Latest Stories from ISCOTUSnow

Thu 24 Apr, 2014

On April 28, 2014, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in Lane v. Franks. This case questions the extent of free speech against qualified immunity. Professor Sheldon Nahmod (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) explains the background and issues at stake in the case.

Wed 23 Apr, 2014

Did you miss your Supreme Court news this week? Let our Weekly Roundup help. (To stay on top of the latest Supreme Court happenings, follow ISCOTUS on Twitter.)

VIDEO: This week, the Supreme Court hears arguments in a case that could shape the future of TV broadcasting. Professor Ed Lee explains the issues in ABC v. Aereo

This week's oral argument is not the first time the Supreme Court will decide on a First Amendment right to lie. Discover the last case in which the Court faced the issue (and how it might affect the current one) in the latest Drama in the Court post

Prof. Ed Lee analyzes the Aereo case and predicts a winner

The Court ruled this week that Michigan's voter ban on affirmative action is constitutional. Learn about what the divided Court said

Tue 22 Apr, 2014

Guest post by Professor Edward Lee of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

On April 22, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in an important copyright case involving Aereo, an Internet TV service from Brooklyn that has the financial backing of media mogul Barry Diller. The case has received a lot of media attention because it pits a disruptive Internet startup against the old-line broadcast TV networks. But it also has the potential to transform the cable industry and the way in which people watch TV.

Predicting the winner: A Win for Aereo?

Tue 22 Apr, 2014

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in American Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Aereo. Professor Edward Lee of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law explains why Aereo's system is a problem for the broadcasters and what the issues are in this case.

Mon 21 Apr, 2014

By Professor Christopher Schmidt. This post is part of ISCOTUS Director Schmidt's "Drama in the Court" series.

Tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, a First Amendment challenge to an Ohio law that prohibits intentionally false statements about political candidates. The case itself presents the basic free speech question only obliquely. The central issue before the Court is a technical one: whether a party can even go to court to challenge this kind of law prior to being prosecuted for violating that law. This is a question, in other words, of whether the plaintiff has “standing” to make the First Amendment challenge. But the underlying constitutional question—whether the First Amendment permits the regulation of blatant lies in political campaigns—will surely be part of the tomorrow’s oral argument.