The U.S. Supreme Court’s current term tackles a wide array of high-profile issues ranging from birthright citizenship and guns to transgender rights, workplace discrimination, and federal regulatory powers.
The justices are deliberating on cases with far-reaching implications for civil rights, government authority, and constitutional protections. Below is a detailed look at key cases argued, decided, and still pending.
WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION
On June 5, the Supreme Court made it easier for individuals from majority groups—such as white or heterosexual people—to bring workplace “reverse discrimination” claims. This ruling revived the lawsuit of Marlean Ames, an Ohio woman who alleged she was denied a promotion and demoted because she is heterosexual.
Ames claimed that she was passed over in favor of a gay woman and demoted in favor of a gay man. The Court rejected a lower court’s dismissal, affirming that federal civil rights law and precedent do not allow distinctions between majority- and minority-group plaintiffs in discrimination cases.
BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
On May 15, the justices heard arguments regarding former President Donald Trump’s executive order attempting to restrict birthright citizenship—a constitutional right under the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. Trump’s directive sought to deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil if their parents are not citizens or lawful permanent residents.
Conservative justices appeared poised to limit lower courts’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions blocking the order. Several federal judges had blocked the order, ruling it likely violates constitutional protections.
RELIGIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL
On May 22, the Court blocked a bid by two Catholic dioceses to open the nation’s first taxpayer-funded religious charter school in Oklahoma. The 4-4 decision, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused, left intact a lower court ruling that the school would violate the First Amendment’s limits on government involvement in religion.
The proposed St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School would have been funded by the state but was found to breach the constitutional separation between church and state.
GHOST GUNS
On March 26, the Court upheld a 2022 federal regulation targeting “ghost guns,” firearms assembled from parts or kits and often untraceable by law enforcement. The 7-2 decision reversed a lower court that had ruled the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its authority.
The Court found the regulation consistent with the Gun Control Act of 1968, supporting Biden administration efforts to curb crime linked to these weapons.
TRANSGENDER RIGHTS
In December, the Court heard arguments on a challenge to Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, including hormone treatments and surgeries. The Biden administration is appealing a lower court ruling that upheld the ban.
The case could have wide implications for similar laws in other states. Conservative justices appeared sympathetic to the ban during oral arguments. A decision is expected by the end of June.
MEXICO GUNS LAWSUIT
On June 5, the Court dismissed a lawsuit filed by Mexico against U.S. gun manufacturers Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms. Mexico accused the companies of fueling gun violence by enabling illegal firearm trafficking to drug cartels.
The Supreme Court overturned a lower court’s ruling that had allowed the suit to proceed, holding that the companies cannot be held liable for actions outside U.S. jurisdiction.
RELIGIOUS TAX EXEMPTION
Also on June 5, the Court sided with a Catholic diocese-affiliated nonprofit in Wisconsin seeking exemption from the state’s unemployment insurance tax. The justices overturned a lower court ruling that rejected the exemption, ruling that the state’s tax scheme discriminated against religious organizations by treating them unequally compared to secular groups.
ONLINE PORNOGRAPHY
On January 15, the Court heard arguments on a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of users to restrict minor access. While justices acknowledged concerns about protecting children, they also expressed worries about imposing burdens on adults’ access to constitutionally protected material.
The case challenges the balance between First Amendment free speech rights and child safety measures. A ruling is anticipated by the end of June.
LGBT SCHOOL BOOKS
On April 22, the Court heard an appeal from Christian and Muslim parents in Maryland who seek to opt their children out of elementary school classes that include storybooks with LGBT characters.
The parents argue that the school district’s refusal violates their religious freedoms protected under the First Amendment. The lower courts had declined to force the school to allow opt-outs. The justices appeared inclined to side with the parents, with a ruling expected soon.
OBAMACARE PREVENTIVE CARE MANDATE
On April 21, the Court examined whether the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which decides what preventive healthcare services insurers must cover under the Affordable Care Act, was properly appointed.
Critics argue that USPSTF members were appointed without Senate confirmation, violating constitutional appointment procedures. A decision on the legality of the preventive care mandate is forthcoming.
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FUNDING
On April 2, the Court reviewed South Carolina’s attempt to cut Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. The state argued it should be allowed to withdraw public money from the abortion and reproductive healthcare provider. Conservative justices expressed support for the state’s position. The lower court had blocked the funding cut, and a decision is expected by June.
NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE
On March 5, the Court heard arguments over whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the authority to license a nuclear waste storage facility in Texas, amid opposition from the state and oil interests. The NRC and the facility operator appealed a ruling that had found the license unlawful. The ruling will affect federal regulatory power over nuclear energy and waste management.
FLAVORED VAPE PRODUCTS
On April 2, the Court upheld the FDA’s refusal to approve flavored e-cigarette products from two companies, reinforcing efforts to limit youth access to vaping. The justices overturned a lower court decision that faulted the FDA for not following proper legal procedures.
EPA AUTHORITY
On March 4, the Court ruled 5-4 against the Environmental Protection Agency, limiting its regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act. The case involved a San Francisco wastewater treatment plant’s permit, which the Court found contained overly vague restrictions, continuing a trend of curbing federal agency power.
UTAH RAILWAY PROJECT
On May 29, the Court ruled in favor of federal agencies allowing a Utah railway project designed to transport crude oil to proceed, overturning a lower court’s decision that had halted the project due to inadequate environmental review. The ruling limits the scope of federal environmental impact assessments.
TAILPIPE EMISSIONS
On April 23, the Court heard challenges by fuel producers against California’s vehicle emissions standards under the Clean Air Act. The case tests the state’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases differently from federal standards. The justices appeared receptive to the industry’s arguments, with a ruling expected soon.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES FUND
On March 26, the Court showed support for the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) method of funding programs to expand phone and broadband internet access to underserved populations. The justices are reviewing a lower court ruling that found the funding mechanism unconstitutional. A decision is expected shortly.
LOUISIANA ELECTORAL MAP
On March 24, the Court heard arguments on a challenge to Louisiana’s congressional district map, which increased Black-majority districts from one to two. Voters contesting the map argue it violates equal protection, while state officials and civil rights groups defend it as a fair remedy to racial discrimination.
DEATH PENALTY CASE
On February 25, the Court overturned the conviction of Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip, citing prosecutorial misconduct in withholding exculpatory evidence. The ruling granted Glossip a new trial and underscored the Court’s role in safeguarding fair trials.
U.S. TIKTOK BAN
On January 17, the Court unanimously upheld a law banning TikTok in the U.S. unless its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, sells its U.S. operations. The Court ruled the ban does not violate free speech rights, emphasizing national security concerns. Enforcement of the ban has been delayed as parties negotiate a potential sale.
The Supreme Court is expected to release decisions on many of these high-stakes cases by the end of June, signaling critical shifts in U.S. law on constitutional rights, federal authority, and social policy.
