When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reflects on the Supreme Court's recent rulings, she sees an inconsistency.» Read More
If anyone thought a sluggish economy with high unemployment would dampen campaign spending for the 2010 midterm elections, they couldn't be more wrong. A Supreme Court ruling, tight races and grass roots activism will make this the most expensive midterm election in history—with fundraising reaching levels never seen before.
The Supreme Court ruled that a section of the 1988 federal fraud statute making it a crime to deprive others “of the intangible right of honest services” was unconstitutionally vague, leaving courts that relied on the statute in the lurch, the NYT reports.
Facing pressure from critics of Wall Street to limit its role in elections, Goldman Sachs has pledged not to spend any of its vast corporate reserves on political advertising. The NYT reports.
Former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling’who is three-and-a-half years into a 24-year prison sentence—wants out of jail while a federal appeals court reconsiders his case.
Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe says she plans to vote to confirm Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice.
At issue isn’t whether publishers can make violent games, but whether states can impose sales restrictions on those titles—effectively declaring them to be on the same level as pornography and legally limit their sale.
We vote for President—the executive branch. We vote for Congress—the legislative branch. Why can't we vote for the Supreme Court—the judicial branch?
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether California can ban the sale or rental of violent video games to children.
President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he will not insist that his Supreme Court nominee pass any "litmus tests" in supporting a woman's right to have an abortion, but made clear he'll choose a candidate who will consider personal privacy and women's rights.
A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling offers investors no help in combatting excessive mutual fund fees. And shareholders advocates say the ruling may spark a new round of litigation.
If there is a protracted battle on any nominee or if any nominee is withdrawn after they are proposed, the process has the potential to wipe out most of the summer and part of the fall. This would leave little time to pass any meaningful legislation before Congress adjourns before the mid-term elections.
The Supreme Court’s decision to treat business entities as “people” has fired up political pundits and lobbyists on all sides, writes William Dunkelberg, Economics Professor at Temple University.
The Supreme Court struck down Thursday long-standing limits on corporate spending in U.S. political campaigns, such as this year's congressional races and the 2012 presidential contest.
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to order immediate closure of shipping locks near Chicago to prevent Asian carp from infesting the Great Lakes. The court rejected a request by Michigan for a preliminary injunction to close the locks temporarily while a long-term solution is sought to the threatened invasion by the ravenous fish.
As I predicted here on this blog this morning, the American Needle vs. The NFL Supreme Court hearing was a total buzzkill.
You are going to be told over and over again today that this American Needle case against the NFL, that is being heard today in front of the Supreme Court, is a case of paramount importance. That it can forever change how sports leagues are run.
In the coming decade, Linux and other open source implementations will continue their migration from back office transaction processing and mission critical applications to the mobile and desktop computing spaces. This will transform the nature of communications and computing devices from static and utilitarian to dynamic and intelligent, writes Keith Bergelt, CEO of Open Invention Network.
The Supreme Court says it will decide how much privacy workers have when they send text messages from company accounts.
Attorneys for former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling say the law under which he was convicted in 2006 is "unconstitutionally vague," and that he government has repeatedly misused the law to suit "whatever meaning is necessary to prosecute whatever defendant happens to be in the government's sights."
The Supreme Court has raised doubts about the validity of part of the anti-fraud law enacted in response to Enron and other corporate scandals early this decade.