Cases
65
This is not an official Supreme Court website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LLC. All rights reserved.
This is not an official Supreme Court website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LLC. All rights reserved.
Term
Term pages work like a public dashboard for the Court: grants, arguments, and decisions all tied to the same annual cycle.
Term dashboard
65 cases, 126 opinions, 59 arguments.
63 grants and 64 decisions are currently attached to this term.
Cases
65
Granted
63
Decided
64
Opinions
126
Arguments
59
Recent opinions
Concurrence
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.
By Ketanji Brown Jackson · Jun 30, 2026
Concurrence
West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson
By Sonia Sotomayor · Jun 30, 2026
Concurrence
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.
By Brett M. Kavanaugh · Jun 30, 2026
Dissent
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.
By Clarence Thomas · Jun 30, 2026
Concurrence
Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.
By Ketanji Brown Jackson · Jun 30, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.
By Brett M. Kavanaugh · Jun 30, 2026
Opinion of the Court
West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson
By Brett M. Kavanaugh · Jun 30, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.
By John G. Roberts, Jr. · Jun 30, 2026
Concurrence
West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson
By Ketanji Brown Jackson · Jun 30, 2026
Concurrence
Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.
By Sonia Sotomayor · Jun 30, 2026
Dissent
National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.
By Elena Kagan · Jun 30, 2026
Opinion of the Court
National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.
By Brett M. Kavanaugh · Jun 30, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Okello T. Chatrie v. United States
By Elena Kagan · Jun 29, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
By John G. Roberts, Jr. · Jun 29, 2026
Dissent
Michael Watson, Mississippi Secretary of State v. Republican National Committee, et al.
By Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · Jun 29, 2026
Concurrence
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
By Neil M. Gorsuch · Jun 29, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Michael Watson, Mississippi Secretary of State v. Republican National Committee, et al.
By Amy Coney Barrett · Jun 29, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States v. Lisa D. Cook, Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, et al.
By John G. Roberts, Jr. · Jun 29, 2026
Dissent
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
By Sonia Sotomayor · Jun 29, 2026
Concurrence
Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii
By Amy Coney Barrett · Jun 25, 2026
Dissent
Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.
By Elena Kagan · Jun 25, 2026
Concurrence
Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.
By Clarence Thomas · Jun 25, 2026
Dissent
Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell
By Ketanji Brown Jackson · Jun 25, 2026
Opinion of the Court
Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.
By Samuel A. Alito, Jr. · Jun 25, 2026
Oral arguments
April Session
Apr 29, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: Charles B. Klein, Washington, D. C.; and Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Michael R. Huston, Phoenix, Ariz.
April Session
Apr 29, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: D. John Sauer, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents in 25-1083: Ahilan T. Arulanantham, Los Angeles, Cal. For respondents in 25-1084: Geoffrey M. Pipoly, Chicago, Ill. VIDED.
April Session
Apr 28, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D. C.; and Curtis E. Gannon, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Paul L. Hoffman, Hermosa Beach, Cal.
April Session
Apr 27, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Paul D. Clement, Alexandria, Va.; and Sarah M. Harris, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Ashley C. Keller, Chicago, Ill.
April Session
Apr 27, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
April Session
Cases
25-365
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Barbara, et al.
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that those "born * * * in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," are U.S. citizens. U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1. The Clause was adopted to confer citizenship on the newly freed slaves and their children, not on the children of aliens t...
24-38
Bradley Little, Governor of Idaho, et al. v. Lindsay Hecox, et al.
Women and girls have overcome decades of discrimination to achieve a more equal playing field in many arenas of American life-including sports. Yet in some competitions, female athletes have become bystanders in their own sports as male athletes who identify as female have taken the place of their female competitors...
24-43
West Virginia, et al. v. B. P. J., By Her Next Friend and Mother, Heather Jackson
Whether Title IX prevents a state from consistently designating girls' and boys' sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth. 2. Whether the Equal Protection Clause prevents a state from offering separate boys' and girls' sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth.
Apr 22, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Sopan Joshi, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Shay Dvoretzky, Washington, D. C.
April Session
Apr 21, 2026
Argued. For AT&T, Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc.: Jeffrey B. Wall, Washington, D. C. For FCC, et al.: Vivek Suri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
April Session
Apr 20, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For respondent: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
April Session
Apr 20, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D. C.
April Session
Apr 1, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: D. John Sauer, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Cecillia D. Wang, San Francisco, Cal.
March Session
Mar 31, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Joseph J. Perkovich, New York, N. Y. (Appointed by this Court.) For respondents: Scott G. Stewart, Solicitor General, Jackson, Miss.; and Emily M. Ferguson, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
March Session
Mar 30, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Tobias S. Loss-Eaton, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
March Session
Mar 30, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex.
March Session
Mar 25, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: Traci L. Lovitt, New York, N. Y. For respondent: Jennifer D. Bennett, San Francisco, Cal.
March Session
Mar 24, 2026
Argued. For petitioners: Vivek Suri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Kelsi B. Corkran, Washington, D. C.
March Session
Mar 24, 2026
Argued. For petitioner: Gregory G. Garre, Washington, D. C.; and Frederick Liu, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: William M. Jay, Washington, D. C.
24-621
National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.
A political party exists to get its candidates elected. Yet Congress has severely restricted how much parties can spend on their own campaign advertising if done in cooperation with those very candidates. 52 U.S.C. § 30116(d). In an opinion by Chief Judge Sutton, a 10-judge majority of the en banc Sixth Circuit agre...
25-112
Okello T. Chatrie v. United States
For cell phone users to use certain services, their cell phones must continuously transmit their exact locations to their service providers. A geofence warrant allows law enforcement to obtain, from the service provider, the identities of users who were in the vicinity of a particular location at a particular time....
24-1260
Michael Watson, Mississippi Secretary of State v. Republican National Committee, et al.
The federal election-day statutes-2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1-set the Tuesday after the first Monday in November in certain years as the "election" day for federal offices. Like all other States, Mississippi requires that ballots for federal offices be cast-marked and submitted to election officials...
25A312
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States v. Lisa D. Cook, Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, et al.
decided
25-332
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter
The parties are directed to brief and argue the following questions: (1) Whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, 295 U. S. 602 (1935), should be overruled. (2) Whether a federal co...
25-1083
Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. Dahlia Doe, et al.
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY (25A952) PRESENTED TO JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR AND BY HER REFERRED TO THE COURT IS DEFERRED. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY (25A999) PRESENTED TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND BY HIM REFERRED TO THE COURT IS ALSO DEFERRED. THE APPLICATIONS ARE ALSO TREATED AS PETITIONS FOR A WRI...
25-1084
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, et al.
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY (25A952) PRESENTED TO JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR AND BY HER REFERRED TO THE COURT IS DEFERRED. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY (25A999) PRESENTED TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND BY HIM REFERRED TO THE COURT IS ALSO DEFERRED. THE APPLICATIONS ARE ALSO TREATED AS PETITIONS FOR A WRI...
24-1068
Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell
For decades, EPA has exercised its authority under FIFRA to find that Monsanto's Roundup product line and its active ingredient, glyphosate, do not cause cancer in humans. Consistent with that understanding, EPA has repeatedly approved Roundup's label without a cancer warning. FIFRA prohibits Monsanto from making an...
25-5
Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. v. Al Otro Lado, a California Corporation, et al.
The Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq. , provides that an alien who "arrives in the United States" may apply for asylum and must be inspected by an immigration officer. 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(1)(A), 1225(a)(1) and (3). The question presented is whether an alien who is stopped on the Mexican side of the...
24-1046
Jason Wolford, et al. v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding, in direct conflict with the Second Circuit, that Hawaii may presumptively prohibit the carry of handguns by licensed concealed carry permit holders on private property open to the public unless the property owner affirmatively gives express permission to the handgun carrie...
24-856
Cisco Systems, Inc., et al. v. Doe I, et al.
Whether the Alien Tort Statute ("ATS"), 28 U.S.C. § 1350, allows a judicially-implied private right of action for aiding and abetting. 2. Whether, if ATS aiding-and-abetting claims are cognizable, mere knowledge rather than purpose suffices to show the requisite mens rea. 3. Whether the Torture Victim Protection Act...
25-429
Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General v. Muk Choi Lau
Under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a), various categories of aliens, including those who have committed or been convicted of certain crimes, are "ineligible to be admitted to the United States" and subject to removal. 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2); see 8 U.S.C. 1229a. Under 8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(13)(C), a lawful permanent resident (LPR) who is...
25-95
Michael Pung, Personal Representative of the Estate of Timothy Scott Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan
Whether taking and selling a home to satisfy a debt to the government, and keeping the surplus value as a windfall, violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment when the compensation is based on the artificially depressed auction sale price rather than the property's fair market value? 2. Whether the forfeitur...
24-699
Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (Cuba), et al.
In 1960, the Cuban government confiscated the property of American nationals and transferred it to state-owned enterprises. After years without a diplomatic resolution, Congress enacted the Helms-Burton Act, which created a damages action for American nationals against "any person ... that traffics in" such confisca...
23-1197
Damon Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, et al.
Congress has enacted two "sister" statutes to protect religious exercise: the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq., and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq. In Tanzin v. Tanvir, 592 U.S. 43 (2020), this Court held th...
25-197
T. M. v. University of Maryland Medical System Corporation, et al.
Whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine can be triggered by a state-court decision that remains subject to further review in state court.
24-1063
Munson P. Hunter, III v. United States
Whether the only permissible exceptions to a general appeal waiver are for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or that the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum. 2. Whether an appeal waiver applies when the sentencing judge advises the defendant that he has a right to appeal and the government does not object.
24-1234
United States v. Ali Danial Hemani
Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3), the federal statute that prohibits the possession of firearms by a person who "is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," violates the Second Amendment as applied to respondent.
25-5146
Ahmad Abouammo v. United States
Whether venue is proper in a district where no offense conduct took place, so long as the statute's intent element "contemplates" effects that could occur there. 2. Whether a criminal information unaccompanied by a waiver of indictment is an "information charging a felony" that allows the government to unilaterally...
25-6
Thomas Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Incorporated
Judicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine designed '"to protect the integrity of the judicial process' by 'prohibiting parties from deliberately changing positions"' to gain an unfair advantage. New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742, 749-50 (2001). The doctrine targets those who "'deliberately"' mislead courts, not...
24-345
FS Credit Opportunities Corp., et al. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd., et al.
is unenforceable by either party .... (2) To the extent that a contract described in paragraph (1) has been performed, a court may not deny rescission at the instance of any party unless such court finds that under the circumstances the denial of rescission would produce a more equitable result than its grant and wo...