North Dakota's state constitution requires at least four of the five state Supreme Court justices to agree for a law to be declared unconstitutional.
November 21, 2025
high
legal
State constitutional requirement for declaring laws unconstitutional in North Dakota's highest court.
Under United States law, political speech and matters of public concern receive First Amendment protection, which makes defamation claims involving such speech more difficult for plaintiffs.
November 14, 2025
high
legal
General principle of U.S. constitutional and defamation law regarding protection of political speech.
The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes that federal law takes precedence over state law, which means state officials generally cannot prosecute federal agents for actions taken in the course of their federal duties.
October 24, 2025
high
constitutional
The constitutional doctrine of federal supremacy limits state authority to interfere with federal officers performing official functions.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals' rights to free speech, including the right to engage in peaceful protest.
October 23, 2025
high
legal_principle
General constitutional protection for speech and peaceful assembly in the United States.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals against unreasonable seizures and the use of excessive force by government agents.
October 23, 2025
high
legal_principle
General constitutional protection governing searches, seizures, and use of force in the United States.
Criminal defendants may request to wear civilian clothing and to appear without visible shackles or restraints during court appearances to reduce the risk of juror prejudice and to help protect their constitutional right to a fair trial.
October 10, 2025
high
legal_procedure
Defense motions in criminal cases commonly seek to minimize visible signs of pretrial incarceration or restraint to avoid influencing juror perceptions.
Proposition 50 (California) would temporarily amend the California Constitution to permit implementation of new congressional district maps that bypass state prohibitions on gerrymandering and could change the partisan composition of certain districts.
November 04, 2024
high
temporal
Policy description of the substantive effect of the ballot measure if adopted.
In 2024 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the federal prohibition on firearm possession by unlawful drug users is unconstitutional in most cases, stating that historical tradition does not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance use but may support limits on a presently intoxicated person's right to carry.
January 01, 2024
high
judicial
Appellate-court interpretation of the Gun Control Act provision in light of the 2022 Supreme Court framework.
A 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision held that the Second Amendment generally protects the right to carry firearms in public for self-defense and that firearm restrictions must be grounded in the nation’s history.
June 23, 2022
high
temporal
Summary of the Supreme Court's legal test for assessing firearm restrictions following the 2022 ruling.
In 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm in public and established a constitutional test for evaluating firearms regulations that focuses on the nation's history and tradition of firearms regulation.
January 01, 2022
high
temporal
Supreme Court precedent setting the legal framework used to assess many subsequent gun-regulation challenges.
In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment generally protects an individual's right to carry firearms in public for self-defense and that firearm restrictions must be supported by the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.
2022
high
judicial
Summarizes the Supreme Court's 2022 constitutional standard for evaluating firearm regulations.
A 2022 Supreme Court decision ended a constitutional right to abortion.
2022
high
temporal
Supreme Court ruling that altered constitutional protections for abortion
A 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling established that defense counsel may not concede a criminal defendant's guilt over the defendant's express objection, creating a basis for a new trial when counsel overrides the defendant's decision to maintain innocence.
June 25, 2018
high
legal_precedent
U.S. Supreme Court precedent protecting a criminal defendant's autonomy to decide fundamental trial choices, including maintaining innocence.
An 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling has long been interpreted to support birthright citizenship for children born in the United States regardless of their parents' immigration status.
January 01, 1898
high
legal
References longstanding Supreme Court precedent (1898) underpinning the doctrine of birthright citizenship.
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits state actors, including public schools and universities, from denying any person the equal protection of the laws on the basis of race.
July 09, 1868
high
legal
Constitutional protection limiting discriminatory actions by government entities and public institutions.
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution confers citizenship on everyone born on American soil, with narrow exceptions for children of foreign diplomats and for those born to a foreign occupying force.
July 09, 1868
high
legal
Constitutional rule defining birthright citizenship and its limited exceptions under U.S. law.
The Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the United States Constitution (signed September 17, 1787) establishes that federal law takes precedence over state law, a principle courts have applied to limit state authority to prosecute federal officers for actions taken within the scope of their federal duties.
September 17, 1787
high
temporal
Foundational constitutional principle governing conflicts between federal and state authority.
U.S. law is unsettled on whether federal officials may deport noncitizens who are already present in the United States based solely on their speech.
high
legal
Legal question about the interaction between First Amendment protections and immigration enforcement actions such as deportation.
U.S. presidents may cite Article II of the U.S. Constitution and commander-in-chief powers when issuing directives related to the armed forces.
high
legal
Constitutional basis commonly invoked for executive actions concerning military matters
A legal defense can assert that an indictment signed or secured by an official who was invalidly appointed as an interim U.S. Attorney may be void and subject to dismissal, including dismissal with prejudice, based on alleged constitutional or statutory appointment defects.
medium
legal_argument
Commonly raised defense argument challenging the validity of indictments on appointment-ground defects.
The legal theory that a person could effectively serve more than two elected presidential terms by first being elected vice president and then succeeding to the presidency is constitutionally untested and legal experts are divided on whether it would be valid.
high
constitutional
Describes an unresolved constitutional interpretation related to succession and term limits.
Under United States constitutional law, the First Amendment protects speech, but communications that constitute true threats or threatening communications are not protected.
high
legal
General U.S. First Amendment principle distinguishing protected speech from threats.
Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, known as the Speech or Debate Clause, provides members of Congress with protections against being arrested or questioned by law enforcement for actions and statements performed in the course of their legislative duties, but those protections are not absolute and their scope is subject to ongoing legal debate.
high
constitutional
Constitutional provision establishing legislative immunities and their contested limits in separation-of-powers disputes.
Subpoenas for telecommunications records in federal investigations can be accompanied by nondisclosure orders directing providers not to notify targets, which can raise legal issues when the records sought concern members of Congress or other constitutionally protected actors.
high
legal
Intersection of investigative subpoena practice, provider gag orders, and constitutional protections for certain categories of individuals.
Under the U.S. constitutional framework, states retain authority to establish the time, place, and manner of elections unless Congress enacts federal laws that expressly preempt state election procedures.
high
legal
Baseline allocation of authority between states and federal government regarding election regulation and the potential for federal preemption.
Presidential pardons issued by the President of the United States apply only to federal offenses and do not extend to state criminal charges.
high
legal
Scope of presidential pardon power under U.S. law
The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution can be invoked as a legal basis to challenge state criminal charges by arguing that federal law or federal official duties preempt state law.
high
legal
Use of Supremacy Clause in legal defenses against state prosecution