In recent decades, Supreme Court nominations have grown increasingly contentious and partisan

Senate confirmations for presidential nominees have become increasingly partisan and delayed

The Senate now takes longer than ever to confirm presidential nominees, with partisan gridlock stalling even routine appointments. The average confirmation time has nearly tripled since the 1980s, leaving key government roles vacant for months.

See who appointed the Supreme Court's 116 throughout its history.

See how a US Supreme Court justice is nominated and confirmed

A president nominates a Supreme Court justice, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducts public hearings and background vetting, and the full Senate debates and votes on confirmation—a process explained step by step in this video.

Watch scholars debate Supreme Court term limits

In a debate from 2017, legal scholars from across the political spectrum spar over whether justices should serve fixed terms. The discussion highlights bipartisan concerns about judicial independence, accountability, and the risks of lifetime tenure.

Watch 2 Supreme Court justices debate how the Constitution should be interpreted

In a 2009 conversation, former Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen G. Breyer lay out competing approaches to constitutional interpretation: Scalia's textualist, strict constructionism versus Breyer's evolutionary view of the Constitution in practice.

A court designed to be the least powerful branch of government became one of the most influential institutions in America.

Some Watergate reforms may have fueled today's partisan, confrontational Congress

The newly elected officials after the Watergate scandal dismantled seniority norms, opened committee votes, and televised proceedings—efforts aimed at increasing transparency that, unintentionally, may have fueled the polarized and combative tone of today's Congress.

The Senate must approve top presidential appointments

Under Article II of the Constitution, the United States Senate provides "advice and consent" on presidential nominees. This resource displays the outcome of every Cabinet nomination since Jimmy Carter's presidency and every Supreme Court nomination in US history.

Explore the most impactful Supreme Court cases in US history

Browse by constitutional topic to explore key rulings, their historical impact, and the legal principles they established. Each case includes a summary of the decision, along with notable excerpts from majority and dissenting opinions.

Hear about the 1962 Supreme Court case so divisive that it caused a justice's breakdown.

Meet the 9 justices currently serving on the US Supreme Court.

The powers of the judicial branch have expanded since the nation's founding

Initially, the Supreme Court was seen as the weakest branch, lacking "the power of the sword or the purse," as Alexander Hamilton noted in *Federalist No. 78*. This podcast explores the political conflicts and pivotal decisions that transformed the court into the powerful constitutional authority it is today.

The 2025-26 Supreme Court docket is poised to reshape presidential power

As the Supreme Court begins a new term, several major cases could define the scope of presidential authority. The court may rule on President Trump's efforts to control state National Guard units, fire independent officials, impose tariffs, and cut congressionally mandated federal spending.

Explore biographies of every justice who has served on the Supreme Court

This archive traces the whole history of the Supreme Court of the United States through detailed biographies of every justice, outlining their backgrounds, appointments, and the legal eras and decisions they helped shape.

Court-packing is the attempt to change the number of Supreme Court justices to shift the balance

Because the Constitution leaves the court's size to Congress, presidents have periodically sought to expand or reshape it. This explainer examines past efforts—including Franklin D. Roosevelt's failed 1937 plan—and why court-packing remains so controversial.

Supreme Court justices serve for life

The Constitution grants Supreme Court justices lifetime appointments to shield them from electoral politics and outside pressure, a design meant to preserve judicial independence but now widely debated due to longer lifespans and partisan balances of the court.

As of 2022, Congress was more ideologically polarized than at any point in 50 years

Research from the Pew Research Center indicates that Democrat and Republican lawmakers have become more ideologically unified internally while moving further apart overall—with Republicans shifting to the right faster than Democrats have shifted to the left.

Hear leading experts on constitutional law discuss the legacy and impact of Marshall

In this podcast, constitutional scholars Michael Gerhardt (University of North Carolina) and Kevin Walsh (University of Richmond) analyze Marshall's 34-year tenure, assessing his role in establishing judicial review, expanding federal power, and shaping the court's institutional authority.

Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1937 court-packing plan sought to expand the Supreme Court—and failed

Frustrated by Supreme Court rulings against the New Deal, Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed expanding the court in 1937. The failed plan triggered fierce backlash and is regarded as the last serious presidential attempt to alter the court's size for ideological ends.

Most Americans support age limits for justices, elected officials

As members of Congress and Supreme Court justices continue to serve at an average age far older than in the past, polls show a majority of Americans favor setting an age limit for these roles. Roughly 79% support caps for federal elected officials, and 74% favor such limits for Supreme Court justices. A constitutional amendment would be required.

The Supreme Court limited federal judges' power to issue nationwide injunctions in 2025

In a 2025 decision arising from litigation over a presidential order on birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court held that individual federal judges may not nationwide block executive policies—curbing the use of sweeping injunctions and reshaping how constitutional challenges proceed through the courts.

Read SCOTUSblog for daily, nonpartisan coverage of the US Supreme Court

Founded in 2002, SCOTUSblog offers expert analysis from lawyers, professors, and journalists. The blog provides transparent, unbiased explanations of significant cases, real-time updates on decisions, and insights into court nominations and trends.

Modern presidential primaries now span months before conventions formalize nominees

In 2020, the major parties selected nominees through 64 primary and caucus contests held over 22 days. Until the 1960s, most nominees were chosen by party leaders at conventions rather than through widespread primaries.

A 1986 Supreme Court ruling prohibited race-based jury strikes, but racial imbalance in jury selection persists

Batson v. Kentucky banned prosecutors from excluding jurors on the basis of race, but critics say it backfired. Prosecutors often use race-neutral pretexts to remove potential jurors that judges rarely reject, and some courts have never found a violation of the ruling.

Some novel ideas to improve presidential debates

The first televised presidential debates of 1960 were seemingly so consequential, candidates opted not to participate in one for 16 years. In the last 60 years, debate format has changed frequently as the political parties and news outlets vie for rules to either protect candidates or increase TV ratings. In this brief video, one expert suggests five interesting innovations to the debate format to make them more informative for the average US voter.

John Marshall inherited a marginal and largely inactive Supreme Court

By 1801, the court had little institutional authority or public standing. Its first three chief justices served only 11 years combined, and in its first decade, the court decided only 63 cases—none of which struck down a federal or state law.

Thousands of state voting changes have been federally blocked since the Voting Rights Act

Since 1965, federal oversight has blocked thousands of state-level voting changes—including redistricting plans—by requiring approval for measures that could affect minority representation, a process scaled back by the Supreme Court in 2013.

The separation of powers is a pivotal component of the US Constitution

Explore how the three branches interact through the Supreme Court case of US v. Alvarez. The Supreme Court first struck down a law, then Congress and the president later revised it—illustrating how judicial review can reshape legislation and executive action.

Hear about the individuals who have reshaped the Constitution throughout American history

This multi-episode podcast series from The Washington Post explores how debates, court decisions, and influential individuals have shaped the Constitution as Americans pushed the nation to live up to its founding ideals.

Courts referee federalism disputes between Congress and the states

Modern federalism is primarily worked out through litigation. The Supreme Court decides disputes in written opinions that explain when federal law preempts state authority, how far Congress's powers extend, and when states may resist.

Take a deep dive into the constitutional foundations of judicial review

In this episode of "This Constitution," the hosts take a law-focused approach to judicial review—examining its roots in Article III and the supremacy clause, its development through Marbury v. Madison, and the ongoing constitutional debates about whether the court's power strengthens or strains American democracy.

How the Trump administration explained the firing of the NSF's National Science Board

The White House argued that the April 24, 2026, decision resulted from the 2021 US v. Arthrex Supreme Court ruling, which "set limits on the powers of executive branch officials who are not Senate-confirmed" and therefore conflicts with the law that created the NSB. As of May 2026, the administration has yet to explain its next steps for the advisory arm of the National Science Foundation, which has lost about a third of its staff since the start of 2025.

A 2013 Supreme Court case weakened federal oversight of redistricting

In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down the Voting Rights Act's preclearance formula, reducing federal oversight of voting laws—including redistricting—and allowing changes to take effect without prior approval.

Why the structure of the National Science Board contributes to the NSF's nonpartisan design

After Congressional debates over the merits of having an independent agency versus one accountable to the president and the public, it was decided that the director and Board members would be presidentially appointed but serve staggered six-year terms. By replacing one-third of the Board's members every two years, each could outlast any single administration.

John Marshall presided over more than 1,100 Supreme Court decisions

During his 34-year tenure, the Marshall court issued 1,129 decisions, including 1,042 unanimous rulings. Marshall authored more than 500 majority opinions—over half of the court's total output during his tenure as chief justice.

Experience famous images from the Watergate scandal, the defining US political crisis of the early 1970s

John Marshall strengthened the Supreme Court and national authority

As chief justice, John Marshall established the principle of judicial review. He reinforced federal supremacy in key cases, defining the Supreme Court as a powerful arbiter between states and the national government under the US federal system.

How Americans have voted throughout history

From shouting candidates’ names, to hanging chads to electronic scanning, the nature of voting has a long, sometimes bumpy history in the United States. See descriptions and images in chronological order with this digestible timeline.

Marshall used deft political maneuvering to increase the court's power in Marbury v. Madison

This podcast explores how Chief Justice John Marshall avoided a direct clash with President Jefferson by denying William Marbury his commission—while simultaneously declaring that courts can strike down unconstitutional laws—cementing judicial review, and expanding the Supreme Court's authority.

See some of the most controversial pardons in presidential history

From Lincoln's selective commutations of Dakota men after an 1862 uprising, to Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon after Watergate, and Bill Clinton's final-day clemency decisions, pardons have long sparked fierce debate over justice, political favoritism, and presidential power.

Roe v. Wade recognized a constitutional right to abortion until Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned it

For decades, the Supreme Court shaped abortion access through constitutional rulings, from Roe's recognition of a right to abortion to Dobbs' returning regulatory power to the states. This explainer tracks key cases, impacts, and current justices' views.

Debating the Constitution today

The Constitution continues to shape our political and social life today. If you want to understand how today’s political debates connect to the Constitution, check out this podcast from the National Constitution Center. The weekly program features experts from diverse perspectives and explores how constitutional principles shape modern issues.

Experts believe a Supreme Court ruling on birthright citizenship is likely in 2026

In September 2025, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to review lower court rulings striking down its executive order on birthright citizenship. If the court takes the case, a decision is expected by mid-2026.

Listen to a podcast that traces the history of DOJ antitrust enforcement

This podcast series traces how the US government's approach to regulating big business has changed over a century—from the DOJ's breakup of John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil monopoly, through lawyer Robert Bork's influence on how courts interpret competition law, to the FTC's modern antitrust lawsuit against Amazon.

Congress is passing fewer laws than in previous decades

A Reuters analysis shows that legislative output in the US Congress has declined as polarization deepens, bipartisan cooperation erodes, and lawmakers rely more on sprawling, must-pass spending bills rather than regular lawmaking.

Understanding why Republicans have challenged funding for the NSF

Lack of Congressional support in funding the National Science Foundation has often been justified by the party's interest in cutting federal deficits and reducing waste for seemingly frivolous research projects. However, an analysis of NSF grant data from 1992 to 2018 shows that awards were given to Democratic constituencies at disproportionately higher rates than to Republican ones, despite a lack of evidence of partisanship in proposal reviews. (Some readers may experience a paywall.)

There were fewer competitive districts in 2022 than at any point since 1970

Analysts reported that the 2022 midterms featured the lowest share of competitive congressional districts since 1970, reflecting how modern redistricting has increasingly produced safe seats and reduced voter choice.

Can courts end partisan gerrymandering?

This podcast explored whether courts can rein in partisan map-drawing, focusing on North Carolina's 2023 redistricting battle, the Moore v. Harper case, and the controversial "independent state legislature" theory.

State supreme court justices almost never serve for life

Unlike US Supreme Court justices, 99% of state supreme court justices face term limits, reselection, or mandatory retirement ages. Since 1970, they've averaged 13 years on the bench—half the tenure of their federal counterparts.

Environmental regulation had bipartisan support in the 1970s

During the 1970s, Democrats and Republicans alike backed landmark environmental laws. Congress passed the Clean Air, Clean Water, and Endangered Species Acts with overwhelming bipartisan majorities—reflecting broad public agreement on protecting the environment.