Based on the project templates and your episode script, here are show notes for your January 2026 mega episode:

January 2026 Supreme Court Mega Preview | The High Court Report

Overview: Action-packed January brings constitutional showdowns across five major cases spanning wartime contractor protection, transgender athletics, sovereign immunity, Second Amendment property rights, and presidential removal power over Federal Reserve governors.

Roadmap Episode: Complete preview covering Chevron's $744 million WWII liability case, transgender sports restrictions post-Skrmetti, New Jersey Transit sovereignty claims, Hawaii's gun permission requirements after Bruen, and Trump's authority to fire Fed officials for pre-appointment conduct.

M & K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of The IAM Pension Fund | Argument Date: 1/20/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Can pension plans charge higher prices using future prices, or must they stick with the original prices?

Overview: Four companies' pension withdrawal liability tripled from timing of actuarial assumption changes, creating circuit split over whether "as of" December 31st calculations require December 31st assumptions or permit retrospective professional judgment.

Posture: Arbitrators favored companies; D.C. District Court and Circuit reversed, permitting post-measurement assumption adoption with restrictions.

Main Arguments:

Wolford v. Lopez | Case No. 24-1046 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that Hawaii may presumptively prohibit concealed carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without property owner express permission.

Overview: Post-Bruen constitutional challenge to Hawaii's affirmative-consent requirement for carrying firearms on private property open to public creates circuit split over intersection of Second Amendment rights and traditional property law principles.

Posture: District court enjoined law; Ninth Circuit reversed, creating conflict with Second and Third Circuits.

Main Arguments:

CSX Galette v. NJ Transit Corp. | Argument Date: 1/14/26 | Docket Link: Here Consolidated with CSX NJ Transit Corp. v. Colt | Argument Date: 1/14/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the New Jersey Transit Corporation functions as an arm of the State of New Jersey for interstate sovereign immunity purposes

Overview: NJ Transit claims sovereign immunity after bus injured passenger in Philadelphia, raising fundamental federalism questions about state power to extend constitutional immunity to state-created corporations while disclaiming their debts and liabilities.

Posture: Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed lower courts, holding NJ Transit qualifies as state arm...

Little v. Hecox | Oral Argument Date: 1/13/26 | Docket Link: Here

Consolidated with West Virginia v. B. P. J. | Oral Argument Date: 1/13/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether laws protecting women's sports by limiting participation to biological females violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

Overview: Consolidated cases challenging Idaho's categorical ban and West Virginia's Save Women's Sports Act generate Supreme Court's first major ruling on transgender athletics after Skrmetti reshaped constitutional sex discrimination analysis.

Posture: Multiple circuit splits; Little preliminarily enjoined (Ninth Circuit), West Virginia reversed (Fourth Circuit); proceedings stayed...

This episode:

Trump v. Cook | Argument Date: 1/21/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Federal Reserve Board governors possess Fifth Amendment property rights in their offices and whether "for cause" removal authority permits presidential removal based on pre-office conduct.

Overview: President Trump's 30-minute ultimatum removal of Fed Governor Cook over mortgage misrepresentations creates unprecedented constitutional crisis testing presidential power against central bank independence and due process rights.

Posture: D.C. Circuit denied emergency stay by 2-1 vote; Governor Cook continues serving pending appeal.

Main Arguments:

• Trump (Petitioner): (1) Federal offices constitute no Fifth Am...

Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish | Oral Argument Date: 1/12/26 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether a causal-nexus or contractual-direction test survives the 2011 amendment to the federal-officer removal statute

Overview: Oil companies that fueled WWII fighter planes face $744.6 million in state court verdicts for 80-year-old production methods, creating unprecedented federal contractor liability exposure with massive removal jurisdiction implications.

Posture: Fifth Circuit denied en banc rehearing by narrow 7-6 vote after split panel affirmed remand.

Main Arguments:

• Chevron (Petitioner): (1) 2011 amendment eliminated causal-nexus requirement through "relating to" language expansion; (2) Fifth Circuit improperly re...

OVERVIEW

December delivered constitutional chaos with two emergency Supreme Court cases and a preview of January's landmark docket. From federal agents facing $10,000 bounties in Chicago to immigration judges exposing government corruption, plus six blockbuster cases that could reshape American law for decades.

Featured Cases:

• Trump v. Illinois - Presidential emergency powers meet federalism

• Margolin v. NAIJ - Immigration judges challenge speech restrictions

• January Preview - Six constitutional blockbusters including transgender sports, gun rights, and executive authority

This week, we'll air throwback episodes. Each episode will relate to the current cases.

Today's case is United States v. Skrmetti. I chose this case to segue into the 2026 Supreme Court calendar. In January, the Supreme Court hears two transgender cases that in some ways offshoot from Skrmetti. Here are a few details on these cases. We'll be sure to preview these cases soon. Also, check out our July 7th Roundup episode for more details.

Transgender Sports Cases

Little v. Hecox (Idaho) | Case No. 24-38 | Docket Link: Here

This week, we'll air throwback episodes. Each episode will relate to the current cases.

Today's episode is FEC v. Cruz. I chose this case for the interplay with a case this term, NRSC v. FEC. Listen to the arguments regarding standing, free speech, and political corruption.

Here's the story of FEC v. Cruz.

Senator Ted Cruz loaned $260,000 to his 2018 reelection campaign, but federal law limits candidates to recovering only $250,000 from post-election contributions, leaving Cruz unable to recover the final $10,000. Cruz and his campaign committee sued the Federal Election Commission, arguing this loan repayment...

Episode Throwback: The Levers of Power

Case: Trump v. United States | Case No. 23-939 | Docket Link: 23-939

Context & Connection

This week, we revisit the 2024 landmark ruling on Presidential immunity to provide context for our current coverage of Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook. These cases collectively explore the boundaries of Article II authority: (1) when can the President fire a person without cause when Congress permitted the person's firing only for cause; and (2) when can courts second guess the President's for cause determinations.

The Immunity Framework

In a 6-3...

This week, we'll air throwback episodes. Each episode will relate to the current cases.

Today's case is Biden v. Nebraska. I chose this case due to the statutory interpretation parallels with the Trump Tariff Cases. When listening, pay close attention to the justices' ways to decipher text and how the major questions doctrine plays into their thinking.

Here's the story of Biden v. Nebraska:

The Biden Administration tried to cancel $430 billion in student loan debt under the HEROES Act, claiming emergency powers from COVID-19 justified forgiving up to $20,000 per borrower. Six states sued...

This week, we'll air throwback episodes. Each episode will relate to the current cases.

In this case, Twitter claimed that federal law shielded them from liability for terrorists who used their platform for terrorist acts. I chose this case because it relates to arguments that Cox raised in Cox v. Sony Music Entertainment. In Cox, Cox argued that this case, Twitter v. Taamneh, created heightened proof necessary to establish liability for its' users actions.

Here's the story of Twitter v. Taamneh:

Families of victims killed in a 2017 ISIS terrorist attack at the Reina...

Overview

This episode delivers post-oral argument analysis and predictions for three major Supreme Court cases heard during the December 2025 argument session. We break down the key exchanges, judicial fault lines, and likely outcomes in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC (campaign finance limits), Hamm v. Smith (intellectual disability determinations in death penalty cases), and FS Credit v. Saba (implied private rights of action in securities law).

NRSC v. FEC: Campaign Finance Revolution

• JD Vance standing issues and Article III requirements

• Chief Justice Roberts challenges coordinated expenditure "fictions"

• Justice Kagan's system...

FS Credit v. Saba | Fund Feud: Forcing Fiduciary Fairness Through Federal Lawsuits | Argument Date: 12/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 gives private plaintiffs a federal cause of action to seek rescission of contracts that allegedly violate the Act.

Overview

The Supreme Court will decide whether activist investors can sue investment funds directly in federal court when funds adopt governance provisions that allegedly violate federal securities law. Four closed-end funds adopted Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act provisions to strip voting rights from shareholders acquiring more than 10...

Hamm v. Smith | Case No. 24-872 | Oral Argument Date: 12/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: When someone takes multiple IQ tests to prove intellectual disability in a capital case, do courts look at all the scores together, or can one low score alone save their life?

Overview

The Supreme Court will decide whether courts must evaluate multiple IQ scores collectively or whether a single qualifying score triggers constitutional protection in death penalty cases. This decision affects hundreds of current death row inmates and reshapes capital litigation nationwide.

Oral Advocates:

Summary:

Analysis of the December 8, 2025 Supreme Court oral arguments in Trump v. Slaughter, examining how the justices signaled their likely approach to presidential removal power and independent agencies.

Key Topics Covered:

1. Chief Justice Roberts' Strategic Questioning

2. Justice Sotomayor's Stare Decisis Defense

3. Predicted 6-3 Ruling for Trump

NRSC v. FEC | Money, Messaging, and Muzzling: The First Amendment Fight Over Party Coordination | Argument Date: 12/9/15 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the First Amendment permits limits on the amount of money that the national committee of a political party may contribute to political candidates in the form of coordinated expenditures.

Overview

This oral argument involves National Republican Senatorial Committee versus Federal Election Commission, a landmark campaign finance case that could fundamentally reshape how political parties operate in federal elections, featuring the extraordinary situation where the Federal Election Commission itself now agrees with...

Trump v. Slaughter | Presidential Power Play : Trump's Total Takedown of Independent Agencies | Case No. 25-332 | Oral Argument Date: 12/8/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Congress can require the President to show cause before removing commissioners of independent agencies, or whether Article II grants the President absolute removal power over all executive officers.

Overview

President Trump removed FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause, challenging the constitutional foundation of independent agencies. The Court confronts whether two dozen independent agencies that control $47 trillion in economic activity can maintain protection from at-will presidential removal.

Oral...

Overview

This episode updates on four major cases granted certiorari by the Supreme Court on December 5th, 2025, following Friday's episode. The cases span constitutional citizenship rights, federal court jurisdiction, criminal procedure, and arbitration law, representing some of the most significant legal questions facing the Court this term.

Roadmap

Opening: December 5th Cert Grants

• Four cases granted certiorari in one day

• Focus on birthright citizenship case that drew most attention

• Brief coverage of three additional jurisdictional cases

Trump v. Barbara: The Birthright Citizenship Case

• Backgrou...

Overview

This week delivered explosive Supreme Court developments with two unanimous decisions and Texas redistricting ruling reshaping voting rights.

The Court reversed Clark versus Sweeney and Pitts versus Mississippi while granting Texas a controversial redistricting stay. Oral arguments revealed deep tensions involving internet liability, immigration law, First Amendment standing, and federal court jurisdiction. Next week promises blockbuster cases addressing presidential power, campaign finance regulations, death penalty standards, and investment law.

Roadmap

Overview

This week delivered explosive Supreme Court developments with two unanimous decisions and Texas redistricting ruling reshaping voting rights.

The Court reversed Clark versus Sweeney and Pitts versus Mississippi while granting Texas a controversial redistricting stay. Oral arguments revealed deep tensions involving internet liability, immigration law, First Amendment standing, and federal court jurisdiction. Next week promises blockbuster cases addressing presidential power, campaign finance regulations, death penalty standards, and investment law.

Roadmap

Olivier v. City of Brandon | Sidewalk Sermons and Section 1983: The Prospective Relief Puzzle | Argument Date: 12/3/25 | Docket Link: Here

OVERVIEW

Gabriel Olivier, a Christian who shares his faith on public sidewalks, gets convicted under a Mississippi ordinance restricting demonstrations near a city amphitheater. He sues in federal court seeking only prospective relief to prevent future enforcement against his religious expression. The Fifth Circuit blocks his lawsuit entirely under Heck v. Humphrey, but eight judges dissent from denial of rehearing en banc, setting up a Supreme Court showdown over whether prior convictions permanently bar constitutional challenges.

First Choice Women's Resource v. Platkin | Case No. 24-781 | Oral Argument Date: 12/2/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented:

Whether federal courts can hear First Amendment challenges to state subpoenas immediately, or whether challengers must first litigate their constitutional claims in state court.

Overview

This episode examines First Choice Women's Resource Centers versus Platkin, a case that generated a stunning 42 amicus briefs and could fundamentally reshape federal court jurisdiction over state investigatory demands. The Supreme Court will determine whether organizations facing state subpoenas for donor information can immediately challenge those demands in federal...

Urias-Orellana v. Bondi | Asylum Authority Showdown: Cartel Violence and Court Deference | Oral Argument Date: 12/1/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

In this case, the Supreme Court must decide whether federal courts must defer to immigration officials when determining if undisputed facts constitute "persecution" under asylum law, or whether courts should make independent legal determinations. The case involves a Salvadoran family who fled years of cartel violence, including death threats and physical attacks, but were denied asylum when the Board of Immigration Appeals concluded their experiences didn't rise to the level of persecution. This decision will affect hundreds...

Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment | The Billion-Dollar Broadband Battle: When ISPs Face Copyright Catastrophe | Oral Argument Date: 12/1/25 | Docket Link: Here

Questions Presented: (1) Did the Fourth Circuit err in holding that a service provider can be held liable for "materially contributing" to copyright infringement merely because it knew that people were using certain accounts to infringe and did not terminate access, without proof that the service provider affirmatively fostered infringement or otherwise intended to promote it? (2) Did the Fourth Circuit err in holding that mere knowledge of another's direct infringement suffices to find willfulness under 17 U...

Overview

This comprehensive mega episode covers all seven blockbuster Supreme Court cases scheduled for December 2025 oral arguments. From presidential power over independent agencies to billion-dollar copyright battles, these cases could reshape American governance, individual rights, and economic regulation for generations. The episode provides high-level analysis of each case's constitutional stakes and practical implications.

Episode Roadmap

December Cases Analysis:

Overview

In this special Thanksgiving episode, The High Court Report pulls back the curtain to share the personal story behind The High Court Report. The episode traces the podcast's origins from a 2021 hearing preparation that led to discovering gaps in existing Supreme Court content, to building a comprehensive resource for practitioners and the public. Your host reflects on the journey from anonymous podcast hosting to creating detailed case previews and opinion summaries that make complex legal decisions accessible. The episode concludes with heartfelt gratitude for family, friends, and listeners who have supported the podcast's mission to democratize...

Overview

This episode captures the most electrifying moments from the Supreme Court's November 2025 oral arguments in the consolidated Trump Tariff Cases—constitutional blockbusters that pit presidential emergency powers against Congress's exclusive authority to tax. These cases represent the most significant separation of powers challenge since the New Deal, with over $4 trillion in tariffs hanging in the balance.

Follow The High Court Report:

Subscribe and Share to help others access crucial Supreme Court analysis and exceptional advocacy examples.

TIMESTAMPS

...

Overview

This episode presents curated highlights from the Supreme Court's November 2025 oral arguments.

Follow The High Court Report:

Follow, rate, subscribe, share, and review. Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Just search "The High Court Report." Or, email us at: scotus.cases.pod@gmail.com.

Timestamps

[00:00:00] Episode Intro

[00:00:59] November Argument Highlights

[00:00:59] Coney Island v. Burton Highlights

[00:15:03] Hain v. Palmquist Highlights

[00:29:37] Landor v. LA Dep't of Corrections Highlights

[00:51:19] Fernandez v. United States Highlights

[01:04:29] Rutherford and...

Overview

• This episode presents curated highlights from the Supreme Court's October 2025 oral arguments, featuring exceptional moments of advocacy and judicial questioning from the term's most significant cases. The October sitting delivered constitutional blockbusters across First Amendment rights, criminal procedure, administrative law, and presidential power. This compilation showcases the highest caliber of Supreme Court advocacy and captures pivotal exchanges that signal how the Court may rule on these transformational cases.

Follow The High Court Report:

Follow, rate, subscribe, share, and review. Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and LinkedIn. Just search "The High Co...

NRSC v. FEC | Money, Messaging, and Muzzling: The First Amendment Fight Over Party Coordination | Argument Date: 12/9/15 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the First Amendment permits limits on the amount of money that the national committee of a political party may contribute to political candidates in the form of coordinated expenditures.

Overview

This episode examines National Republican Senatorial Committee versus Federal Election Commission, a landmark campaign finance case that could fundamentally reshape how political parties operate in federal elections, featuring the extraordinary situation where the Federal Election Commission itself now agrees with the...

FS Credit v. Saba | Fund Feud: Forcing Fiduciary Fairness Through Federal Lawsuits | Argument Date: 12/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 gives private plaintiffs a federal cause of action to seek rescission of contracts that allegedly violate the Act.

Overview

The Supreme Court will decide whether activist investors can sue investment funds directly in federal court when funds adopt governance provisions that allegedly violate federal securities law. Four closed-end funds adopted Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act provisions to strip voting rights from shareholders acquiring more than 10...

Hamm v. Smith | Case No. 24-872 | Oral Argument Date: 12/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: When someone takes multiple IQ tests to prove intellectual disability in a capital case, do courts look at all the scores together, or can one low score alone save their life?

Overview

The Supreme Court will decide whether courts must evaluate multiple IQ scores collectively or whether a single qualifying score triggers constitutional protection in death penalty cases. This decision affects hundreds of current death row inmates and reshapes capital litigation nationwide.

Episode Roadmap

Opening...

Olivier v. City of Brandon | Sidewalk Sermons and Section 1983: The Prospective Relief Puzzle | Argument Date: 12/3/25

OVERVIEW

Gabriel Olivier, a Christian who shares his faith on public sidewalks, gets convicted under a Mississippi ordinance restricting demonstrations near a city amphitheater. He sues in federal court seeking only prospective relief to prevent future enforcement against his religious expression. The Fifth Circuit blocks his lawsuit entirely under Heck v. Humphrey, but eight judges dissent from denial of rehearing en banc, setting up a Supreme Court showdown over whether prior convictions permanently bar constitutional challenges.

EPISODE ROADMAP<...

Duration: 00:10:25

Trump v. Slaughter | Case No. 25-332 | Oral Argument Date: 12/8/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Congress can require the President to show cause before removing commissioners of independent agencies, or whether Article II grants the President absolute removal power over all executive officers.

Overview

This episode examines a case that could trigger the most dramatic restructuring of federal power since the New Deal. President Trump removes FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause, challenging the constitutional foundation of independent agencies. The Court confronts whether two dozen independent agencies that control $47 trillion in economic activity...

First Choice Women's Resource v. Platkin | Case No. 24-781 | Oral Argument Date: 12/2/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether federal courts can hear First Amendment challenges to state subpoenas immediately, or whether challengers must first litigate their constitutional claims in state court.

Overview

This episode examines First Choice Women's Resource Centers versus Platkin, a case that generated a stunning 42 amicus briefs and could fundamentally reshape federal court jurisdiction over state investigatory demands. The Supreme Court will determine whether organizations facing state subpoenas for donor information can immediately challenge those demands in federal court, or...

Urias-Orellana v. Bondi | Case No. 24-777 | Oral Argument Date: 12/1/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

The Supreme Court will decide whether federal courts must defer to immigration officials when determining if undisputed facts constitute "persecution" under asylum law, or whether courts should make independent legal determinations. The case involves a Salvadoran family who fled years of cartel violence, including death threats and physical attacks, but were denied asylum when the Board of Immigration Appeals concluded their experiences didn't rise to the level of persecution. This decision will affect hundreds of thousands of asylum cases and could reshape...

Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment | Case No. 24-171 | Oral Argument Date: 12/1/25 | Docket Link: Here

Questions Presented: (1) Did the Fourth Circuit err in holding that a service provider can be held liable for "materially contributing" to copyright infringement merely because it knew that people were using certain accounts to infringe and did not terminate access, without proof that the service provider affirmatively fostered infringement or otherwise intended to promote it? (2) Did the Fourth Circuit err in holding that mere knowledge of another's direct infringement suffices to find willfulness under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)?

Overview Duration: 00:15:34

Carter v. United States | Case No. 24-860 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here (consolidated with Rutherford v. United States | Case No. 24-820 | Docket Link: Here)

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases Rutherford versus United States and Carter versus United States. These cases examine whether federal prisoners deserve relief based on changes Congress made to gun sentencing laws. Rutherford received 25 years for his second armed robbery—a sentence that would be only 7 years under today's laws. Congress eliminated brutal "stacking" penalties in 2018, but only for future defendants. Now Rutherford and Ca...

Fernandez v. United States | Case No. 24-556 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here | The Sentence Reduction Standoff: Compassion Versus Collateral Attack

Overview

This is the Supreme Court oral arguments in the case called Fernandez v. United States. Fernandez seeks a sentence reduction under federal law. Fernandez argues legal changes since his sentencing constitute "extraordinary and compelling reasons" for reducing his sentence. The government argues these legal changes don't apply retroactively and cannot justify reduction. The central question: Can courts consider legal changes—even those that don't apply retroactively—as grounds for reducing previously imposed sentences?

Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections | Case No. 23-1197 | Argued: November 10, 2025 | Landor's Lost Locks: When Prison Guards Clip Constitutional Claims

GEO Group v. Menocal | Case No. 24-758 | Argued: November 10, 2025 | The Procedural Privilege: The Immunity Fast-Pass to Appeal

Overview

This episode examines oral arguments from two significant Supreme Court cases heard on the same day. The first, Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections, explores whether incarcerated individuals can sue prison officials personally for religious liberty violations under federal law. The second, GEO Group v. Menocal, addresses whether government contractors can claim derivative sovereign immunity...

Geo Group, Inc. v. Menocal | Case No. 24-758 | Oral Argument Date: 11/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Geo Group versus Menocal, which examines whether derivative sovereign immunity creates a fast-pass to appeal. Detainees sue a private contractor running an ICE facility, claiming forced labor—the company says "the government told me to do it" and wants to skip straight to appeal after the trial court found that the contractor held no derivative sovereign immunity. Must government contractors face years of expensive, potentially politically-motivated litigation first, or can they appeal im...

Landor v. Louisiana Dept. of Corrections | Case No. 23-1197 | Oral Argument Date: 11/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

This is the Supreme Court oral argument in Landor versus Louisiana Department of Corrections, examining when prison guards clip constitutional claims. Damon Landor kept his Rastafarian vows for nearly two decades, but with just three weeks left in his sentence, Louisiana guards forced him down and shaved his head—even after he showed them a court ruling that said this exact act breaks federal law. Can Landor seek damages against the prison guard after Landor becomes free?

Or...

Fernandez v. United States | Case No. 24-556 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here | The Sentence Reduction Standoff: Compassion Versus Collateral Attack

Carter v. United States | Case No. 24-860 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here (consolidated with Rutherford v. United States | Case No. 24-820 | Docket Link: Here) | Retroactivity Rebellion: Can Courts Correct What Congress Left Behind?

SCOTUS.cases.pod@gmail.com

Overview

This episode examines two closely related cases that challenge the boundaries of federal compassionate release authority. Both Fernandez v. United States and Rutherford v. United States/Carter ask when trial...

Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., et al. | Oral Argument: November 5, 2025 | Case No. 25-250 | Docket Link: Here

Consolidated with: Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump | Case No. 24-1287 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the Trump Tariff cases—Trump versus V.O.S. Selections and Learning Resources versus Trump—a constitutional clash over tariffs and separation of powers. President Trump put sweeping tariffs on trillions of dollars in imports using a 1977 emergency law that says he can "regulate" trade—but the law never mentions tariffs, duties, or taxes...

Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist | Case No. 24-724 | Oral Argument Date: 11/4/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Hain Celestial Group versus Palmquist, a forum fight about when courts keep cases they never should have had. A Texas family sued two companies over their child's heavy metal poisoning from baby food—but after a federal court wrongly kicked out one defendant and ran a two-week trial, an appeals court said the case never belonged in federal court, forcing everyone back to square one.

Questions Presented:

Coney Island Auto Parts, Inc. v. Burton | Case No. 24-808 | Oral Argument Date: 11/5/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Coney Island Auto Parts versus Burton, a time trap tangle examining when void verdicts gain validity. Coney Island's bank account gets frozen for nearly $100,000 based on a 2015 Tennessee judgment they claim they never knew about. When Coney finally fights back seven years later, the Sixth Circuit dismisses the case, saying that you waited too long to challenge the judgment Coney didn’t even know about. "If something never existed in th...

Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist | Case No. 24-724 | Oral Argument Date: 11/4/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

A father seeks justice after his son, Army Staff Sergeant Ryan Hencely, was killed in a 2016 terrorist attack at Bagram Airfield. The Army's own investigation found contractor Fluor failed to supervise the Afghan worker who carried out the attack, calling it the "primary contributing factor." Yet Fluor claims federal law shields them from any state tort liability.

Question Presented: Should Boyle be extended to allow federal interests emanating from the FTCA's combatant-activities exception to preempt state tort...

Rico v. United States | Case No. 24-1234 | Oral Argument Date: 11/3/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Rico versus United States, the disappearing defendant dilemma examining when sentence clocks stop ticking. Isabel Rico went on the run during her 42-month release term. The government says her time on the run doesn't count toward her sentence.

Question Presented: Whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.

Oral Advocates:

Geo Group v. Menocal Case No. 24-758 | Oral Argument Date: 11/10/25

Overview

This episode examines The GEO Group, Inc. versus Menocal, a technical procedural fight with massive real-world consequences for the hundreds of billions of dollars the U.S. government spends on contracts annually. The case pits the efficiency of the justice system against the government's ability to use private contractors to carry out its functions. At stake is whether a government contractor who loses a pre-trial claim of "derivative sovereign immunity" can appeal that decision immediately, or must wait until after a full, costly trial...

Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections | Case No. 23-1197 | Oral Argument Date: 11/10/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether an individual may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of RLUIPA.

Overview

This episode examines Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections, a case that could reshape religious liberty enforcement in prisons by determining whether inmates can sue individual prison officials for personal damages under RLUIPA. The case centers on Damon Landor, a devout Rastafarian whose decades-long dreadlocks were forcibly shaved despite existing Fifth Circuit precedent protecting such religious practices.<...

Coney Island Auto Parts v. Burton | Case No. 24-808 | Oral Argument Date: 11/5/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a default judgment void for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Overview

This episode examines a deceptively simple civil procedure case that could fundamentally reshape how federal courts handle void judgments, creating a constitutional tension between centuries-old legal principles and modern procedural rules about timing requirements for challenging judgments that courts never had authority to enter.

Episode Roadmap

Opening: The...

Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., et al. | Oral Argument: November 5, 2025 | Case No. 25-250 | Docket Link: Here

Consolidated with: Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump | Case No. 24-1287 | Docket Link: Here

September 10th Episode (A Constitutional Clash: Trump's Tariffs and the Separation of Powers): https://scotus-oral-arguments.captivate.fm/episode/a-constitutional-clash-trumps-tariffs-and-the-separation-of-powers/

Overview

This episode examines the Supreme Court's September 9, 2025 Order that expedited review of two consolidated cases challenging President Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), representing a constitutional clash over the separation of powers a...

Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist | Case No. 24-724 | Oral Argument Date: 11/4/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether a district court's final judgment as to completely diverse parties must be vacated when an appellate court later determines that it erred by dismissing a non-diverse party at the time of removal; and whether a plaintiff may defeat diversity jurisdiction after removal by amending the complaint to add factual allegations that state a colorable claim against a nondiverse party when the complaint at the time of removal did not state such a claim.

Overview

This...

Rico v. United States | Case No. 24-1234 | Oral Argument Date: 11/3/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.

Overview

This episode examines Rico v. United States, a Supreme Court case that challenges the boundaries between judicial power and congressional authority in criminal sentencing. The case asks whether federal courts can indefinitely extend supervised release terms for defendants who abscond, despite Congress never explicitly authorizing such extensions. Through Isabel Rico's story - a woman whose 42-month sentence ballooned to over 60 months due to a judge-made doctrine...

Hencely v. Fluor | Case No. 24-924 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Should Boyle be extended to allow federal interests emanating from the FTCA's combatant-activities exception to preempt state tort claims against a government contractor for conduct that breached its contract and violated military orders?

Overview

This episode examines Hencely v. Fluor Corporation, a case that could dramatically reshape government contractor immunity law by determining whether the Supreme Court's narrow Boyle defense should be expanded to protect military contractors who breach their contracts and violate military orders during wartime operations.

Episode Roadmap<...

Duration: 00:15:50

Oral Argument: Case v. Montana | Case No. 24-624 | Oral Argument Date: 10/15/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Question Presented: Whether law enforcement may enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring, or whether the emergency-aid exception requires probable cause.

Oral Advocates:

Link to Opinion: TBD.

...

Oral Argument: Louisiana v. Callais | Case No. 24-109 | Oral Argument Date: 10/15/25

Link to Docket: Here

Consolidated with: Robinson v. Callais | Case No. 24-110 | Oral Argument Date: 10/15/25 | Docket Link: Here

Case Preview: Here

Background: Over the State's strenuous objections, the Middle District of Louisiana held, Robinson v. Ardoin , 605 F. Supp. 3d 759 (M.D. La. 2022)-and the Fifth Circuit affirmed, Robinson v. Ardoin , 86 F.4th 574 (5th Cir. 2023)-that Louisiana likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by failing to create a second majority-Black congressional district. The Fifth Circuit gave the Legislature...

Oral Argument: Ellingburg v. United States | Case No. 24-482 | Oral Argument Date: 10/14/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Question Presented: Whether criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.

Oral Advocates:

Oral Argument: Bowe v. United States | Case No. 24-5438 | Oral Argument Date: 10/14/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Background: Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1), “[ a] claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was presented in a prior application shall be dismissed. ” (emphasis added).

Question Presented:

Oral Argument: Postal Service v. Konan | Case No. 24-351 | Oral Argument Date: 10/8/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Background: The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), ch. 753, 60 Stat. 842 (28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2671 et seq .), generally waives the United States' sovereign immunity for suits seeking damages "for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of the federal government "under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law...

Oral Argument: Bost v. Illinois State Bd. of Elections | Case No. 24-568 | Oral Argument Date: 10/8/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: https://scotus-oral-arguments.captivate.fm/episode/upcoming-oral-argument-bost-v-illinois-ballot-box-bout-when-can-candidates-challenge-election-rules/

Background: Federal law sets the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the federal Election Day. 2 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 7; and 3 U.S.C. § 1. Several states, including Illinois, have enacted state laws that allow ballots to be received and counted after Election Day. Petitioners contend these state laws are preempted under the Elections and Electors Clauses. Petitioners sued to enjoin Illinois' law allowing ballots to...

Oral Argument: Chiles v. Salazar | Case No. 24-539 | Oral Argument Date: 10/7/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Question Presented: Whether a law that censors certain conversations between counselors and their clients based on the viewpoints expressed regulates conduct or violates the Free Speech Clause.

Oral Advocates:

Link to Opinion: TBD.

Website...

Episode Title

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Question Presented:

Oral Advocates:

Oral Argument: Barrett v. United States | Case No. 24-5774 | Oral Argument Date: 10/7/25

Link to Docket: Here

Case Preview: Here

Question Presented:

Oral Advocates:

Oral Argument: Berk v. Choy | Case No. 24-440 | Oral Argument Date: 10/6/25

Link to Docket: Here

Episode Preview: Here

Background:

Question Presented: Whether a state law providing that a complaint must be dismissed unless it is accompanied by an expert affidavit may be applied in federal court.

Oral Advocates:

Link to Opinion: TBD.

Website Link to Opinion Summary: TBD.

Website Link to Oral Argument: TBD.

Timestamps: <...

Oral Argument: Villarreal v. Texas | Case No. 24-557 | Oral Argument Date: 10/6/25

Link to Docket: Here

Preview Episode: Here

Question Presented: Whether a trial court abridges the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel by prohibiting the defendant and his counsel from discussing the defendant's testimony during an overnight recess.

Oral Advocates:

Louisiana v. Callais | Case No. 24-109 | Oral Argument Date: 10/15/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the State's intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Other Referenced Episodes:

• August 19th – Road Work Ahead: How Four 2024 Cases May Be Reshaping First Amendment Scrutiny | Here

Overview

This episode examines Louisiana v. Callais, a potentially transformative voting rights case that could reshape Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and minority representation nationwide. After ordering reargument and supplemental briefing, the Supreme Court conf...

Case v. Montana | Case No. 24-624 | Oral Argument Date: 10/15/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether law enforcement may enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring, or whether the emergency-aid exception requires probable cause.

Other Referenced Episodes:

Overview

This episode examines Case v. Montana, a Fourth Amendment case that has drawn unprecedented attention...

Bowe v. United States | Case No. 24-5438 | Oral Argument Date: 10/14/25 | Docket Link: Here

Questions Presented:

Overview

This episode examines Bowe v. United States, where the government concedes error but argues the Supreme Cour...

Ellingburg v. United States | Case No. 24-482 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.

Overview

This episode examines Ellingburg v. United States, one of the most procedurally unusual Supreme Court cases in recent memory. After the Court granted certiorari, the government switched positions following a change in presidential Administration, now agreeing with the criminal defendant that the Eighth Circuit erred. The Court appointed an outside attorney as amicus curiae to defend the lower court's judgment...

Bost v. Illinois State Bd. of Elections | Case No. 24-568 | Oral Argument Date: 10/8/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

This episode examines Bost v. Illinois, a Supreme Court case that could reshape how candidates challenge election laws in federal court. Congressman Michael Bost and two Republican presidential elector nominees are challenging Illinois's law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted up to 14 days after Election Day, creating a fundamental test of Article III standing doctrine in the election law context. The case sits at the intersection of constitutional standing requirements and the unique competitive dynamics of electoral politics...

Postal Service v. Konan | Case No. 24-351 | Oral Argument Date: 10/8/25 | Docket Link: Here

Episode Overview

This episode examines United States Postal Service v. Lebene Konan, a Supreme Court case that asks whether the federal government has immunity when postal employees intentionally refuse to deliver mail as part of a campaign of racial harassment. The case centers on the interpretation of the Federal Tort Claims Act's "postal exception" and whether terms like "loss" and "miscarriage" cover intentional wrongdoing or only negligent acts.

Episode Roadmap

Opening: A Deceptively Simple Question

Barrett v. United States | Case No. 24-5774 | Oral Argument Date: 10/7/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether the Double Jeopardy Clause permits punishment under both 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and § 924(j) for one act that violates each statute

Other Referenced Episodes:

Overview

This episode explores Barrett v. United States, a fascinating Double Jeopardy case where the federal government unusually sides with a criminal defendant against its own prosecution. The Supreme Court must determine whether convicting someone under both federal gu...

Chiles v. Salazar | Case No. 24-539 | Oral Argument Date: 10/7/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether a law that censors certain conversations between counselors and their clients based on the viewpoints expressed regulates conduct or violates the Free Speech Clause.

Other Referenced Episodes:

Overview

This episode examines one of the most anticipated cases of the October 2025 Supreme Court term - a First Amendment challenge to Colorado's "conversion therapy" ban that has generated over 50 amicus briefs and sits at...

Villarreal v. Texas | Case No. 24-557 | Oral Argument Date: 10/6/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether a trial court abridges the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel by prohibiting the defendant and his counsel from discussing the defendant's testimony during an overnight recess.

Overview

This episode examines Villareal v. Texas, a case that addresses a fundamental question affecting every criminal trial where a defendant takes the stand: what happens when testimony gets interrupted by an overnight recess? The case explores the intersection of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and trial courts' authority to...

Berk v. Choy | Case No. 24-440 | Oral Argument Date: 10/6/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Delaware's expert affidavit requirement for medical malpractice claims conflicts with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when applied in federal diversity cases

Episode Overview

This episode examines Berk v. Choy, a case that started with a simple fall but could reshape how federal courts handle state law requirements across the country. The Supreme Court must decide whether Delaware's expert affidavit requirement for medical malpractice claims conflicts with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when applied in federal diversity cases, presenting...

Episode Overview

The Supreme Court returns from summer recess with a blockbuster lineup of cases for October and November 2025. This episode provides a comprehensive preview of the 19 cases already scheduled for oral argument, spanning critical issues from voting rights to conversion therapy bans to criminal procedure reforms. We examine why this term opens with such consequential cases and what practitioners and citizens should watch for as the arguments unfold.

What You'll Learn

Overview

This episode examines the Supreme Court's September 9, 2025 Order that expedited review of two consolidated cases challenging President Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), representing a constitutional clash over the separation of powers and presidential trade authority.

Roadmap

Opening: Explosive Constitutional Questions

Background: The Trump Tariff Orders

This episode examines how the Supreme Court's 2024-25 term may be quietly reshaping First Amendment doctrine through four cases that suggest new approaches to constitutional scrutiny levels.

We analyze how the Court appears to be moving away from the mechanical application of strict, intermediate, and rational basis review established in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, instead developing more contextual approaches that consider traditional government authority, institutional expertise, and competing constitutional values.

The episode explores Catholic Charities Bureau's traditional strict scrutiny analysis of denominational discrimination, TikTok's content-neutral treatment of national security regulations, Free Speech Coalition's novel "...

This episode revisits the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock decision and examines how the Court's recent retreat from Bostock in United States v. Skrmetti sets up a constitutional showdown over transgender rights in school sports.

We analyze the methodical legal reasoning behind Bostock's landmark ruling that Title VII protects gay and transgender employees, then explore how each faction of justices treated Bostock differently in Skrmetti's constitutional challenge to Tennessee's transgender healthcare ban.

The episode concludes by examining how both sides strategically deployed Bostock and anticipated Skrmetti's outcome in their cert petitions for the upcoming transgender sports cases...

This episode catches up on recent Supreme Court developments in the regular and emergency dockets.

This episode catches up on recent Supreme Court developments in the regular and emergency dockets.

This episode examines a July 14th Supreme Court emergency docket ruling that reveals fundamental tensions about executive power over federal agency firings at the Education Department and the limits of congressional authority.

This episode also compares and contrasts this case (McMahon v. New York) with OPM v. AFGE, a government workforce reduction case discussed in our July 9th episode. In both cases, the government raised virtually identical arguments about standing, jurisdiction and the merits. In both cases, SCOTUS permitted the reductions to take effect while litigation played out.

Case Covered:

McMahon v. New...

This episode examines two major Supreme Court emergency docket rulings that reveal fundamental tensions about presidential power, judicial authority, and constitutional rights. Both cases demonstrate the Court's willingness to grant extraordinary relief to the government while exposing deep philosophical divisions among the justices.

Cases Covered:

Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees | Case No. 24A1174 | Docket Link: Here

Bottom Line: Court allows President to proceed with planning massive federal workforce reductions while legal challenges continue

Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. | Case No. 24A1153 | Docket Link: Here

...

This episode covers four major Supreme Court cases granted certiorari in summer 2024 (July 3, 2025 Miscellaneous Order: Here), examining the Court's strategic approach to constitutional law and its rapid movement on key cultural and legal issues.

Episode Roadmap

Opening: The Court's Strategic Acceleration

Transgender Sports Cases

Little v. Hecox (Idaho) | Case No. 24-38 | Docket Link: Here

This episode:

This episode provides a comprehensive analysis of five major Supreme Court decisions released on June 27, 2025, that collectively reshape key areas of constitutional law including judicial authority, parental rights, agency power, executive appointments, and online speech regulation. We also discuss the notable absence of a decision in Louisiana v. Callais, a complex redistricting case that many Court watchers expected to be resolved.

Cases Covered:

Trump v. CASA, Inc.

Opinion Summary: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton | Date Decided: 6/27/25 | Case No. 23-1122

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

This Court has repeatedly held that States may rationally restrict minors' access to sexual materials, but such restrictions must withstand strict scrutiny if they burden adults' access to constitutionally protected speech. See, e.g., Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656, 663 (2004). In the decision below, the Fifth Circuit applied rational-basis review-rather than strict scrutiny-to vacate a preliminary injunction of a provision of a Texas law that significantly burdens adults' access to protected speech, because the law's stated...

Opinion Summary: Mahmoud v. Taylor | Date Decided: 6/27/25 | Case No. 24-297

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

Respondent Montgomery County Board of Education requires elementary school teachers to read their students storybooks celebrating gender transitions, Pride parades, and same-sex playground romance. The storybooks were chosen to disrupt "cisnormativity" and "either/or thinking" among students. The Board's own principals objected that the curriculum was "not appropriate for the intended age group," presented gender ideology as "fact," "sham[ed]" students with contrary opinions, and was "dismissive of religious beliefs." The Board initially allowed parents to opt their...

Opinion Summary: FCC v. Consumers' Research | Date Decided: 6/27/25 | Case No. 24-354

This case was consolidated with: SHLB Coalition V. Consumers' Research, Case No. 23-422.

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

In 47 U.S.C. 254, Congress required the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) to operate universal service subsidy programs using mandatory contributions from telecommunications carriers. The Commission has appointed a private company as the programs' Administrator, authorizing that company to perform administrative tasks such as sending out bills, collecting contributions, and disbursing funds to beneficiaries.

Questions Presented:

1. Whether Congress violated...

Opinion Summary: Kennedy v. Braidwood Mgmt., Inc. | Date Decided: 6/27/25 | Case No. 24-316

Host Note: On 4/25/25, the Supreme Court ordered the parties to “file supplemental letter briefs addressing the following question: Whether Congress has ‘by Law’ vested the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services with the authority to appoint members of the United States Preventive Services Task Force. U. S. Const. art. II, §2, cl. 2.” Link to 4/25/25 Order: Here. On 5/5/25, the parties filed supplemental letter briefs.

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (Task Force), which sit...

Opinion Summary: Trump, President of U.S. v. Casa, Inc. | Date Decided: 6/27/25 | Case No. 24A884

Links to Docket: Here (Case No. 24A884); Here (Case No. 24A885); and Here (Case No. 24A886).

Questions Presented:

Background:

Opinion Summary: Riley v. Bondi | Date Decided: 6/26/25 | Case No. 23–1270

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

Petitioner Pierre Riley, ineligible for cancellation of removal or discretionary relief from removal, sought deferral in withholding-only proceedings, pursuant to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. After the Board of Immigration Appeals issued a decision reversing an immigration judge's grant of relief, Riley promptly petitioned for review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Although both parties urged the court to decide the merits of the case, the Fo...

Opinion Summary: Gutierrez v. Saenz | Date Decided: 6/26/25 | Case No. 23-7809

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

In Reed v. Goertz, 598 U.S. 230 (2023), this Court held that Rodney Reed has standing to pursue a declaratory judgment that Texas's post-conviction DNA statute was unconstitutional because ''Reed suffered an injury in fact," the named defendant "caused Reed's injury," and if a federal court concludes that Texas's statute violates due process, it is "substantially likely that the state prosecutor would abide by such a court order."

In this case, a divided panel of the United States...

Opinion Summary: Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic | Date Decided: 6/26/25 | Case No. 23–1275

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

More than 30 years ago, this Court first applied what would become known as the "Blessing factors," holding that a Medicaid Act provision created a privately enforceable right to certain reimbursement rates. Wilder v. Va. Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 509-10 (1990). Later, the Court distilled from Wilder a multi-factor test for deciding whether a "statutory provision gives rise to a federal right" privately enforceable under Section 1983. Blessing v. Freestone, 520 U.S. 329, 340 (1997). Five years later, though, the Court disparaged Bl...

Opinion Summary: Hewitt v. United States | Date Decided: 6/26/25 | Case No. 23-1002

This case was consolidated with: Duffey V. United States, Case No. 23-1007.

Link to Docket: Here.

Background:

The First Step Act (FSA) significantly reduced the mandatory minimum sentences for several federal drug and firearm offenses. First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115- 391, §§ 401, 403, 132 Stat. 5194, 5220-5222. Sections 401 and 403 apply to offenses committed after the FSA's enactment on December 21, 2018, and to "any offense that was committed before the date of enactment * * * if a sentence for the offense has not been imposed as of...

In today's episode, we analyze the Supreme Court's recent activities across three key areas:

Key Topics Covered

Term Statistics (As of June 23, 2025)

Last Week's Opinion Analysis