In this annual review from the Cato Institute, Ilya Shapiro and leading legal scholars analyze the 2017-2018 Supreme Court term, specifically the most important and far-reaching cases of the year, plus cases coming up. Now in its seventeenth edition, the Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after the term's end and the only one grounded in the nation's first principles, liberty, and limited government.

Now in its 20th year, the Cato Supreme Court Review brings together leading legal scholars to analyze key cases from the Court's most recent term, plus cases coming up. Topics in the 2020-2021 edition include public disclosure of charitable donations (Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta), the off-campus speech (Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.), union access onto agribusiness land (Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid), police acting as "community caretakers" and warrantless police entries (Caniglia v. Strom), and Arizona's new voting laws (Brnovich v. DNC).

In this annual review from the Cato Institute, leading legal scholars analyze the 2022-2023 Supreme Court term, specifically the most important and far-reaching cases of the year, plus cases coming up. Now in its 22nd edition, the Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after the term's end and the only one grounded in the nation's first principles, liberty, and limited government.

Intro -- Contents -- Foreword -- Introduction -- The Ninth Amendment in Light of Text and History -- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission: "Precisely What WRTL Sought to Avoid -- United States v. Stevens: Restricting Two Major Rationales for Content-Based Speech Restrictions -- Church and State at the Crossroads: Christian Legal Society v. Martinez -- Doe v. Reed and the Future of Disclosure Requirements -- The Tell-Tale Privileges or Immunities Clause -- The Degradation of the "Void for Vagueness" Doctrine: Reversing Convictions While Saving the Unfathomable "Honest Services Fraud" Statute -- Taking Stock of Comstock: The Necessary and Proper Clause and the Limits of Federal Power -- Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB: Narrow Separation-of-Powers Ruling Illustrates That the Supreme Court Is Not "Pro-Business"--Federal Misgovernance of Mutual Funds -- Forward to the Past -- Antitrust Formalism Is Dead! Long Live Antitrust Formalism! Some Implications of American Needle v. NFL -- Looking Ahead: October Term 2010 -- Contributors -- About Cato

Now in its 19th year, the Cato Supreme Court Review brings together leading legal scholars to analyze key cases from the Court's most recent term, plus cases coming up. Topics in the 2019-2020 edition include DACA and the Dreamers (DHS v. Regents), the president's removal power (Seila Law v. CFPB), Obamacare's so-called contraception mandate (Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania), qualified and absolute immunity (Hernandez v. Mesa), and using state tuition assistance on religious schools (Espinoza v. Montana).

In this annual review from the Cato Institute, leading legal scholars analyze the 2023-2024 Supreme Court term, specifically the most important and far-reaching cases of the year, plus cases coming up. Now in its 23rd edition, the Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after the term's end and the only one grounded in the nation's first principles, liberty, and limited government.

In this annual review from the Cato Institute, leading legal scholars analyze the 2021-2022 Supreme Court term, specifically the most important and far-reaching cases of the year, plus cases coming up. Now in its 21st edition, the Cato Supreme Court Review is the first scholarly journal to appear after the term's end and the only one grounded in the nation's first principles, liberty, and limited government. Topics in the 2021-2022 edition include: vaccine mandates (National Federation of Independent Business v. OSHA and Biden v. Missouri), guns (New York State Rifle Association v. Bruen), drugs (Ruan v. United States), free speech (Austin v. Reagan National Advertising), abortion (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization), school choice (Carson v. Makin), state secrets (United States v. Zubaydah and FBI v. Fazaga), and much more.

NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF 2021: POLITICS BY THE WALL STREET JOURNAL "A must-read for anyone interested in the Supreme Court."—MIKE LEE, Republican senator from Utah Politics have always intruded on Supreme Court appointments. But although the Framers would recognize the way justices are nominated and confirmed today, something is different. Why have appointments to the high court become one of the most explosive features of our system of government? As Ilya Shapiro makes clear in Supreme Disorder, this problem is part of a larger phenomenon. As government has grown, its laws reaching even further into our lives, the courts that interpret those laws have become enormously powerful. If we fight over each new appointment as though everything were at stake, it’s because it is. When decades of constitutional corruption have left us subject to an all-powerful tribunal, passions are sure to flare on the infrequent occasions when the political system has an opportunity to shape it. And so we find the process of judicial appointments verging on dysfunction. Shapiro weighs the many proposals for reform, from the modest (term limits) to the radical (court-packing), but shows that there can be no quick fix for a judicial system suffering a crisis of legitimacy. And in the end, the only measure of the Court’s legitimacy that matters is the extent to which it maintains, or rebalances, our constitutional order.