# Legal Cases Hub Folder hub for `/Policy/Legal Cases/` — judicial rulings that **state a rule binding future conduct**, filed alongside legislation, executive orders and agency directives as instruments of policy in force rather than as things that happened on a date. ## Why these live in Policy A ruling is not an event. *[[Loper Bright v. Raimondo]]* is not a thing that happened on June 28, 2024 — it is the operative rule governing every agency statutory interpretation since. Filing it under `/Events/` asserted a discreteness that litigation does not have: cases run for years through multiple courts, and the date on the opinion is the least interesting fact about them. `/Policy/` already held the index ([[Supreme Court Rulings Hub]]) while the cases themselves sat in `/Events/`; this folder closes that gap. **Supersession is native here, not a problem.** Statutes get amended, executive orders get revoked, and *Chevron* was the operative rule for forty years until it wasn't. "This was binding law from X to Y" is the idiom `/Policy/` is built for; `/Events/` has no way to express it at all. ## The filing test > **Strip out who the parties were. Does the page still have a point?** **Yes → here.** *[[Bush v. Gore]]* passes despite its own disclaimer of precedent — equal-protection limits on recounts, and the demonstration that litigation could decide a presidential election. *[[United States v. Microsoft]]* passes: it set the shape of every platform monopolization case since. **No → `/Events/`.** The page narrates what happened to particular parties. Seven pages are held there on this basis: [[Musk v. OpenAI Trial]] · [[Macron v. Owens Defamation Lawsuit]] · [[United States v. Soriano]] · [[Paxton v. Powered by People]] · [[DOE v. Smith College]] · [[State AG Coalition v. Trump]] · [[Palantir v. Republik (Zurich)]]. It is art, not science. When a case does both — most criminal prosecutions of political figures, most ongoing antitrust suits — ask which job the *page* is doing, not which the case is doing. ## Frontmatter Vote counts come from Oyez. Case names follow one convention: `v.` takes a period, no year suffix, and never a title that belongs to a party. ## Finding a case - **[[Supreme Court Rulings Hub]]** — the thematic index, organised by the projects of the conservative judicial agenda: racial hierarchy and voting rights, money in politics, religious liberty, the administrative state, executive power. Start here. - **[[Conservative Court Capture Timeline]]** — the pipeline that produced the judges who produced these rulings. - **[[Federalist Society]]** · **[[Leonard Leo]]** — the institutional engine and its architect. ## Cases outside the SCOTUS index Lower-court and state rulings that the Supreme Court index does not cover. | Case | Court | What it does | |---|---|---| | [[AAUP v. Rubio]] | D. Mass. | Principal ruling against the ideological-deportations campaign | | [[Storch v. Hegseth]] | D.D.C. | IG removals unlawful on notice grounds; no reinstatement | | [[Van Loon v. Department of the Treasury]] | 5th Cir. | OFAC cannot sanction immutable smart contracts | | [[ABC and Disney v. FCC]] | D.D.C. | First Amendment challenge to FCC licence proceedings | | [[United States v. Alcoa]] | 2d Cir. | Learned Hand's monopoly-structure rule | | [[United States v. Paramount Pictures]] | SCOTUS | Broke the studio system; terminated 2020 | | [[People v. Hall]] | Cal. | Chinese witnesses barred from testifying against whites | | [[SpaceX v. NLRB]] | 5th Cir. | NLRB ALJ and Board-member removal protections likely unconstitutional; case later mooted when SpaceX was moved under the Railway Labor Act | | [[United States v. SpaceX]] | S.D. Tex. | DOJ's in-house immigration judges enjoined on Appointments Clause grounds; DOJ dropped the case in 2025 | | [[CFTC v. Arizona]] | D. Ariz. | Lead case in the CFTC's suits against nine states over prediction markets; preliminary injunction for the government (May 2026) | | [[KalshiEX v. Flaherty]] | 3d Cir. | Sports event contracts likely preempt state gambling law; the 9th and 6th Circuits disagree, and the split is before the Supreme Court | | [[Robinhood Derivatives v. Dreitzer]] | SCOTUS (petition) | Robinhood's petition, No. 26-338, on the Ninth Circuit's Nevada ruling; Nevada responds by Nov 13, 2026 | | [[North American Derivatives Exchange v. Nevada]] | SCOTUS (petition) | Crypto.com's petition, No. 26-344, on the same Ninth Circuit ruling; Nevada responds by Nov 16, 2026 | | [[Diaz v. Tesla]] | N.D. Cal. | Section 1981's uncapped damages in a workplace racial-harassment case; a $137M verdict cut to $15M, then $3.2M on retrial | ## Antitrust enforcement cluster Pending and historical monopolization actions — the arena where the right kept the neo-Brandeisian toolkit and swapped the theory of harm. [[United States v. Microsoft]] · [[United States v. Google]] · [[United States v. Apple]] · [[FTC v. Meta]] · [[FTC v. Amazon]] ## Related - **[[Policy Hub]]** — parent folder - **[[Supreme Court of the United States]]** — the institution - **[[Judicial Capture]]** — what the rulings enable - `/Resistance/Legal Frameworks/` holds the curated LGBTQ-rights case cluster as a deliberate editorial grouping; those cases stay there.