US federal courts

A US judge has overturned President Trump's ban on certain media outlets from White House coverage. The ruling blocks the administration from excluding journalists from presidential events, a move critics called an attack on press freedom. Supporters of the president are expected to challenge the decision, and the case is likely to move through the appeals courts, keeping the fight over media access in the spotlight.

A US judge has overturned a White House media ban imposed under Donald Trump, ruling against the administration's attempt to exclude certain news organisations from access. The decision is being widely reported by major outlets including BBC News and is drawing significant attention, with many seeing it as a key test of press freedom and the limits of presidential control over media access.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that states may use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of voters. The decision allows state officials to cross-check voter registration records against the immigration database, a step several Republican-led states have sought. Critics argue such checks risk wrongly purging eligible voters, particularly naturalised citizens, while supporters frame the ruling as a victory for election integrity.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration may, for the time being, continue using its revamped federal voter eligibility database, which is used to check voter rolls against citizenship and other records. The decision is an interim one, allowing the database's use while legal challenges proceed. Supporters see it as a step toward election integrity; critics worry it could enable improper purges of eligible voters.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to run voter citizenship checks using the federal SAVE database ahead of the midterm elections. The decision lets election officials verify the citizenship status of registered voters against federal records. Supporters say it protects election integrity, while voting-rights groups warn it could lead to eligible voters being wrongly flagged or purged from rolls close to the vote.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of registered voters. The decision permits election officials to cross-check voter rolls against immigration records, a move backers say protects election integrity and critics warn could lead to eligible voters being wrongfully purged. The ruling is drawing sharp reactions from voting rights groups and election officials across the country.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that Trump administration officials may use a federal immigration database to cross-check voter registration records. The decision allows states and federal officials to verify voter eligibility using immigration status data, a move supporters call a safeguard against noncitizen voting and critics warn could wrongly purge eligible voters. The ruling is expected to intensify ongoing legal and political battles over election integrity and voting access ahead of upcoming elections.

The US Department of Justice has asked the Supreme Court to take up a case that could narrow legal protections for transgender people. The filing is being read as an effort to roll back established interpretations of sex discrimination protections. Civil rights groups warn the case could strip away safeguards in employment, healthcare and education, while supporters argue the current reading of federal law goes too far.

CNN, MS NOW and Politico have asked a federal judge to stop President Trump from reviving a ban on their reporters' access to the White House. The news organisations are seeking a court order to preserve their access, arguing the move restricts press freedom. The dispute reopens a running battle between the administration and major US news outlets over media access.

The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to let it enforce limits on gender-affirming care for transgender inmates in federal prisons. The request asks the justices to allow the policy to take effect while legal challenges proceed, and it lands amid ongoing national battles over transgender healthcare and prison rights.

The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to allow restrictions on gender-affirming health care for transgender inmates in federal prisons. The request seeks to undo lower court rulings that blocked such limits, and it lands amid ongoing legal and political battles over transgender rights and the treatment of transgender people in the US justice system.

The US Supreme Court has allowed states to use a federal database to verify the citizenship of voter registration applicants. The decision, reported by Route Fifty, clears the way for expanded vetting ahead of the midterm elections, though analysts say its practical effect on the upcoming contests will be limited because implementation timelines and coverage constraints restrict how widely the tool can be applied.

The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to let it deny hormone therapy to transgender inmates in federal custody. The request escalates a legal fight over medical care for transgender prisoners, pitting claims of institutional discretion and public cost against court rulings that withholding such treatment violates the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The justices' response will shape how far correctional authorities must go in providing gender-affirming care behind bars.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the federal government may use Social Security data to help identify noncitizens registered to vote. The decision, reported by The Washington Post, clears the way for expanded data-sharing between agencies to verify voter eligibility. Supporters call it a safeguard for election integrity, while critics warn it could enable improper purges of eligible voters.

The US Supreme Court's SAVE ruling is being read as a signal that the Court could weaken a key protection that limits last-minute voter purges ahead of federal elections. Election law watchers say the decision may make it easier for states to remove voters close to Election Day, a practice critics warn risks disenfranchising eligible voters with little time to correct errors.

A federal court has ruled that the Pentagon can designate AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, according to the El Dorado News-Times. The decision allows the Defense Department to maintain the designation against the San Francisco-based artificial intelligence firm, a move with potential implications for its ability to work with the US government and defense contractors.

The Trump administration cancelled a $7 billion solar energy grant program, but a federal judge in Rhode Island has now ordered the program restored. The ruling is a setback for the administration's effort to roll back renewable energy funding and a win for states and organizations relying on those solar grants. Supporters of clean energy are highlighting the decision as a check on executive power over congressionally funded climate programs.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the Trump administration's expansive federal database for use in voter roll screening, per the New York Times. The move is likely to intensify debate over election integrity versus voter access, with critics warning it could lead to improper purges of eligible voters while supporters frame it as a safeguard against noncitizen voting.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court's dismissal of internet advertising patents held invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act, in a case involving Google. The ruling means the patents were found to cover ineligible abstract ideas rather than patentable inventions, dealing a blow to the patent holder.

Prediction market operator Kalshi has lost a ruling at the appeals court level concerning whether state regulators can oversee its prediction markets. The decision means states may retain authority to regulate or restrict certain event contracts, a setback for Kalshi's argument that federal law preempts state oversight of its business. The ruling is likely to shape ongoing disputes between prediction market platforms and state gaming and securities regulators.

The US Supreme Court has issued a ruling concerning a Department of Homeland Security voter database, and officials say it will have no impact on California's 2026 general election. The decision clarifies how federal data access rules apply to states, but California's voting procedures for 2026 remain unchanged, according to local reporting in Lassen County.

The US judiciary is preparing a pilot programme for courthouse management, according to Facilities Dive. Details of the pilot's scope, timeline and participating courthouses were not provided in the initial report. The initiative suggests the federal court system is testing new approaches to how its facilities are administered.

A US court has ruled against prediction market operator Kalshi, holding that states retain the authority to regulate prediction markets operating within their borders. The decision is a setback for Kalshi's expansion strategy, which has relied on federal oversight of event contracts. It may prompt further legal fights over whether prediction markets fall under federal or state gambling and derivatives law.