Supreme Court has not committed to a major innovation in transparency it started during the pandemic

By Eve Ringsmuth, Associate Professor of Political Science, Oklahoma State University
Rachael Houston, Assistant Professor of American judicial politics, Texas Christian University
Timothy Johnson, Horace T. Morse Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law, University of Minnesota

The Supreme Court has not yet committed to making livestreaming oral arguments a permanent part of its work. But this measure could lead to more transparency and possibly confidence in the court.

Read complete article

~	How AI can lead to false arrests and wrongful convictions

~	How does your brain decide between the road not taken or the same old route? Resolving conflicting memories is key to navigation

~	We studied what happened when financially struggling artists received $1,000 a month, no strings attached, for 18 months

~	When you don’t have the facts, argue the law: How Trump’s EPA is limiting its own ability to protect public health far into the future

~	The missing link in America’s critical minerals push isn’t mining – it’s processing expertise

~	‘Devil Wears Prada 2’ shows how Christian imagery circulates in unusual ways through the fashion industry

~	What makes a good teacher? Ask a Republican and a Democrat, and they are likely to agree

~	Europe: Failure to suspend Israel from Eurovision betrays humanity and exposes blatant double standards

~	Tunisia: End Abusive Prosecution of Refugee Aid Workers

~	How Nigerians are coping with heat waves amid crippling power outages.