from Your News:
From gender-transition bans to parental rights, gunmaker liability, and federal health mandates, the Court is set to rule on cases with sweeping national implications.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
As the Supreme Court prepares to recess for the summer, justices are expected to issue decisions in nine high-profile cases that could reshape federal authority, civil liberties, and key cultural debates. The rulings come after decisions on e-cigarettes, ghost guns, deportation, and TikTok, and could reverberate across state and federal policies.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Here are the nine decisions to watch in June:
1. Ban on ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ for Minors
In United States v. Skrmetti, the Court is weighing the constitutionality of Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors. The Biden administration argued the law violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, calling it sex-based discrimination. Tennessee defended the law as a necessary safeguard against irreversible and experimental procedures. Some justices, including Clarence Thomas, questioned whether the law is more properly viewed as an age-based classification.
2. Nationwide Injunctions and Birthright Citizenship
The justices also considered the use of sweeping judicial blocks in Trump v. CASA Inc., where three lower court orders halted enforcement of an executive order on birthright citizenship. The Trump administration argued the 14th Amendment doesn’t mandate citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. Justice Thomas criticized nationwide injunctions, while Justices Sotomayor and Kagan said the order contradicted at least four existing Court precedents.
3. Parental Opt-Out from LGBT Content in Schools
In Mahmoud v. Taylor, parents challenged a Maryland school board’s refusal to allow them to opt their children out of elementary book readings on gender and sexuality. The lawsuit argued the policy violated First Amendment rights and parental religious freedom. The board said no opt-out was necessary. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito expressed support for the parents’ position. Case details.
4. Constitutionality of Obamacare’s Preventive Care Task Force
The Court heard arguments in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, Inc. over whether the federal Preventive Services Task Force, created under the Affordable Care Act, violates the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. The task force mandated coverage of services like HIV prevention. Justices appeared skeptical of the challengers’ claims.
5. Texas Age Verification Law for Pornography Access
In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, adult entertainment groups challenged a Texas law requiring age verification for accessing online pornography. They argued the law chills speech and violates the First Amendment. Texas cited Ginsberg v. New York (1968), which allowed regulation of adult content harmful to children. The justices appeared divided.
6. Medicaid Funding for Planned Parenthood
In Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, the Court reviewed whether South Carolina may exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program. The plaintiffs argued that Medicaid guarantees patients the right to choose qualified providers. Justices Kagan and Kavanaugh appeared split on the issue.
7. Mexico’s Lawsuit Against U.S. Gunmakers
Mexico sued several U.S. gun manufacturers for allegedly supplying weapons used by cartels. The case tests the limits of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The First Circuit allowed the case to proceed, but the Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical of Mexico’s evidence and legal theory during oral argument.
8. Terror Victim Lawsuits Against the PLO
In Fuld v. PLO and United States v. PLO, justices examined whether Americans killed by terrorist attacks abroad can sue the Palestine Liberation Organization. The Second Circuit previously ruled against the plaintiffs, citing due process. The justices appeared inclined to uphold the federal law that empowers victims to seek justice in U.S. courts.
9. Nuclear Waste Storage in Texas
In Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, the Court reviewed whether the NRC exceeded its authority by licensing a private nuclear waste storage facility in the Permian Basin. The Fifth Circuit sided with Texas, citing the Atomic Energy Act’s limitations. Justices Gorsuch and Alito questioned the NRC’s authority to site such facilities in a vital oil production zone.
