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

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.

Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review

The 1803 ruling empowered courts to strike down laws that violate the Constitution, permanently expanding the Supreme Court's authority and cementing its role as a coequal branch. This video explains the case and its lasting impact.

A 2024 court ruling has had ripple effects for frozen embryos

The Alabama Supreme Court's 2024 ruling that embryos created through IVF are legally children has had a chilling effect on the fertility industry. A few centers for reproductive assistance paused egg fertilization, and others are questioning where the legal argument will lead. The decision has some surprising implications for the future of IVF technology, including techniques that haven't yet been invented.

Ratified in 1868, the 14th Amendment guaranteed citizenship to all people born in the United States and required states to provide equal legal protection to all.

Explore the nearly 1,000 laws, regulations, and provisions the court has held unconstitutional since Marbury v. Madison

Over more than two centuries, the Supreme Court has struck down nearly 1,000 federal, state, and local measures—exercising its authority to invalidate laws that conflict with the Constitution and shaping civil rights, the separation of powers, and the scope of government authority.

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.

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.

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

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.

A single 1803 Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison, gave courts the power to strike down acts of Congress.

The Supreme Court has greatly expanded executive power in recent years

In Trump v. United States, the court ruled that a former president enjoys absolute immunity for "official acts" in his constitutional core powers. In Trump v. CASA, Inc., the court limited federal courts' ability to block executive enforcement through nationwide injunctions—decisions that shifted power toward the executive branch.

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.

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

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.

A Gilded Age moral crusader convinced Congress to pass a law banning 'obscene, lewd or lascivious' materials from the mail that's central to today's debate over abortion pills.

John Marshall advanced federal supremacy and judicial review

Marshall's jurisprudence emphasized that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, enforceable by an independent judiciary. Through his court's decisions, he affirmed judicial review, broad implied powers for Congress, and federal authority to override conflicting state laws.

Pregnant teachers were once banned from public school classrooms after their first trimester, with school boards believing that they were bad influences on students.

The Voting Rights Act expanded the DOJ's power to enforce voting protections

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 expanded the Department of Justice's power to challenge discriminatory election laws, send federal examiners, and supervise voting changes in areas with histories of voter suppression—although some of these powers have been limited by court rulings since then.

The Dred Scott decision denied African Americans citizenship, upheld slavery, and marked the first use of judicial review since Marbury v. Madison

This page explores the case, providing information on Dred Scott and his case before the Supreme Court. Explore the implications of one of the most critical cases in the history of the court.

The 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote in the United States, was a culmination of over 70 years of organizing and advocacy.

The Voting Rights Act reshaped federal protection of voting rights

Signed into law in 1965, the Voting Rights Act aimed to end racial discrimination in voting. This resource traces its creation and explains how later court rulings have weakened its enforcement power over time.

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.

In the US, any court can rule on constitutionality—unlike in most other countries

In the American system, known as diffuse judicial review, federal and state courts at every level may assess whether laws comply with the Constitution, and their decisions are ultimately reviewable by the Supreme Court. Many other democracies, by contrast, reserve constitutional review to specialized constitutional courts.

The Supreme Court curbed the EPA's power to regulate carbon emissions in 2022

In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the EPA exceeded its authority by requiring industrywide carbon cuts. Chief Justice Roberts' opinion invoked the "major questions" doctrine, which limits the ability of federal agencies to act without explicit congressional approval.

An 1873 Supreme Court case about slaughterhouses weakened parts of the 14th Amendment

In 1873, the Supreme Court's Slaughterhouse Cases ruled that the 14th Amendment's "privileges or immunities" clause protected only federal—not state—citizenship rights, greatly limiting the amendment's power to safeguard enslaved people from state discrimination.

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.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014) extended religious exemptions to family-owned corporations

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that family-owned companies could invoke the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to refuse contraception coverage required under the Affordable Care Act. It was the first time the court recognized that for-profit corporations could hold religious beliefs.

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

Read the majority opinion that established judicial review

In his opinion in Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall argued that a written constitution is "paramount law" and that courts must refuse to enforce statutes that conflict with it. He declared that "it is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is."

Courts have blocked the Trump administration's 2025 executive order limiting birthright citizenship

In June 2025, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the constitutionality of the order. Since then, two federal appellate courts have found the order unconstitutional, halting its enforcement nationwide.

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.

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.

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.

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.

IVF is legal across America, but some worry that state bans could curtail this reproductive technology

This reproductive technology is available across the US, but if states take action to prohibit the discarding of unused embryos or pass related legislation, it could affect access to IVF. Laws prohibiting IVF or effectively outlawing the procedure by defining personhood as being conferred at the moment of conception have been under discussion in several states in recent years, including Ohio, Virginia, and Texas.

The Supreme Court extended the ban on discriminatory jury strikes to include gender in 1994

In J.E.B. v. Alabama, the court ruled 6-3 that using peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on sex violates the Equal Protection Clause, building on its 1986 Batson decision banning race-based strikes.

Plessy v. Ferguson legalized segregation until Brown v. Board of Education overturned it

In 1896, the Supreme Court upheld racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine, enabling decades of discrimination. This explainer traces how Brown later ruled school segregation unconstitutional and reshaped civil rights law.

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.

How Title IX changed college basketball

Until Title IX was passed in 1972, the NCAA had little interest in women's sports because it didn't see them as profitable. This article explores how the AIAW was formed to govern women's basketball, and the massive fight the NCAA eventually put up to take over in 1982. Read about the legal battles it took, and how much money women's basketball is bringing to the NCAA now.

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.

The 1948 Supreme Court ruling was overturned in 2020

In 2020, US District Court Judge Analisa Torres overturned the 1948 Supreme Court ruling that broke up the studio system—effectively allowing the film industry to become vertically integrated once again—with companies like Amazon and Disney taking advantage of the relaxed regulations.

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

This video examines the historical shift from bipartisan, civil confirmation hearings to the deeply divisive process seen today. It focuses on the 1987 nomination of Robert Bork, the most recent nominee to be rejected, as an important moment in this transformation.

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.

The 14th Amendment aimed to guarantee citizenship for formerly enslaved people

The 14th Amendment was crafted to overturn Dred Scott by granting birthright citizenship to formerly enslaved people and their descendants, securing their legal status under federal law.

How a Cleveland woman who slammed the door on police changed the Fourth Amendment

In 1957, a bomb exploded under the front porch of boxing promoter Don King in Cleveland. When police received a tip to search Dollree Mapp's home, she refused to let them in. Her case went to the Supreme Court, resulting in a ruling that barred illegally obtained evidence from state criminal trials.

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.

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.

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.

An 1898 Supreme Court case confirmed birthright citizenship for children of immigrants

In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment guaranteed US citizenship to Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants—establishing a lasting precedent for birthright citizenship regardless of parental status.

The Bill of Rights was designed to protect individuals from the power of the federal government

When the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791, its protections applied only to the federal government. It wasn't until the 14th Amendment (1868) and the Supreme Court's doctrine of selective incorporation that most provisions were extended to state governments—a process that began in 1925.