Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest
Investigative Journalismin the Public Interest
ProPublica is a nonprofit, investigative newsroom that exposes corruption. We report in all 50 states and partner with local newsrooms. Our work spurs real-world impact and has received numerous awards, including nine Pulitzer Prizes.
How Abortion Bans Lead to Preventable Deaths
How Recent Arrivals at the Border Have Changed the Country and Its Attitudes
SCOTUS Justices’ Beneficial Relationships With Billionaire Donors
We’ve added more information about the Supreme Court justices’ finances, including newly uncovered filings from Clarence Thomas from the 1990s and Samuel Alito’s latest disclosure.
The Journal editorial page accused ProPublica of misleading readers in a story that hadn’t yet been published.
We’ve updated our database with the latest financial filings from eight justices, detailing millions in book income, almost 40 trips and one gift.
In the years after the undisclosed trip to Alaska, Republican megadonor Paul Singer’s hedge fund has repeatedly had business before the Supreme Court. Alito has never recused himself.
In a call with donors, First Liberty Institute’s Kelly Shackelford read the supportive email he said came from Thomas. The leader of the religious-rights group also labeled Justice Elena Kagan “treasonous” for backing a stronger ethics code.
The update includes data from eight financial disclosures made public last Friday that cover 2023, as well as information from some older filings.
The trips include vacations in Indonesia and at the exclusive, men’s-only Bohemian Grove retreat, which were first reported by ProPublica last year.
More than two months after authorizing subpoenas for two key figures in the Supreme Court’s ethics crisis, Senate Democrats have yet to issue them.
Much attention has been paid to the young Silicon Valley engineers working for Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, but the group has also hired high-powered legal talent.
The subpoenas ask for details on gifts, travel and other perks the two men provided or helped arrange for Supreme Court justices and their relatives, but Senate Democrats will need help from their GOP colleagues if Crow and Leo defy the subpoenas.
ProPublica conducted a new analysis that shows the court is deciding more consequential rulings than ever before in largely unsigned orders with little to no explanation.
The Supreme Court justice flew to Montana and other destinations on the billionaire GOP donor’s dime. Crow’s lawyer revealed these flights to the Senate Judiciary Committee, whose ongoing investigation was sparked by ProPublica’s reporting.
Experts say it is unclear if the new rules, which come after reporting by ProPublica and others revealed that justices had repeatedly failed to disclose gifts and travel from wealthy donors, would address the issues raised by the recent revelations.
The letters cite ProPublica’s reporting on an undisclosed private jet flight and Alaska fishing vacation provided to Justice Samuel Alito.
The new filing comes after ProPublica’s reporting on the Supreme Court justice’s beneficial relationship with the billionaire GOP megadonor. Thomas also reported three private jet trips provided by Crow.
Ambiguous — and unenforced — recusal standards mean few checks and balances for top judges when cases involve their family members.
Facing financial ruin, the Lac du Flambeau tribe began offering short-term loans online with annual rates often over 600%. But as the tribe rose in an industry derided for predatory practices, it put its reputation at risk and drew costly lawsuits.
The inside story of how Leonard Leo built a machine that remade the American legal system — and what he plans to do next.
Even by Thomas’ own permissive interpretation, the justice’s recently revealed travel to Palm Springs and the Bohemian Grove appear to violate the disclosure law, experts explained.
Our national, regional and Local Reporting Network teams’ coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court, sexual assault, house flippers and the health insurance system were among the stories that ProPublica readers spent the most time with in 2023.
Conservative activist Leonard Leo helped elect a judge in Wisconsin. Without him, the GOP feared their agenda would be “toast,” according to an email.
Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has been unleashed on federal agencies. ProPublica is attempting to document who is working with him and what they are doing.
Justice Alito’s leaked opinion cites Sir Matthew Hale, a 17th-century jurist who conceived the notion that husbands can’t be prosecuted for raping their wives, who sentenced women to death as “witches,” and whose misogyny stood out even in his time.
Climate change and anti-immigrant hate are colliding, foretelling a volatile future.
The secretive Judicial Conference is tasked with self-governance. The group, led by the Supreme Court’s chief justice, has spent decades preserving perks, defending judges and thwarting outside oversight.
Moore v. Harper could transform the law — but not in the way that many pundits, or even politicians, anticipate.
In the largest known political advocacy donation in U.S. history, industrialist Barre Seid funded a new group run by Federalist Society co-chair Leonard Leo, who guided Trump’s Supreme Court picks and helped end federal abortion rights.
A Florida pharmacist serves as an expert witness on behalf of states defending lethal injection protocols, often speaking about a drug that he has no authority to prescribe. His testimony has helped pave the way for executions across the country.
The Supreme Court decision that handed the 2000 election to George W. Bush is widely believed not to be a precedent, yet it’s been cited in hundreds of federal and state cases since. It could play a role in this year’s election, too.
State representatives in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona and Georgia could do the president’s bidding. But the political and legal obstacles are formidable.
La decisión de la Corte Suprema que otorgó la elección de 2000 a George W. Bush no se considera en general un precedente, pero desde entonces ha sido citada en cientos de casos federales y estatales. Y también podría influir en las elecciones de este año.
It’s easy enough for the Trump campaign to file a lawsuit claiming improprieties, but a lot harder to provide evidence of wrongdoing or a convincing legal argument. Here’s what you need to know as the election lawsuits start to mount.
Regardless of who wins the presidency, courtroom battles seem almost certain. Here’s a layperson’s look at the states and laws that may determine the outcome.
Es bastante fácil para la campaña de Trump demandar por irregularidades, pero es mucho más difícil presentar pruebas de irregularidades o un argumento jurídico convincente. Esto es lo que debe saber conforme comienzan a acumularse los litigios relacionados con las elecciones.
Independientemente de quién gane la presidencia, las batallas en los tribunales parecen inevitables. A continuación, ofrecemos un panorama general de los estados y las leyes que pueden determinar el resultado.
President Trump proposed a replacement for retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy. Here, the best reporting to date on the Supreme Court nominee.
A ProPublica review adds fuel to a longstanding worry about the nation’s highest court: The justices can botch the truth, sometimes in cases of great import.
Research funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and others not only helped spur the nation’s top court to strike down key parts of a Texas abortion law, but also has fueled a string of other changes making abortion more accessible.
The plaintiff in the Supreme Court case challenging the use of race in college admission looks to be the perfect argument. But the case barely mentions her. Instead, the agenda is much broader: To fight race-based policies everywhere.
In oral arguments Wednesday, religious groups contend that just signing a form to facilitate access to birth control violates their rights.
The expert ended up prompting a back-and-forth between Supreme Court justices, who narrowly upheld use of a lethal injection drug.
For more than 30 years, the Federalist Society has worked behind the scenes to shape Supreme Court outcomes to a conservative agenda. In <em>King v. Burwell</em>, its influence could eliminate health insurance subsidies for millions of people.
The Obama administration is preparing to issue a rule setting a single standard for proving violations of the Fair Housing Act — just as the Supreme Court signals it may take up a challenge to the measure.
The Supreme Court, poised to rule on a major affirmative action case, accepts another one. What this might say about dismantling race-conscious programs.
It's a topic voters won't necessarily hear about – despite the long-lasting consequences.
The court's ruling on a Texas redistricting case could transform the nation's approach to minority voting rights -- and determine which party controls Congress.
Sign up for ProPublica's Big Story newsletter and get our latest stories delivered straight to your inbox.
