Federal Court

A US judge has ruled against President Trump's ban on certain media outlets from White House coverage, overturning the restriction. The decision restores access for the affected news organisations and touches on press freedom and the limits of presidential power over media access. The ruling is drawing wide attention as a significant check on the administration's handling of the press.

A US judge has overturned a White House media ban imposed under Donald Trump, ruling against the administration's attempt to exclude certain news organisations from access. The decision is being widely reported by major outlets including BBC News and is drawing significant attention, with many seeing it as a key test of press freedom and the limits of presidential control over media access.

A federal judge has ruled against the Trump administration's ban blocking certain reporters from White House press access. CNN reported the decision, which means the affected journalists must be allowed back into official briefings and events. Supporters of the ruling see it as a win for press freedom and the First Amendment, while critics of judicial intervention are pushing back. The case is one of several legal battles over the administration's treatment of the media.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of people registering to vote. The decision lets states check voter rolls against immigration records, a move supporters frame as election integrity and critics warn could disenfranchise eligible voters, fueling debate over voting access.

CNN has returned to the White House press pool after a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore the network's access, which had been revoked earlier. The ruling marks a significant check on presidential control over press credentials, and the network is covering its reinstatement closely as debate continues over press freedom and the limits of executive power.

A Supreme Court ruling involving a disputed election may conflict with state law, according to reporting from Hawaii. The decision raises questions about how election disputes should be resolved when federal judicial rulings and state statutes diverge. Observers are watching for potential legal challenges and clarification on which authority prevails in administering elections.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration can, for the time being, use its revamped federal voter eligibility database. The decision allows federal officials to proceed with the system while legal challenges continue in lower courts. Multiple major outlets, including the Associated Press, are reporting the ruling, which comes amid ongoing disputes over election integrity measures and state voter roll maintenance.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to run voter citizenship checks using the federal SAVE database ahead of the midterm elections. The decision lets election officials verify the citizenship status of registered voters against federal records. Supporters say it protects election integrity, while voting-rights groups warn it could lead to eligible voters being wrongly flagged or purged from rolls close to the vote.

A federal judge, Trump appointee Stephanie Gallagher, has held the Trump administration in contempt for deporting a man to El Salvador in violation of three court orders. The judge is ordering the government to return him. The ruling, reported by Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney, is drawing attention as part of the broader legal fight over the administration's immigration enforcement and compliance with court rulings.

Maine Senator Susan Collins is running her first campaign since the Supreme Court overturned federal abortion rights, a decision her 2018 confirmation vote for Justice Brett Kavanaugh helped make possible. Abortion has become a central issue in her reelection race, with opponents arguing her vote enabled the rollback of Roe v. Wade, while Collins defends her record in a state that has backed abortion rights protections.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of registered voters. The decision permits election officials to cross-check voter rolls against immigration records, a move backers say protects election integrity and critics warn could lead to eligible voters being wrongfully purged. The ruling is drawing sharp reactions from voting rights groups and election officials across the country.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that Trump administration officials may use a federal immigration database to cross-check voter registration records. The decision allows states and federal officials to verify voter eligibility using immigration status data, a move supporters call a safeguard against noncitizen voting and critics warn could wrongly purge eligible voters. The ruling is expected to intensify ongoing legal and political battles over election integrity and voting access ahead of upcoming elections.

A federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein, warning Attorney General Pam Bondi that contempt charges could follow if the department continues to withhold them. The order describes contempt as 'premature' for now, but signals the court is losing patience with the DOJ's stalling on the disclosures.

A federal judge has referred attorneys representing Donald Trump for potential disciplinary action in connection with a lawsuit involving the IRS. The referral suggests the judge believes the lawyers' conduct in the case may have violated professional standards. Details about the specific allegations and which attorneys are affected have not been made fully clear, and any disciplinary proceedings would be handled by the relevant bar authorities.

The Supreme Court has issued a decision concerning a federal voter-citizenship database, with potential consequences for upcoming midterm elections. The ruling raises questions about how states verify voter eligibility and could influence election administration and turnout battles heading into the midterms, with officials and voting-rights groups closely watching the implications.

A federal judge has ordered the White House to respond by 12:30 PM regarding its non-compliance with a court order concerning press access. The deadline sets up a rapid test of whether the administration will follow the ruling, and the development is drawing wide attention as a fresh clash between the courts and the executive branch over press freedom.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pressing the DC Circuit to vacate a drone flight restriction that effectively criminalized recording immigration agents from the air. The group argues the rule blocks lawful First Amendment activity, preventing the public and journalists from documenting federal immigration enforcement operations. The case is now before the appeals court, drawing attention from civil liberties advocates.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government may use Social Security data to help identify noncitizens registered to vote. The decision, reported by The Washington Post, clears the way for expanded data-sharing between agencies to verify voter eligibility. Supporters call it a safeguard for election integrity, while critics warn it could enable improper purges of eligible voters.

A federal judge has denied a request to block Tennessee Highway Patrol traffic stops conducted in coordination with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The ruling allows the joint enforcement operations to continue while the legal challenge proceeds. The decision is likely to draw reaction from immigration advocates who oppose the stops and from supporters of tougher immigration enforcement.

A federal court ruling requires Texas to install air conditioning in its prisons by 2029, following years of complaints and lawsuits over deadly heat in lockups that often exceed 100 degrees. The decision makes Texas the latest Southern state legally required to cool its correctional facilities, and it is drawing attention to prison conditions and inmate welfare nationwide.

The US Supreme Court's SAVE ruling is being read as a signal that the Court could weaken a key protection that limits last-minute voter purges ahead of federal elections. Election law watchers say the decision may make it easier for states to remove voters close to Election Day, a practice critics warn risks disenfranchising eligible voters with little time to correct errors.

A federal judge in Rhode Island has ordered the revival of the $7 billion Solar for All program, which the Trump administration had canceled. The program funded solar energy projects aimed at low-income and disadvantaged communities across the United States. The ruling means the administration must restart the program while related legal challenges over the cancellation move forward.

The Supreme Court has taken up litigation concerning the SAVE income-driven student loan repayment plan and the federal student aid database behind it, putting billions of dollars in borrower balances back in question. The case tests the Education Department's authority to restructure repayment terms. Borrowers, servicers and policymakers are watching closely for how the ruling would reshape repayment options nationwide.

A U.S. appeals court has upheld the government's designation of AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, a decision with implications for the firm's ability to work with federal agencies and defense-related programs. The ruling keeps in place an earlier determination, and the case is being closely watched across the tech industry as a test of how national security rules apply to leading artificial intelligence developers.

The Trump administration cancelled a $7 billion solar energy grant program, but a federal judge in Rhode Island has now ordered the program restored. The ruling is a setback for the administration's effort to roll back renewable energy funding and a win for states and organizations relying on those solar grants. Supporters of clean energy are highlighting the decision as a check on executive power over congressionally funded climate programs.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court's dismissal of patents covering internet advertising technology owned by a party challenging Google. The court found the claims ineligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act, which governs whether inventions are patentable subject matter. The decision is being closely watched by intellectual property practitioners, as it adds to the line of Federal Circuit rulings limiting software and business-method patents in the digital advertising space.

A high court has ruled that election officials may use a federal database to help identify and remove ineligible voters from registration rolls. The decision clarifies the legality of cross-checking voter records against federal data, a practice that has drawn debate between those who see it as protecting election integrity and those concerned about wrongful removals of eligible voters.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the Trump administration's expansive federal database for use in voter roll screening, per the New York Times. The move is likely to intensify debate over election integrity versus voter access, with critics warning it could lead to improper purges of eligible voters while supporters frame it as a safeguard against noncitizen voting.

A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction barring ICE from detaining immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza in New York, finding the practice unconstitutional. The ruling ends a contested detention operation at the Manhattan federal building and marks a significant legal setback for the agency's expanded immigration enforcement in the city.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling that clears the way for New York to use an expanded federal database for verifying the citizenship status of voters. The decision could affect how the state maintains its voter rolls and verifies eligibility. Details of the ruling's reasoning and its broader implications for other states' voter verification practices remain to be seen.