A seemingly extra, innocent sentence in a Supreme Court order just ignited major legal intrigue. In South Carolina v. Doe, the Court denied emergency relief in a transgender bathroom case — but inserted a puzzling line: “The denial … is not a ruling on the merits.” Too banal to be accidental. Why slip it into a controversial ruling?

This post dives into how that superfluous sentence may signal internal bargaining, hidden messaging, or a warning shot to lower courts — opening a rare window into how the Court maneuvers behind the scenes.

Read the Article

A California jury has slammed Google with a stunning $314.6 million verdict, finding the tech giant secretly harvested cellular data from idle Android phones without user consent. The class-action suit, representing 14 million Californians, claimed Google used this data to power its advertising empire—all while draining users’ data plans. Google insists users agreed to the data collection and plans to appeal, calling the verdict a fundamental misunderstanding of how Android works. Meanwhile, a nationwide trial is looming in 2026, threatening even bigger consequences for the company.