Supreme Court action this week features Justice Sonia Sotomayor amid abortion/immigration and gun-rights debates—longtime justice (b. 1954, NYC, Obama appointee, 2009).
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to expedite cases challenging the Trump administration's efforts to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from Haiti, Syria, and other countries. Lower courts delayed these terminations, but the court's decision could allow the administration to proceed with deportations affecting hundreds of thousands.
The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing cases on Trump-era asylum policies, focusing on the legal definition of 'arrive in' the U.S. and the use of 'metering' to limit asylum applications. Decisions will impact border enforcement and asylum access, with a ruling expected by June 2026.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship, a case that tests the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The case has attracted protests and high-profile attendance, including President Trump. A decision is expected later this year, with significant legal and political implications.
The US Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that Colorado's ban on conversion therapy for minors likely violates the First Amendment, citing free speech protections. The decision questions the legality of similar laws in over 20 states, emphasizing the importance of free medical and speech rights in therapy practices.
Recent memos show the US Supreme Court has been increasingly using secretive, expedited procedures to make major decisions, bypassing traditional deliberation. This shift began in 2016 with the blocking of Obama's climate policy and has since impacted numerous cases, raising concerns about transparency and judicial independence.
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Michigan's lawsuit to shut down part of the Line 5 pipeline will stay in state court. Justice Sotomayor has found that Enbridge Energy missed the deadline to move the case to federal court, reinforcing state authority over pipeline regulation amid environmental concerns.
The US Supreme Court has heard arguments in Chatrie v. United States, testing whether geofence warrants — court orders that compel companies to produce location histories for devices near a crime — violate the Fourth Amendment. The case stems from a 2019 Virginia bank robbery that used a Google geofence to identify a suspect.