criticized the decision as a loss and reiterated support for the SAVE America Act, which would ban most mail ballots and require proof of citizenship for voter registration. Illinois permits mail ballots to arrive up to two weeks after Election Day if postmarked on time, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the majority opinion.
- Royalties. Teaching gigs. A concert in Puerto Rico. Financial forms offer view inside Supreme Court
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor received $4,333 in concert tickets for a Puerto Rico event last August, while other justices disclosed royalties from books and teaching income. Financial disclosure forms revealed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson earned $1.81 million in book advances and Justice Amy Coney Barrett reported over $849,000 in royalties.
- Royalties. Teaching gigs. A concert in Puerto Rico. Financial forms offer view inside Supreme Court
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor received $4,333 in concert tickets from Rimas Entertainment, Bad Bunny's label, during a trip to Puerto Rico. Justices reported book royalties and teaching income, including $1.81 million for Ketanji Brown Jackson and $33,285 for Brett Kavanaugh. The disclosures highlight increased scrutiny of justices' financial activities and ethical practices.
- Trump unloads after Supreme Court upholds late mail-in ballots in Mississippi
President Trump criticized the Supreme Court's decision to uphold Mississippi's law allowing mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day. The ruling in Watson v. RNC opposed Trump's push for stricter election rules, prompting him to demand the immediate passage of the SAVE America Act, which would require voter ID and restrict mail-in voting. Trump accused several senators of opposing the bill to enable 'cheating,' while Senator Bill Cassidy, a co-sponsor of the act, disputed Trump's claims.
- Trump unloads after Supreme Court upholds late mail-in ballots in Mississippi
President Donald Trump criticized a Supreme Court ruling that upheld Mississippi's law allowing mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day to be counted. Trump argued the decision, which opposed his push for stricter election rules, necessitates immediate congressional action to pass the SAVE America Act, a bill requiring voter ID and restricting no-excuse mail-in voting. The ruling included a rebuke from Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, who rejected arguments for stricter ballot deadlines.
- US Supreme Court in Virginia case says police need warrants for cellphone location data
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that law enforcement requires warrants to access cellphone location history data under the Fourth Amendment. The decision centered on a 2019 Virginia credit union robbery case, where police obtained location data from a third-party tech company. The ruling leaves unresolved when such searches are deemed reasonable, with civil liberties advocates and states debating the implications of geofence warrants.
- Trump laments 'tremendous loss' on mail-in ballots at Supreme Court, doubles down on voter-ID bill
Trump expressed disappointment over mail-in ballot policies at the Supreme Court and advocated for a voter-ID bill. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, nominated by Trump, dismissed claims that federal laws override Mississippi's rules on late-arriving absentee ballots.
- US Supreme Court deals blow to Trump, ruling states can accept ballots after Election Day
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that states can count mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day, rejecting arguments from the Trump administration and Republican states. The decision, in RNC vs. Watson, upheld Mississippi's law allowing ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five business days, with thirteen states having similar grace periods.
- Supreme Court ruling gives a reprieve to states with grace periods for receiving mail ballots
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the legality of counting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received afterward, preserving grace periods in 14 states. The decision rejected a Republican National Committee challenge to Mississippi's law, which allows ballots to be counted up to five days after Election Day, and spared states from last-minute changes before midterms.
- Roundup: BREC meeting change / Mail-in ballots / Rocket Lab acquires Iridium
BREC's City-Brooks Master Plan meeting was moved to Independence Park Theater for better seating and comfort. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by election day to be counted if received up to five days later. Rocket Lab will acquire Iridium in an $8 billion deal to expand its space services and compete with SpaceX.
- Supreme Court ruling gives a reprieve to states with grace periods for receiving mail ballots
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Republican challenge to state laws allowing mail ballots to be counted after Election Day, preserving grace periods in 14 states. The ruling upheld Mississippi’s law permitting ballots postmarked by Election Day and received up to five days later, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett affirming the practice’s legality under federal law.
- Supreme Court ruling gives a reprieve to states with grace periods for receiving mail ballots
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a Republican National Committee effort to ban grace periods for mail ballots, preserving the practice in 14 states. The ruling upheld Mississippi's law allowing mail ballots postmarked by Election Day and received up to five days later, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett affirming the legality of such periods under federal law.
- Supreme Court ruling gives a reprieve to states with grace periods for receiving mail ballots
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld grace periods for counting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received later, blocking a Republican challenge targeting Mississippi's law. Fourteen states, including California and Illinois, will retain their practices, avoiding last-minute changes before midterms. The ruling clarified that federal law does not require ballots to be received by Election Day.
- US Supreme Court in Virginia case says police need warrants for cellphone location data
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement requires warrants to access cellphone location history data under the Fourth Amendment, citing privacy rights. The 6-3 decision centered on a Virginia bank robbery case, with Justice Elena Kagan writing the majority opinion. The ruling left unresolved questions about the reasonableness of geofence warrants, which allow police to track phones in specific geographic areas.
- Concert tickets, paintings and book deals: Supreme Court justices disclose 2025 finances
Supreme Court justices disclosed over $2 million in 2025 book deal earnings, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson receiving a $1.2 million advance. Gifts included concert tickets and a painting commission, while advocates criticized the ethical implications of justices earning millions from books.
- Royalties. Teaching gigs. A concert in Puerto Rico. Financial forms offer view inside Supreme Court
Supreme Court financial disclosure forms reveal Justice Sonia Sotomayor received $4,333 in concert tickets from Rimas Entertainment during a trip to Puerto Rico, while other justices disclosed book royalties and teaching income. The forms highlight ongoing scrutiny of justices' off-bench activities, including Justice Clarence Thomas's unreported luxury travel and book deals generating over $1 million for Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Amy Coney Barrett.
- Royalties. Teaching gigs. A concert in Puerto Rico. Financial forms offer view inside Supreme Court
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor attended a Puerto Rico concert gifted by Rimas Entertainment, while justices reported book royalties, teaching income, and travel. Financial disclosures revealed earnings from books, speaking engagements, and courses, with Justice Samuel Alito requesting an extension for his report.
- US Supreme Court deals blow to Trump, ruling states can accept ballots after Election Day
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that states can count mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day, rejecting arguments that federal law requires all ballots to be received by election day. The decision, in RNC vs. Watson, upheld Mississippi's law allowing ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received within five business days, with thirteen states having similar grace periods. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, stated federal law does not override state election rules regarding ballot deadlines.
- Supreme Court rules states can count late-arriving mailed ballots, rejecting Trump-led challenge
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that states can count mailed ballots arriving after Election Day if postmarked by Election Day, rejecting a Republican-led challenge. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Samuel Alito dissented, arguing the decision risks election integrity. President Donald Trump criticized the ruling, calling it a 'tremendous loss' and urging Congress to pass the SAVE America Act.
- US Supreme Court says police need warrants for cellphone location data
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police need warrants to access cellphone location history data under the Fourth Amendment. The 6-3 decision centered on a 2019 Virginia credit union robbery case, with Justice Elena Kagan writing that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cellphone location records. The ruling leaves unresolved questions about when such searches are considered reasonable.