Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

What's on the Supreme Court's agenda ahead of the new term

AYESHA RASCOE, HOST:

Tomorrow marks the start of a new term for the Supreme Court. Last term, it handed down blockbuster rulings on presidential immunity and the power of regulatory agencies, boosting its own role in how the federal government functions. The new term begins weeks from the election against a backdrop of deep political divisions and heightened scrutiny of the court. Amy Howe is a reporter and editor for SCOTUSblog. She's been keeping an eye on the Supreme Court's upcoming docket and joins us now. Welcome to the program.

AMY HOWE: Thanks for having me.

RASCOE: So the court has 34 cases on the docket. For reference, it heard 62 cases last term. I'm sure everybody has those numbers just offhand. But does this look to be a quieter term?

HOWE: Right now, it does, but many of the cases that made last term a blockbuster weren't on the court's docket at this time last year, so they could still add another 30 cases or so to their docket that could make this court a blockbuster. But right now it looks a little bit quieter, which may be in part, a deliberate choice by the justices to try to keep some space in their schedule and keep a lower profile in case some election cases bubble up to the court in November and December.

RASCOE: Are there one or two cases that you are paying close attention to?

HOWE: There are a couple of cases that, you know, are high-profile cases by really any definition. One of them is a case called United States v. Skrmetti. It's a challenge to a Tennessee law that bans hormone treatment as gender-affirming care for minors. The plaintiffs in the case, who are transgender teens and their parents argue that the law violates the Constitution because the law allows minors who aren't trans to receive the same treatment if they're seeking to conform the sex that they were assigned at birth. And so they say that's discrimination based on sex. In 2020, in a case called Bostock, the Supreme Court ruled that under federal employment laws, if you discriminate against someone because they're transgender, you're discriminating based on sex. And so the plaintiffs in this case, joined by the federal government, say that the same logic should apply to their claim under the Constitution.

RASCOE: Are there any other cases that you're looking or paying close attention to?

HOWE: There's another case involving what's known as ghost guns. It's a challenge to the Biden administration's efforts to regulate these guns, which are sort of partially complete firearms or firearms that you can assemble from a kit that you can sometimes even buy online. And the Biden administration says that we just want to be able to subject them to the same rules as other commercial gun sales to make sure that they don't wind up in the hands of people who aren't supposed to have them. This is not a case about the Second Amendment right to bear arms. It's a complicated interpretation of the federal laws governing commercial gun sales. It's going to be a close case.

RASCOE: There any particular legal themes, legal theories that you're following?

HOWE: One of the things you've already mentioned was, you know, last term was the idea of regulatory power. And last term, the court struck down a 40-year-old decision in a case called Chevron involving deference to administrative agencies. And so one of the themes that a lot of people are watching is whether the court will continue what some people have called the war on the administrative state. And with the Chevron doctrine, for example, it was the idea that Congress would write the laws and that courts should be the ones to determine what the laws say rather than deferring to how the agencies interpreted them.

RASCOE: This court is dealing with political pressure, leaks to the media, controversies with spouses - as a court watcher, can you sense any tension with the justices?

HOWE: Traditionally, the justices at the end of their term, which usually ends in late June or early July, have sort of the summer to travel or teach or go on vacation and sort of decompress and return to the bench sort of refreshed. And I think that's one thing that we'll be watching is when they return to the bench on Monday, will they look refreshed or will they look like they, you know, didn't really have much of vacation and there still continues to be a lot of tension? And I think to a certain extent, the fact that they had these leaks and that people were talking to the press signals that there is sort of tension and dissent coming from inside the court.

RASCOE: That's Amy Howe a reporter and editor for SCOTUSblog. Thank you so much for joining us.

HOWE: Thanks so much for inviting me. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Ayesha Rascoe is a White House correspondent for NPR. She is currently covering her third presidential administration. Rascoe's White House coverage has included a number of high profile foreign trips, including President Trump's 2019 summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Hanoi, Vietnam, and President Obama's final NATO summit in Warsaw, Poland in 2016. As a part of the White House team, she's also a regular on the NPR Politics Podcast.