U.S. Supreme Court

An Isabella County family home was auctioned to settle a small tax debt. The family is asking to be compensated for the fair market value of the home, not just the significantly lower amount it sold for at auction.

Isabella County sold a home to settle a roughly $2,200 tax bill. The home sold for a fraction of its estimated nearly $200,000 value. The former owner's attorney said the county owes his clients the full value of the property.

A federal appeals court has blocked Michigan’s ban on conversion therapy for minors who are LGBTQ+, declaring it violates the First Amendment rights of therapists and counselors. In a 2-1 opinion, the court said the 2023 law illegally restricts speech that reflects the moral beliefs of therapists. It set aside a lower court’s ruling and granted a preliminary injunction sought by Catholic Charities.

Flint’s budget problems boil over. Also, a Michigan constitutional scholar talks about recent history of the Supreme Court — pre-Trump — into the modern era. And we bid farewell to a global pro wrestling legend from Michigan.

A group of Republican state legislators is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to let them challenge two voter-approved amendments to the Michigan Constitution.

The justices ruled in favor of a 1994 ban on firearms for people under restraining orders in domestic violence cases.

When the Reproductive Health Care Act passed last year, it contained a little-known provision that’s about to take effect. After this summer’s data drop, Michigan state officials will no longer keep track of abortion care procedures in the state.

"Homelessness is not a police problem. It’s not a law enforcement issue. It’s a housing issue," said Deyanira Nevarez Martinez, an assistant professor in MSU’s Urban and Regional Planning Program.

Governor Whitmer discusses the importance of access to mifepristone, an abortion pill, and addresses other questions around reproductive rights.

In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, a graphic designer asserted her First Amendment right to refuse providing creative services to same-sex couples. A 6-3 majority of the court found that the state cannot force creative businesses to produce work that doesn't align with religious beliefs.