Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest federal court and the final interpreter of U.S. constitutional and federal law. It consists of nine justices appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, serving lifetime terms. In 2025-26 the Court issued significant rulings related to immigration enforcement, executive power, and civil liberties that shaped the legal boundaries of administration policies.
Also known as SCOTUS · U.S. Supreme Court
2026 Events (12)
Supreme Court struck down coordinated party-spending limits in NRSC v. FEC, overturning Colorado II
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in NRSC v. FEC on June 30, 2026 to strike down decades-old federal limits on how much money political parties can spend in direct coordination with their candidates, holding the restriction violated the First Amendment. Justice Brett Kavanaugh's majority opinion overturned the Court's 2001 precedent in FEC v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee ("Colorado II"), which had upheld coordinated-spending limits as a safeguard against circumvention of individual contribution limits. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented, warning the ruling opens a new route for large donors to funnel unlimited sums to candidates through party committees.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 transgender athlete bans do not violate Equal Protection Clause
On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in West Virginia v. B.P.J. (No. 24-43) that state laws banning transgender women and girls from women's and girls' sports teams do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion; the Court also held unanimously that Title IX permits schools to maintain separate sports teams defined by biological sex. The ruling upholds athletic exclusion laws in West Virginia and Idaho and removes the primary federal constitutional protection that transgender athletes had used to challenge such laws nationwide.
SCOTUS 6-3 overturned Humphrey's Executor, holding presidents may fire independent agency commissioners at will
On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court overturned Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935) in a 6-3 ruling authored by Chief Justice Roberts in Trump v. Slaughter, holding that President Trump's firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause was constitutional. The ruling makes Congress's statutory for-cause removal protections for independent agency commissioners — including at the FTC, NLRB, EEOC, MSPB, and CPSC — unenforceable. A separate 5-4 ruling in Trump v. Cook temporarily blocked Trump from removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, carving out a partial exception for the Fed.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Trump has unreviewable power to terminate TPS for 330,000 Haitian and 3,800 Syrian nationals
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 25, 2026, that the Trump administration has virtually unreviewable power to terminate Temporary Protected Status for approximately 330,000 Haitian and 3,800 Syrian nationals living legally in the United States. Writing for the conservative majority, Justice Samuel Alito held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of presidential TPS decisions and rejected a constitutional racial-animus claim, despite Justice Elena Kagan's dissent quoting Trump's own statements describing Haitians in explicitly racist terms.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that CBP metering policy does not violate asylum law, eliminating asylum seekers' principal legal challenge avenue
On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado that U.S. Customs and Border Protection's "metering" policy — systematically turning asylum seekers away at ports of entry before they physically cross the border line — does not violate federal asylum law. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito held that noncitizens physically blocked at a port of entry have not "arrived in the United States" within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1158 and therefore have no statutory right to apply for asylum. The decision forecloses the primary legal avenue that had permitted asylum seekers to challenge their systematic exclusion at the border.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that criminal suspicion alone justifies immigration parole of lawful permanent residents
On June 23, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Trump administration, holding that an immigration officer's unverified allegation of criminal wrongdoing is sufficient to place a lawful permanent resident on immigration parole at a border crossing. The majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, found that border officers need not establish criminal activity by clear and convincing evidence before restricting a green card holder's rights. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent, joined by both other liberal justices, warned the ruling handed the government a "massive blank check" to weaken due-process protections for the approximately 13.5 million lawful permanent residents in the United States.
Supreme Court 6-3 eliminated human rights claims under Alien Tort Statute in Cisco Systems v. Doe, overruling Sosa
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 23, 2026 in Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Doe that federal courts may no longer hear any human rights claims under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), categorically overruling Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (2004) and ending 46 years of ATS human rights litigation. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the conservative majority; Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. The ruling also held that aiding-and-abetting liability is not available under the Torture Victim Protection Act.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 prisoners cannot sue individual guards for money damages under RLUIPA, eliminating key religious-freedom remedy
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 23, 2026 that prisoners cannot sue individual prison guards for money damages under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), leaving only injunctive relief as a remedy for religious freedom violations by prison staff. The case arose from Damon Landor, a Rastafarian man whose dreadlocks were forcibly cut by Louisiana prison guards in 2020. The conservative majority held that individual guards did not consent to personal liability under RLUIPA, while the dissent warned the ruling leaves prisoners with "little reason to expect guards to abide by legal protections."
Supreme Court declined to review 8th Circuit ruling barring private enforcement of VRA Section 208 in seven states
On June 22, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a 2025 8th Circuit ruling holding that private parties lack standing to sue to enforce Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act, which guarantees voters with disabilities or limited literacy the right to choose their own poll assistant. The brief, unsigned cert denial left in place the only federal appeals court ruling to eliminate private enforcement of Section 208, creating a two-tiered VRA enforcement landscape for voters in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Private enforcement — historically the primary driver of VRA litigation — is now unavailable in those seven states, leaving compliance dependent on Justice Department action.
Supreme Court lets Alabama use GOP-drawn map eliminating a majority-Black district
On June 2, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Alabama's emergency request to use its Republican-drawn congressional map for the November 2026 midterms, a map with a majority-Black population in only one of the state's seven districts. The unsigned emergency-docket order, decided 6-3 along ideological lines, overrode a three-judge federal panel that had found the map intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and displaced the court-drawn districts used in 2024. The three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sotomayor warning that the decision "disregards both democratic values and the rule of law."
Supreme Court declines to resolve VRA Section 2 private-right-of-action question, leaving private enforcement in circuit-split limbo
On May 18, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two brief, unsigned grant-vacate-and-remand orders in Bd. of Election Comm'rs v. NAACP (5th Cir.) and Turtle Mountain Band v. Howe (8th Cir.), sending both cases back to lower courts "in light of" the Court's April 29, 2026 decision in Louisiana v. Callais. Both cases had squarely presented the question of whether private parties — voters and civil-rights organizations — retain a right to sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. By declining to resolve that question, the Court leaves in place a circuit split: in the 5th Circuit private suits are allowed, in the 8th they are not. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from both orders, writing that she would have decided the cases on the merits to confirm a private right of action.
Supreme Court 6-3 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais gutted Voting Rights Act minority-district protections, enabling states to eliminate minority seats
On April 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Louisiana v. Callais that Louisiana's court-ordered second majority-Black congressional district was itself an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the Equal Protection Clause. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the conservative majority, substantially reworked the 40-year-old Thornburg v. Gingles framework, holding that Section 2 claims succeed only when evidence supports a "strong inference" that a state intentionally drew districts to deny minority voters equal opportunity — replacing the prior effects-based standard with a heightened intent requirement. Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, said the ruling would "eviscerate" the Voting Rights Act and warned the consequences would be "far-reaching and grave."
2025 Events (4)
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 district courts cannot issue nationwide injunctions, eliminating key civil rights enforcement tool
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 27, 2025, in Trump v. CASA, Inc. that federal district courts lack authority to issue nationwide injunctions protecting people beyond named parties in a case. The majority opinion, written by Justice Barrett, held that the Judiciary Act of 1789 authorizes only injunctions necessary to provide complete relief to named plaintiffs. The ruling immediately allowed Trump's birthright citizenship executive order to partially take effect against non-parties in states that had not filed suit, while courts continued finding the order unconstitutional.
Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Medicaid patients cannot sue to enforce free-choice-of-provider, clearing path to exclude Planned Parenthood
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 26, 2025, in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic that Medicaid enrollees cannot use 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to enforce the program's free-choice-of-provider provision in federal court. Justice Gorsuch's majority opinion held the provision imposes duties on states without conferring individual rights that § 1983 protects, allowing South Carolina's exclusion of Planned Parenthood from Medicaid to stand. At least 14 other states had enacted or attempted similar exclusions, each now free of judicial check by patients through this mechanism.
Supreme Court 6-3 stayed order requiring torture screening before third-country deportations, enabling removals to South Sudan and Libya
The Supreme Court voted 6-3 on June 23, 2025, to stay a federal district court order that had required the Trump administration to provide immigrants a meaningful opportunity to contest removal to dangerous third countries before deportation. The stay immediately allowed the administration to resume removals to South Sudan, Libya, and El Salvador under bilateral agreements, without any screening for Convention Against Torture claims. Justice Sotomayor dissented sharply, writing that the administration had "repeatedly defied" the lower court order and calling the Supreme Court's intervention "so gross an abuse of the Court's equitable discretion."
Supreme Court 7-2 stayed injunction blocking CHNV parole termination, enabling DHS to revoke status for 532,000 noncitizens
On May 30, 2025, the Supreme Court granted the Trump administration's emergency application to stay a federal injunction, allowing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to proceed with terminating humanitarian parole for more than 532,000 noncitizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela admitted under the Biden-era CHNV programs. The unsigned 7-2 order — with Justices Jackson and Sotomayor dissenting — cleared the way to revoke parole status without the individualized case-by-case review that the district court's injunction had required. Justice Jackson wrote that the majority had "plainly botched" the ruling and decried the "devastating consequences" of upending the lives of nearly half a million people while their legal claims remained pending.