For those of us keenly observing the Supreme Court, patience is a virtue we’ve come to embrace. The Court’s modus operandi requires significant waiting periods. Cases accepted for review often stretch on for months before oral arguments are heard. Post-argument deliberations can also drag on for several more months before the final decisions are revealed. Each term, beginning in October, tends to withhold its most consequential rulings until June, when the justices work diligently to conclude their term.
As of late April, the justices have wrapped up their last case discussions for the current term. Their focus, along with their clerks, has shifted to fine-tuning the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions in preparation for public disclosure. What has been a quiet period will soon transform into a flurry of activity and decisions, with the Supreme Court taking center stage in the public discourse over the next six weeks.
One critical area where we can expect new rulings is abortion. While the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson decision primarily handed the reins back to states, some federal issues linger. A notable case among them revolves around the FDA’s approval of mifepristone, a pill used for abortions. However, it’s likely the Court might sidestep the core issue by ruling that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the suit.
In another case originating from Idaho, we see a clash between federal mandates for treating emergency medical conditions and state-level abortion restrictions. The Biden administration’s overreach here is palpable, as it seeks to curtail state sovereignty on abortion—a move that could set a dangerous precedent regarding federal interference in state governance.
Expect important decisions regarding the administrative state as well. The courts have long extended vast deference to bureaucrats, effectively allowing them to wield legislative-like power through regulation. This status quo is under threat, as the Supreme Court, in a case argued earlier this year, might substantially truncate this deference. This potential shift isn’t about expanding judicial power; it’s about restoring constitutional governance and ensuring that legislative duties remain with our elected representatives rather than unaccountable bureaucrats.
Next, the regulation of social media is also on the docket. Both political spectra—the Left and the Right—have vested interests, whether it’s conservatives advocating for unbiased platforms or progressives pushing to curtail so-called “misinformation.” However, there’s a shared concern over how regulations may impinge upon First Amendment rights. Given social media’s critical role in public discourse, the Supreme Court’s guidance on regulatory limits is imperative.
Lastly, we await decisions that will profoundly affect former President Donald Trump. Beyond the effort to bar him from ballots, the Court will rule on the degree of presidential immunity from prosecution in the context of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021. Beyond partisan squabbles, this ruling will have historic implications on the balance between holding leaders accountable and granting them sufficient leeway to execute their duties effectively.
These and other pivotal cases will dominate headlines over the coming weeks. As we watch, the central question remains: will the Supreme Court stay true to the Constitution and the principles of the rule of law? The answer will shape the nation’s legal landscape for years to come. Stay vigilant, liberty-loving Americans.
