HomeScheduleJusticesCasesOpinionsAdvocatesStatsHow It Works

Opinions

Loading opinion data.

scotus.wiki

The Judicial Branch

SCOTUS.wiki

Tracking the Supreme Court in plain language — justices, opinions, cases, and the Court’s calendar.

Congress.wikiWhiteHouse.wiki
HomeScheduleJusticesCasesOpinionsAdvocatesStatsHow It WorksPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

Share your feedback

Help us improve by sharing your thoughts, reporting issues, or suggesting features.

Describe the issue or feature request. Your current page will automatically be included.

If you'd like a response, please enter your email.

This is not an official Supreme Court website.

Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LLC. All rights reserved.

scotus.wiki

The Judicial Branch

SCOTUS.wiki

Tracking the Supreme Court in plain language — justices, opinions, cases, and the Court’s calendar.

Color Theme

Congress.wikiWhiteHouse.wiki
HomeScheduleJusticesCasesOpinionsAdvocatesStatsHow It WorksPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

Share your feedback

Help us improve by sharing your thoughts, reporting issues, or suggesting features.

Describe the issue or feature request. Your current page will automatically be included.

If you'd like a response, please enter your email.

This is not an official Supreme Court website.

Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LLC. All rights reserved.

Opinions

Decisions, authorship, and vote alignment.

Majority opinions, concurrences, dissents, and per curiam decisions — organized by author, vote split, and case context.

How the opinions divide

Majority 364
Concurrences 220
Dissents 189
Per curiam 19

All opinions

792

This term

126

Per curiam

19

Opinion of the Court

The controlling opinion when a majority joins it. This is the decision most Americans mean when they ask what the Court held.

Concurrence

Agrees with the judgment but adds a different reason, a narrower rule, or a warning about where the law should go next.

Dissent

Explains why one or more justices think the Court got the case wrong. Often becomes the language people remember years later.

Latest opinion

The most recent decision from the Court.

Opinion of the CourtOctober Term 2025Jun 30, 2026

Idaho's Law Barring Transgender Girls from Female School Sports Upheld by Supreme Court

Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
by Brett M. Kavanaugh · Docket 24-38

In a 6–3 decision authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court reversed and remanded a lower-court ruling that had blocked Idaho’s law barring transgender girls (individuals assigned male at birth who identify as female) from competing on girls’ K–12 sports teams. The Court’s opinion limits the scope of the injunction and sends the case back for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s reasoning.

View case

Vote split

6–3

All opinions

The opinion stream.

Grouped by decision day. Each card shows the opinion type, authoring justice, vote split, and a summary — color-coded by type so you can scan the stream at a glance.

Jun 30, 2026

11 opinions
Concurrence

Whether schools can limit girls' and boys' sports teams to biological sex at birth under Title IX and Equal Protection

West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson

Official portrait of Sonia Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor · 24-43

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote an opinion that agrees with the Court’s final outcome (reversing and remanding) in the school sports dispute but disagrees with some of the majority’s legal reasoning. She was joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson for that separate opinion.

6–3

Joined by

5 justices

AI headline

Supreme Court narrows challenge to Idaho law restricting transgender girls from girls’ K–12 sports; reverses lower-court

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Law Curbing Party Spending with Candidates Struck Down as First Amendment Violation

National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 24-621

The Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling and sent the case back. Justice Kagan wrote a dissent joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, arguing the Court should not have overturned limits on political-party spending coordinated with candidates.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Birthright Citizenship: Children Born in U.S. to Parents Here Illegally Are Citizens

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 25-365

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a separate concurring opinion (joined in parts by Justice Sotomayor) explaining her reasoning for the result. Several justices wrote separate opinions disagreeing in part or in whole.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Birthright Citizenship: Children Born in U.S. to Parents Here Illegally Are Citizens

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 25-365

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the Court’s opinion, joined by four other Justices; Justices Jackson and Kavanaugh wrote separate opinions. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Whether schools can limit girls' and boys' sports teams to biological sex at birth under Title IX and Equal Protection

West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-43

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court and sent the case back. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a separate opinion that agrees with the Court’s ultimate outcome in part and disagrees in part, explaining her reasons for concurring only in the judgment.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Idaho's Law Barring Transgender Girls from Female School Sports Upheld by Supreme Court

Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-38

Justice Jackson agreed with the Court’s ultimate decision to reverse and remand the lower-court ruling but did not fully join the majority opinion. She wrote separately to explain her specific views about how the law should be analyzed and why she both joined and disagreed with parts of the Court’s reasoning.

Case page →
Concurrence

Idaho's Law Barring Transgender Girls from Female School Sports Upheld by Supreme Court

Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.

Official portrait of Sonia Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor · 24-38

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote an opinion that agreed with reversing the lower court’s judgment in part but disagreed with important aspects of the Court’s reasoning. She was joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson.

Case page →
Concurrence

Birthright Citizenship: Children Born in U.S. to Parents Here Illegally Are Citizens

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
Brett M. Kavanaugh · 25-365

Justice Kavanaugh joined the Court’s decision to affirm the lower court’s judgment but wrote a separate opinion saying he reached the same ultimate result for partly different reasons. His opinion agrees with some parts of the majority and disagrees with others.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Law Curbing Party Spending with Candidates Struck Down as First Amendment Violation

National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
Brett M. Kavanaugh · 24-621
6–3

In a 6-3 decision, the Court held that a federal law limiting how much a political party can spend on campaign advertising when done in coordination with its candidates (52 U.S.C. §30116(d)) violates the First Amendment. The judgment of the lower court was reversed and the case remanded.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether schools can limit girls' and boys' sports teams to biological sex at birth under Title IX and Equal Protection

West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
Brett M. Kavanaugh · 24-43
6–3

The Court held (6–3) that Title IX does not bar a state from providing separate sports teams defined by biological sex assigned at birth, and that doing so does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. The ruling reverses the lower court and sends the case back for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Birthright Citizenship: Children Born in U.S. to Parents Here Illegally Are Citizens

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.

Official portrait of John G. Roberts, Jr.
John G. Roberts, Jr. · 25-365
5–3

In a 5–3 decision authored by Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause grants birthright citizenship to children born in the United States even when their parents are unlawfully or temporarily present. The judgment affirms that such children are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore U.S. citizens at birth.

Case page →PDF

Jun 29, 2026

7 opinions
Concurrence

Whether Congress can protect FTC commissioners from removal (challenge to FTC for-cause removal)

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Official portrait of Neil M. Gorsuch
Neil M. Gorsuch · 25-332

The Supreme Court reversed and remanded a lower-court ruling about the Federal Trade Commission’s statutory removal protections for its members. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the Court’s opinion (5–3), and Justice Gorsuch wrote a separate concurrence. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. The case asked whether Congress may limit the President’s ability to remove FTC commissioners and whether the Court should overrule Humphrey’s Executor (1935).

Case page →PDF

Jun 25, 2026

17 opinions
Dissent

Whether migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the border "arrive in the United States" for asylum and inspection rights

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, a California Corporation, et al.

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 25-5

The Supreme Court reversed a lower-court decision and remanded the case involving whether people stopped on the Mexican side of the border can “arrive in the United States” and thus apply for asylum. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a dissent disagreeing with the majority's decision to reverse.

Case page →PDF

Jun 23, 2026

9 opinions
Dissent

Whether State Prison Officials Can Be Sued Personally Under RLUIPA for Religious Rights Violations

Damon Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, et al.

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 23-1197

The Court affirmed the lower-court result (per Justice Gorsuch’s majority), but Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, wrote a dissent. The dissent disputes the majority’s reading or application of the religious-liberty statutes (RFRA/RLUIPA) or the available remedies, expressing concern about how the Court treated the plaintiff’s claims and the legal standards used.

Case page →PDF

Jun 18, 2026

3 opinions
Opinion of the Court

Whether federal ban on firearm possession by drug users violates the Second Amendment — United States v. Ali Danial Hemani

United States v. Ali Danial Hemani

Official portrait of Neil M. Gorsuch
Neil M. Gorsuch · 24-1234
7–2

In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court held that applying the federal ban on firearm possession by an "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" (18 U.S.C. §922(g)(3)) to the respondent, Ali Danial Hemani, violates the Second Amendment.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether Federal Election-Day Statutes Stop States From Counting Late-Received Absentee Ballots

Michael Watson, Mississippi Secretary of State v. Republican National Committee, et al.

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 24-1260

The Supreme Court reversed the lower-court judgment and sent the case back. Justice Alito wrote a dissent, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, with Justice Kavanaugh joining most but not all parts of the dissent. The dispute involved federal statutes that set the date for federal elections and Mississippi’s requirement that ballots be cast on that day.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether Congress can protect FTC commissioners from removal (challenge to FTC for-cause removal)

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Official portrait of Sonia Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor · 25-332

The Court reversed and sent the case back, but Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson issued a dissent. The dissent argues the majority got the law or its consequences wrong concerning removal protections for Federal Trade Commission members and related separation‑of‑powers questions.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

When Can Police Use 'Geofence' Warrants to Get Cellphone Location Data? Chatrie v. United States

Okello T. Chatrie v. United States

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 25-112

In a decision authored by Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court held that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they obtain a person’s cell‑phone location data from a service provider. The Court said individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their phone’s location information, so officers generally need a warrant based on probable cause before acquiring such data.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether Congress can protect FTC commissioners from removal (challenge to FTC for-cause removal)

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Official portrait of John G. Roberts, Jr.
John G. Roberts, Jr. · 25-332
5–3

In a 5–3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the law protecting Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioners from removal except for cause (15 U.S.C. §41) violates the Constitution’s separation of powers and is therefore invalid. The Court reversed the lower court’s judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Court Refuses Stay of Order Blocking Removal of Fed Governor Lisa Cook

STAY TRUMP V. COOK

Official portrait of John G. Roberts, Jr.
John G. Roberts, Jr. · 25A312

The Court denied the government's request to pause (stay) a district court’s preliminary injunction that blocked the attempted removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook while the case proceeds in lower courts.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether Federal Election-Day Statutes Stop States From Counting Late-Received Absentee Ballots

Michael Watson, Mississippi Secretary of State v. Republican National Committee, et al.

Official portrait of Amy Coney Barrett
Amy Coney Barrett · 24-1260
5–3

In a 5–3 decision, the Supreme Court held that federal election-day statutes do not require absentee ballots to be received on Election Day, so Mississippi may count ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within five days after.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether federal law bars state failure-to-warn claims against Monsanto over Roundup's cancer risk

Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
Brett M. Kavanaugh · 24-1068
7–2

The Court held 7–2 that a federal law (FIFRA) preempts a state-law failure-to-warn claim that would force Monsanto to add a cancer warning to Roundup’s label. The judgment reversing the lower court requires the case to be sent back (remanded).

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the border "arrive in the United States" for asylum and inspection rights

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, a California Corporation, et al.

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 25-5
6–3

In a 6–3 decision, the Court held that under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) an alien “arrives in the United States” only when they physically cross the border into U.S. territory. People stopped on the Mexican side of the border are not entitled under the INA to apply for asylum or to be inspected by a U.S. immigration officer.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Presidential Immunity for Official Acts in Immigration Enforcement Upheld in Trump v. Miot

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, et al.

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 25-1084

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision and sent the case back for further proceedings. Justice Alito announced the judgment for the Court; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh joined fully; Justices Gorsuch and Barrett joined except for one part. Justice Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented.

Case page →
Concurrence

Whether federal law bars state failure-to-warn claims against Monsanto over Roundup's cancer risk

Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 24-1068

The Supreme Court reversed and sent back a case about whether Monsanto (Roundup) must warn consumers that its product causes cancer. Justice Kavanaugh wrote the Court’s opinion reversing the lower court; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Barrett joined. Justice Thomas wrote a separate concurrence. Justices Jackson and Gorsuch dissented.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Whether migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the border "arrive in the United States" for asylum and inspection rights

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, a California Corporation, et al.

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 25-5

The Court reversed and remanded a lower-court ruling in a case about whether people stopped on the Mexican side of the border can be treated as "arriving" in the United States for asylum purposes. Justice Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion, joining the majority judgment.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Hawaii Ban on Carrying Handguns on Private Property Open to the Public Struck Down

Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-1046

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and sent the case back, allowing Hawaii’s rule to be evaluated further. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (joined by Justice Sotomayor) wrote a dissent arguing the majority was wrong to disturb the lower court’s decision upholding Hawaii’s presumptive ban on carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express permission.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Presidential Immunity for Official Acts in Immigration Enforcement Upheld in Trump v. Miot

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, et al.

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 25-1084
1–4

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and remanded the case. Justice Alito wrote the Court’s opinion, with a majority joining most parts and a narrow dissent from Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson.

Case page →
Dissent

Hawaii Ban on Carrying Handguns on Private Property Open to the Public Struck Down

Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 24-1046

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and sent the case back, but Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissent disagreeing with the majority's decision to overturn the lower court. The dispute concerned whether Hawaii can generally ban permit holders from carrying handguns on private property that is open to the public unless a property owner expressly allows it.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Hawaii Ban on Carrying Handguns on Private Property Open to the Public Struck Down

Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 24-1046
6–3

The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and held that Hawaii may not presumptively ban licensed concealed‑carry permit holders from carrying handguns on privately owned places open to the public unless the property owner expressly authorizes it. The law violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Whether federal courts can hear non-constitutional challenges to termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS)

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 25-1083

The Supreme Court reversed the lower-court judgment and remanded the case. Justice Alito announced the Court’s judgment and opinion; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh joined fully; Justices Gorsuch and Barrett joined except for one part. Justice Thomas wrote a separate concurring opinion. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether federal courts can hear non-constitutional challenges to termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS)

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 25-1083
1–4

The Court held that a statute (8 U.S.C. §1254a(b)(5)(A)) bars courts from reviewing non-constitutional challenges to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) decisions. Applying that rule, the Court found the plaintiffs’ equal protection claim (that the Government ended Haiti’s TPS for racial reasons) is unlikely to succeed because a plausible race-neutral reason exists: the current Administration opposes TPS as previously applied and has ended renewals across the board. The judgment below is reversed and the case remanded.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the border "arrive in the United States" for asylum and inspection rights

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, a California Corporation, et al.

Official portrait of Sonia Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor · 25-5

The Supreme Court reversed a lower-court ruling and sent the case back. Chief Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion reversing the judgment; Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. Sotomayor’s dissent argues the majority got key legal points wrong about who is entitled to seek asylum and inspection under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Hawaii Ban on Carrying Handguns on Private Property Open to the Public Struck Down

Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii

Official portrait of Amy Coney Barrett
Amy Coney Barrett · 24-1046

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and sent the case back, rejecting the lower court’s approach to Hawaii’s rule that generally bars licensed handgun carriers from bringing firearms onto private property open to the public unless the property owner gives express permission. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote a concurring opinion joined in part by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether federal law bars state failure-to-warn claims against Monsanto over Roundup's cancer risk

Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-1068

The Supreme Court reversed a lower-court judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, disagreeing with the Court’s decision to reverse and remand in this case involving EPA findings about glyphosate and labeling under FIFRA.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether federal courts can hear non-constitutional challenges to termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS)

Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 25-1083

The Supreme Court reversed the lower-court decision and sent the case back for further proceedings. Justice Kagan dissented, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, disagreeing with the Court’s judgment and reasoning.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Presidential Immunity for Official Acts in Immigration Enforcement Upheld in Trump v. Miot

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, et al.

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 25-1084

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings. Justice Kagan wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, objecting to the Court's decision and reasoning.

Case page →
Dissent

Helms-Burton Suit: Can U.S. Courts Hear Claims Against Cuban State Companies for 1960 Expropriations?

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (Cuba), et al.

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 24-699

The Supreme Court reversed and sent the case back to lower courts. A majority (Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett) ruled for Exxon and against the Cuban claimants, while Justice Kagan wrote a dissent, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson. The dissent disagrees with the majority’s interpretation of who qualifies as a defendant under the Helms‑Burton Act.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether border officers need clear and convincing evidence before treating a lawful permanent resident as an applicant for admission

Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General v. Muk Choi Lau

Official portrait of Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas · 25-429

In Blanche v. Lau (June 23, 2026), the Supreme Court held that the Immigration and Nationality Act does not force border officers to meet a 'clear and convincing' evidence standard before deciding that a lawful permanent resident (LPR) is an applicant for admission because of a suspected crime involving moral turpitude.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether State Prison Officials Can Be Sued Personally Under RLUIPA for Religious Rights Violations

Damon Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, et al.

Official portrait of Neil M. Gorsuch
Neil M. Gorsuch · 23-1197
6–3

In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court held that state officials cannot be sued in their personal capacities under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), a law enacted under Congress’s Spending Clause, unless the officials voluntarily and knowingly consented to be sued. Because the defendants here did not consent, the plaintiff’s claims against them in their individual capacities were dismissed.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether the Alien Tort Statute allows courts to create aiding-and-abetting claims against companies

Cisco Systems, Inc., et al. v. Doe I, et al.

Official portrait of Amy Coney Barrett
Amy Coney Barrett · 24-856
6–3

In a 6–3 decision authored by Justice Barrett, the Supreme Court held that federal courts may not create new private causes of action under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) to enforce violations of international law, and that neither the ATS nor the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) provides liability for aiding-and-abetting.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence in part

Whether the Alien Tort Statute allows courts to create aiding-and-abetting claims against companies

Cisco Systems, Inc., et al. v. Doe I, et al.

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-856

The Supreme Court reversed a lower-court ruling and sent the case back. Chief Justice Barrett’s majority opinion (joined by five Justices) controls the judgment. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a separate opinion that agrees with some parts of the Court’s decision and disagrees with others; Justice Kagan joined her. The case concerns whether the federal Alien Tort Statute (ATS) allows private aiding-and-abetting claims and what mental state plaintiffs must show; it also involves the Torture Victim Protection Act.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Whether governments may keep surplus from tax-sale auctions or must pay fair market value

Michael Pung, Personal Representative of the Estate of Timothy Scott Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan

Official portrait of Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · 25-95

The Supreme Court held (opinion by Justice Alito) that when a county conducts a regular tax foreclosure sale, the Constitution requires just compensation to be measured by the actual auction sale price, not an imagined higher fair market value. Isabella County did not violate the Excessive Fines Clause by keeping the difference between auction price and a property's hypothetical market value.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

Helms-Burton Suit: Can U.S. Courts Hear Claims Against Cuban State Companies for 1960 Expropriations?

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (Cuba), et al.

Official portrait of Brett M. Kavanaugh
Brett M. Kavanaugh · 24-699
6–3

The Court held 6–3 that the Helms-Burton Act strips sovereign immunity from Cuban agencies and instrumentalities, so American plaintiffs suing those Cuban entities under the Act do not also need to meet the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s (FSIA) listed exceptions.

Case page →PDF
Dissent

Whether the Alien Tort Statute allows courts to create aiding-and-abetting claims against companies

Cisco Systems, Inc., et al. v. Doe I, et al.

Official portrait of Sonia Sotomayor
Sonia Sotomayor · 24-856

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson for major sections, dissented from the Court’s decision reversing a lower court. The dissent argues the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) can support aiding-and-abetting claims and that the Court’s narrowing of the ATS and related standards is wrong. The case is sent back after the majority reversed.

Case page →PDF
Concurrence

Whether federal ban on firearm possession by drug users violates the Second Amendment — United States v. Ali Danial Hemani

United States v. Ali Danial Hemani

Official portrait of Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson · 24-1234

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a concurring opinion (joined by Justice Sotomayor) in the Court’s decision to affirm a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which bars firearm possession by people who are "unlawful users of or addicted to any controlled substance." The overall judgment — authored by Justice Gorsuch — upheld the statute as applied to the respondent.

Case page →PDF
Opinion of the Court

When Is an Appeal Waiver Unenforceable? Hunter v. United States (appeal-waiver miscarriage-of-justice rule)

Munson P. Hunter, III v. United States

Official portrait of Elena Kagan
Elena Kagan · 24-1063

The Supreme Court held that a defendant’s agreement not to appeal a sentence cannot be enforced if enforcing it would produce a miscarriage of justice — an egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute.

Case page →PDF
HomeScheduleJusticesCasesOpinionsAdvocatesStatsHow It Works