federal court

A US judge has overturned President Trump's ban preventing certain media outlets from access to the White House. The ruling reaffirms press freedom protections, limiting the administration's ability to exclude journalists from presidential coverage. The decision is drawing wide attention as part of ongoing legal battles between the Trump administration and news organisations over access and First Amendment rights.

The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for states to use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of voters, in a decision reported by CyberScoop. The ruling lets states tap the immigration-status system as part of voter roll checks, a move likely to intensify debate over election integrity measures and the treatment of eligible citizens during verification.

A federal judge has paused the Trump administration's move to bar CNN from the White House, allowing the network's reporters back into the building pending further legal proceedings. The case is part of a broader dispute between the administration and major news outlets over access to the president and press briefings, with press freedom groups closely watching the outcome.

A federal judge, Trump appointee Stephanie Gallagher, has held the Trump administration in contempt for deporting a man to El Salvador in violation of three court orders. The judge is ordering the government to return him. The ruling, reported by Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney, is drawing attention as part of the broader legal fight over the administration's immigration enforcement and compliance with court rulings.

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to restore CNN's access to the White House, and the network's reporters are back on the premises. The ruling is being read as a check on the administration's efforts to penalize a major news outlet, with press freedom advocates welcoming the decision while the legal fight over media access continues.

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 Supreme Court has issued a decision concerning a federal voter-citizenship database, with potential consequences for upcoming midterm elections. The ruling raises questions about how states verify voter eligibility and could influence election administration and turnout battles heading into the midterms, with officials and voting-rights groups closely watching the implications.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration may, for the time being, use its revamped federal voter eligibility database. The decision, reported by AP News and NewsNation, allows the administration to continue the programme while legal challenges proceed. The database is intended to check voter eligibility, and critics and supporters are weighing its implications for election administration and voter access.

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 ruling requires Texas to install air conditioning in its prisons by 2029. The decision follows years of complaints and litigation over dangerously high temperatures inside state lockups, where heat has been blamed for deaths of inmates and staff. It marks one of the most significant mandates on prison conditions in the state.

The Supreme Court has taken up litigation concerning the SAVE income-driven student loan repayment plan and the federal student aid database behind it, putting billions of dollars in borrower balances back in question. The case tests the Education Department's authority to restructure repayment terms. Borrowers, servicers and policymakers are watching closely for how the ruling would reshape repayment options nationwide.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pressing the D.C. Circuit to vacate a drone flight restriction that effectively criminalized recording immigration agents from the air. The group argues the rule blocks journalists and the public from documenting federal immigration enforcement, raising First Amendment concerns. Debate centers on how far the government can restrict aerial photography over enforcement operations.

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.

A U.S. appeals court has upheld the government's designation of AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, a decision with implications for the Pentagon's ability to work with the firm. The ruling keeps Anthropic subject to restrictions affecting its eligibility for federal contracts and defense-related work, and the case is being closely followed across the AI industry and defense community.

A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction barring ICE from detaining immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza in New York, finding the practice unconstitutional. The ruling ends a contested detention operation at the Manhattan federal building and marks a significant legal setback for the agency's expanded immigration enforcement in the city.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling that clears the way for New York to use an expanded federal database for verifying the citizenship status of voters. The decision could affect how the state maintains its voter rolls and verifies eligibility. Details of the ruling's reasoning and its broader implications for other states' voter verification practices remain to be seen.

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 Office of Personnel Management has changed the hiring questionnaire that asked federal job applicants to name their favorite executive order, acting after a court ordered the replacement of the question. The prompt had drawn criticism as an ideologically loaded test for prospective government employees, and its removal follows a legal challenge to the hiring practice.

A federal appeals court has sided with Hawaii's requirement that gun permit applicants complete the process within a set window and submit to inspection mandates. The ruling keeps in place provisions that gun rights advocates have challenged as burdensome, while state officials argue they are necessary for public safety. The decision is likely to fuel ongoing legal battles over the reach of Second Amendment protections following recent Supreme Court rulings on firearms rights.

A court decision could lead to new protections for rare species in California's Sierra Nevada, according to reporting by the Plumas Sun. The ruling may affect how rare plants and animals in the region are safeguarded under state or federal law. Details of the ruling and which species stand to gain protection have not been specified in the available reporting.

The Supreme Court has issued a ruling concerning the Department of Homeland Security's voter database, and officials have confirmed it will have no impact on California's 2026 general election. The decision resolves questions about whether federal voter data access could affect how the state runs its elections. California's electoral procedures for 2026 will proceed as planned.