What a long, strange trip this Supreme Court term has been. But the justices are truckin’ on to the end of the term, which should wrap by the Fourth of July holiday weekend. (Except for emergency actions in challenges to Trump administration policies, but more on that in a moment.)
As usual, decisions in the term’s most high-profile cases will come in its final weeks. I have no crystal ball, but here are some of my predictions of what is to come in the final stretch of the Supreme Court’s term.
Note: This is not an exhaustive list of undecided cases. There are plenty of others that involve really important questions like habeas corpus relief, the scope of Environmental Protection Agency authority, and Medicare reimbursements. But this newsletter must actually fit into your inbox. For a deeper dive, you can check Oyez’s handy list of cases from the term, which indicates which ones have yet to be decided.
Advertisement
TRUMP v. EVERYBODY: While not actually a part of this term’s docket, expect the justices to continue to act on emergency petitions filed in relation to Trump administration actions, including efforts to continue deportations to El Salvador and South Sudan, fire federal workers and strip them of union rights, and more. Those emergency actions will last beyond the official close of the term, meaning the justices will have a busy summer. So far, Trump has won some but lost more, so overall this will be a real coin flip. But a big question is what the court will do about nationwide injunctions, like the one halting Trump’s birthright citizenship order from taking effect. It’s a tough issue, and during oral arguments earlier this month, the justices seemed stumped.
Advertisement
RELIGION RULES: If there is one overarching prediction I have about this term, it’s that the court’s expansion of religious freedom protections, particularly for conservative Christians, will continue —- even if such claims bump up against antidiscrimination laws and the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Not only does the court seems poised to rule in favor of allowing what would be the nation’s first publicly funded religious charter school in Oklahoma, the justices could also exempt Catholic Charities from paying unemployment taxes for its employees and allow states to bar Medicaid recipients from receiving health care, wholly unrelated to abortion services, from Planned Parenthood.
TROUBLE FOR TRANS RIGHTS: I’ll be shocked if the court doesn’t uphold Tennessee’s ban on minors receiving gender-affirming care. It’s also quite likely the court will side with parents who object to books with LGBTQ themes in their children’s Maryland classrooms in what I call the “don’t read gay” case.
REVERSE DISCRIMINATION? A couple of decisions will determine if a new area of civil rights litigation is on the horizon: reverse discrimination claims. In one case, a straight woman is claiming she was discriminated against when she was denied a promotion given by her lesbian supervisor to a gay colleague. In another, after Louisiana’s newest congressional voting map included two “opportunity districts” where Black voters have enough power to elect candidates of their choice, a group of “non-African Americans” challenged it is discriminatory against whites. Those cases could — and likely will — turn generations of laws aimed at protecting members of marginalized groups on their head.
Advertisement
If my predictions prove true, buckle up. It’s going to be a bumpy month.
This is an excerpt from The Gavel, a newsletter about the Supreme Court from columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Sign up to get The Gavel in your inbox every Wednesday evening.
Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at kimberly.atkinsstohr@globe.com. Follow her @KimberlyEAtkins.
