U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

A case in which the Court will decide (1) whether a privately owned and operated school's educational decisions are considered state action simply because the school has a contract with the state to provide free education to students, and (2) whether the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause prohibits, or the Establishment Clause requires, a state to exclude religious schools from its charter-school program.

A case in which the Court will decide (1) whether the Supremacy Clause prevents individuals from suing the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act when federal employees' actions, even if negligent or wrongful, are related to carrying out federal policy and can be interpreted as following federal laws; and (2) whether the discretionary-function exception, which usually protects the government from being sued for certain decisions made by its employees, is always inapplicable when dealing with claims related to law enforcement officers' actions that fall under the intentional torts category?

A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) when some members of the proposed class lack any Article III injury.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Rehabilitation Act of 1973 require children with disabilities to satisfy a “bad faith or gross misjudgment” standard when seeking relief for discrimination relating to their education.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Combat-Related Special Compensation statute contains its own procedure for calculating retroactive payments that displaces the six-year limitations period in the Barring Act.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a party may establish the redressability component of Article III standing by pointing to the coercive and predictable effects of regulation on third parties.

A case in which the Court will decide whether public schools burden parents' religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents' religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a proceeding under 26 U.S.C. § 6330 for a pre-deprivation determination about a levy proposed by the Internal Revenue Service to collect unpaid taxes becomes moot when there is no longer a live dispute over the proposed levy that gave rise to the proceeding.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a party who files a notice of appeal during the period between when their original appeal deadline expired and when the court reopens their time to appeal must file a second notice after the reopening is granted.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the structure of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force violates the Constitution's Appointments Clause, and whether the provision that insulates the task force from the Health & Human Services secretary's supervision is severable from the rest of the statute.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Medicaid Act's “any qualified provider” provision unambiguously confers a private right upon a Medicaid beneficiary to choose a specific provider.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a state violates the First Amendment's religion clauses by denying a religious organization an otherwise-available tax exemption because the organization does not meet the state's criteria for religious behavior.

A case in which the Court will decide whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)—which strictly limits the circumstances in which an inmate can file a second petition for federal post-conviction relief—applies to all second habeas petitions (petitions filed after the first one) or only to specific types of second petitions.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a state violates the First Amendment's religion clauses by denying a religious organization an otherwise-available tax exemption because the organization does not meet the state's criteria for religious behavior.

A case in which the Court will decide whether Congress violated the Constitution in the way it gave power to the FCC to collect Universal Service Fund money, and whether the FCC then violated the Constitution by letting a private, industry-controlled company make those collection decisions.

A case in which the Court will decide whether challenges by small oil refineries seeking exemptions from the requirements of the Clean Air Act's Renewable Fuel Standard program should be heard exclusively in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit because the agency's denial actions are “nationally applicable” or “based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect.”

A case in which the Court will decide whether challenges by small oil refineries seeking exemptions from the requirements of the Clean Air Act's Renewable Fuel Standard program should be heard exclusively in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit because the agency's denial actions are “nationally applicable” or “based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect.”

A case in which the Court will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction to review an Environmental Protection Agency action that affects only one state or region, simply because the EPA published that action alongside actions affecting other states in a single Federal Register notice.

A case in which the Court will decide issues relating to the 30-day deadline to seek review of a ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals denying withholding of deportation.

A case in which the Court will decide whether Louisiana's creation of a second majority-Black congressional district constitutes unconstitutional racial gerrymandering, even when drawn in response to a federal court finding that the state's prior single majority-Black district likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

A case in which the Court will decide issues relating to the 30-day deadline to seek review of a ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals denying withholding of deportation.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a nonparty can challenge a federal agency's “final order” under the Hobbs Act's judicial review provision; and whether federal nuclear laws allow the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to license private companies to store spent nuclear fuel at off-reactor sites.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a nonparty can challenge a federal agency's “final order” under the Hobbs Act's judicial review provision; and whether federal nuclear laws allow the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to license private companies to store spent nuclear fuel at off-reactor sites.

A case in which the Court will decide whether U.S. gun manufacturers can be held liable for violence in Mexico under theories of proximate causation and aiding and abetting, based on their domestic production and sale of firearms that are later trafficked to Mexican cartels.

A case in which the Court will decide whether U.S. gun manufacturers can be held liable for violence in Mexico under theories of proximate causation and aiding and abetting, based on their domestic production and sale of firearms that are later trafficked to Mexican cartels.

A case in which the Court will decide whether plaintiffs must prove minimum contacts before federal courts may assert personal jurisdiction over foreign states sued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

A case in which the Court will decide whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6)'s stringent standard applies to a post-judgment request to vacate for the purpose of filing an amended complaint.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a majority-group plaintiff must show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority” to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

A case in which the Court will decide whether, in cases subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, prisoners have a right to a jury trial concerning their exhaustion of administrative remedies where disputed facts regarding exhaustion are intertwined with the underlying merits of their claim.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a court may, in considering whether to revoke an individual's supervised release and impose a prison sentence, consider factors from the law governing sentencing not mentioned in the supervised release law.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a Texas death-row inmate has standing to sue the state over its refusal to give him access to DNA testing pursuant to a law permitting DNA testing only when the person can prove that he would not have been convicted if the DNA testing produced exculpatory results.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a plaintiff can state a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) that bars a plan fiduciary from knowingly engaging in a transaction that is an exchange of goods or services between the plan and anyone barred from doing business with the plan, simply by alleging that such a transaction occurred.

A case in which the Court will decide whether courts should apply the “moment of the threat” doctrine when evaluating an excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Hobbs Act, a federal district court is bound by the Federal Communication Commission's legal interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a manufacturer may file a petition for review in a circuit where it neither resides nor has its principal place of business, if the petition is joined by a seller of the manufacturer's products that is located within that circuit.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a Texas law that requires any website that publishes content one-third or more of which is “harmful to minors” to verify the age of each of its users before providing access should be subject to “rational basis” review or “strict scrutiny.”

A case in which the Court will decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits making a “false statement” for the purpose of influencing certain financial institutions and federal agencies, also prohibits making a statement that is misleading but not false.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 is a “final judgment, order, or proceeding” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).

A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a former employee—who was qualified to perform her job and who earned post-employment benefits while employed—loses her right to sue over discrimination with respect to those benefits solely because she no longer holds her job.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the First Step Act's sentencing reduction provisions apply to a defendant whose original sentence was imposed before the Act's enactment, then vacated and resentenced to a new term of imprisonment after the Act's enactment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to TikTok, violates the First Amendment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether an award of the “defendant's profits” under the Lanham Act can include an order for the defendant to disgorge the distinct profits of legally separate non-party corporate affiliates.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.