federal court

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.

A US federal judge has overturned President Trump's ban blocking certain media outlets from White House coverage. The ruling restores press access to presidential events and is being widely covered as a significant test of press freedom and the limits of presidential control over media access. Reactions are split, with critics calling the ban an attack on the First Amendment and supporters questioning judicial interference in White House operations.

A federal judge has overturned the Trump administration's ban barring certain journalists from White House press access. CNN is among the outlets covering the ruling, which touches on First Amendment concerns and the government's ability to control which news organizations can cover the president. The decision is expected to fuel ongoing debate over press freedom and executive power.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that states may use the federal SAVE database to verify the citizenship status of voters or voter registration applicants. The decision allows states to cross-check voter rolls against federal immigration records, a move supporters frame as election integrity enforcement and critics warn could lead to eligible citizens being wrongly purged from voter lists.

A Supreme Court ruling concerning a disputed election may clash with Hawaii state law, according to Honolulu Civil Beat. The report highlights potential legal tension between the federal court's decision and state statutory provisions, raising questions about how election disputes should be resolved and which authority prevails when federal and state rules diverge.

CNN reporters are back inside the White House after a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore the network's access to press events. The ruling marks a significant check on presidential control of press credentials, and observers are debating its implications for press freedom and the limits of executive authority over media access.

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 ruled that the Trump administration can temporarily use its revamped federal voter eligibility database while legal challenges continue. The decision clears the way for federal officials to cross-check voter rolls against the new system in the interim. News outlets including AP News and NewsNation report the ruling as an interim measure, not a final resolution of the dispute over the database.

A federal judge has referred attorneys representing Donald Trump for potential disciplinary action in connection with a lawsuit involving the IRS. The referral suggests the judge believes the lawyers' conduct in the case may have violated professional standards. Details about the specific allegations and which attorneys are affected have not been made fully clear, and any disciplinary proceedings would be handled by the relevant bar authorities.

An activist in Louisiana is campaigning to strengthen Black voting power following a Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act. The decision has narrowed key protections, prompting civil rights advocates to pursue redistricting and registration efforts at the state level. Supporters see the work as a response to weakened federal safeguards, while the ruling continues to draw criticism from voting rights groups.

A federal court has ruled that Texas must install air conditioning in its prisons by 2029. The decision addresses the extreme heat in the state's largely uncooled prison facilities, which has long drawn criticism from inmates' families, advocates and lawmakers over dangerous summer temperatures. The ruling sets a deadline for the Texas prison system to comply, making it one of the most significant heat-safety mandates for corrections in the United States.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pressing the DC Circuit to vacate a drone flight restriction that effectively criminalized recording immigration agents from the air. Civil liberties advocates argue the rule blocks lawful documentation of federal immigration enforcement operations. The case has drawn attention amid ongoing disputes over the public's right to film government agents carrying out arrests and deportations.

A New York judge has adjourned the state murder trial of Luigi Mangione, the man accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan in December 2024. No new trial date or reason for the delay was given in initial reports. The case has drawn intense public attention, and the postponement means the high-profile proceedings will drag on longer, while a separate federal case against Mangione also remains pending.

A federal judge in Rhode Island has ordered the Trump administration to restore the $7 billion Solar for All program, which the administration had canceled. The EPA-funded program was designed to bring solar power to low-income households across the country. The ruling marks a setback for the administration's effort to unwind climate spending approved under earlier legislation.

A US appeals court has upheld the designation of AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, a ruling with implications for the Pentagon's ability to restrict the firm's involvement in defense-related technology procurement. The decision keeps the designation in place despite the company's challenge, and is drawing attention given Anthropic's prominence in the artificial intelligence sector and its government contracts.

The Trump administration cancelled a $7 billion federal solar energy grant program, but a federal judge in Rhode Island has now ordered the program reinstated. The ruling restores funding that had supported solar projects nationwide, and the decision is drawing attention as part of the wider legal battle over the administration's cuts to renewable energy spending.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a patent dispute against Google, ruling that the internet advertising patents in question are ineligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act for claiming abstract ideas. The decision closes off the case and reinforces the judiciary's restrictive approach to software and business-method patents.

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.

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 high court has approved the use of a federal database to weed out ineligible individuals, according to a headline circulating in news coverage. The ruling would allow authorities to rely on federal records to screen out applicants or candidates who do not meet eligibility requirements. Further details on the specific court, database, and programme affected have not been confirmed.

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 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 Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Ohio may regulate Kalshi's sports event contracts, a decision with implications for the prediction-market platform's operations in the state. The ruling comes amid broader disputes between Kalshi and state regulators over whether its sports contracts constitute gambling subject to state oversight or federally regulated financial products.

A federal appeals court has sided with Hawaii's firearm regulations, upholding the state's requirements that gun permit applicants apply within a set window and that authorities may inspect permitted firearms. The ruling keeps in place two of Hawaii's strict gun control measures, which are among the toughest in the United States.

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.

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 US Supreme Court has ruled on a case concerning a Department of Homeland Security voter database, and officials say the decision will have no bearing on California's 2026 general election. The ruling resolves a dispute over federal access to state voter records, but California's election procedures and voter rolls will continue unchanged for the upcoming contest.

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.

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 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.