Rationally Based is a Supreme Court blog focused on the United States Supreme Court’s decisions, judicial philosophies, and their effects. We analyze landmark cases, legal trends, and the Court’s role in shaping law and society, keeping it clear and concise. Whether you’re a legal professional, law student, or just interested in the highest court, we provide insights into its impact on American jurisprudence. Explore our articles to stay informed on the Court’s decisions and their implications.
Loading articles...
Featured Articles
Latest Articles
Race-Based Redistricting Comes Before the Supreme Court
Louisiana is asking the Supreme Court to invalidate a congressional map that creates a second majority-Black district, setting the stage for a major showdown over the future of the Voting Rights Act and the role of race in American politics. Amid debates over redistricting, the disposition of this case may have long lasting ramifications.
DC Attorney General Files Lawsuit to Stop Federal Takeover of MPD
The District of Columbia has filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald J. Trump, Attorney General Pamela Bondi, and other top administration officials, seeking to block what it calls a "brazen usurpation" of its authority over the city's Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). The complaint, filed on August 15, 2025, asks a federal court to halt the administration's assertion of "direct federal control" over the local police force, arguing the move is an illegal overreach that violates federal law and threatens to create "operational havoc" within the department.
Trump Administration Aims to Weaken Current Gun Regulations
The Trump Administration has initiated a decisive shift in the national debate over firearms, moving beyond legislative battles to employ a novel strategy centered on executive authority. The administration's core objective is to systematically dismantle the federal firearms regulatory framework from within. This is being achieved not by repealing laws through Congress, but through targeted non-enforcement of statutes, strategic reversals in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) litigation posture, and administrative actions to nullify prior regulations.
Upcoming SCOTUS Cases You Should Know About
The Supreme Court’s upcoming term, starting October 6, 2025, features several cases that could significantly impact American law and policy. These cases address complex issues, from free speech in professional settings to transgender rights in sports, voting rights, and criminal justice.
Oral Argument Breakdown: Trump v. CASA, Inc.
In Trump v. CASA, Inc., argued on May 21, 2025, the justices grappled with the contentious issue of national (or universal) injunctions that block the enforcement of a federal executive order beyond the specific parties involved in a lawsuit. The case centers on Executive Order 14,160, issued by President Trump on January 20, 2025, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." This order aimed to reinterpret the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to deny birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or temporary visitors. Multiple district courts issued nationwide injunctions to halt the order’s enforcement, prompting the government to seek a stay from the Supreme Court.
Notable Cases at SCOTUS This Term
Families across the country wait to see if their kids can access certain medical care, parents wonder if their religious beliefs will be respected in schools, and police wait for standards of accountability. As the Supreme Court’s 2024-2025 term wraps up, five major cases are set to tackle these questions and more, touching on LGBTQ+ rights, religious freedom in child rearing, disability discrimination and accommodations, online free speech, and police accountability.
Retired Supreme Court Justice, David Souter, Dies at 85
Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter, appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1990, died Thursday at his New Hampshire home at 85. Despite his Republican nomination, Souter became a reliable liberal voice during his 19-year tenure, prompting the GOP rallying cry “No more Souters” to avoid justices who might shift left.
What is the Supreme Court’s “Shadow Docket?”
The Supreme Court of the United States, often seen as the pinnacle of judicial transparency with its public hearings and detailed opinions, has a lesser-known side: the shadow docket. This term, which has gained traction in recent years, refers to a collection of decisions and actions the Court takes outside its regular, public merits docket—the process where cases are argued in open court and rulings are issued with comprehensive written opinions. The shadow docket, by contrast, operates with far less visibility, often involving emergency orders, procedural rulings, and other decisions made swiftly, without oral arguments or extensive explanations. Despite its lower profile, the shadow docket can have profound impacts on American law and policy, raising questions about transparency and accountability in the nation’s highest court.
Meet Ross J. Fodera, Esq.
Ross J. Fodera, Esq. is the founder of the Fodera Law Firm and specializes in small business legal services, including employment disputes, real estate transactions, corporate formation, contract disputes, and risk management. Since becoming an attorney Mr. Fodera has been involved in a number of six-figure settlement negotiations, EEOC proceedings, and real estate litigation. Mr. Fodera takes pride in providing affordable services and effectively communicating with clients so they understand every stage of their representation. Mr. Fodera is barred in the District of Columbia and Massachusetts.
In a significant policy shift, federal prosecutors in the District of Columbia have been directed to stop bringing felony charges against individuals solely for carrying rifles or shotguns. The new directive, confirmed by U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro, stems from a Justice Department determination that the city's longstanding ban on the public carry of long guns is unconstitutional in light of recent Supreme Court precedent.