Lindsay Whitehurst

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett told a House appropriations panel that threats against justices have intruded into their family lives, recounting the difficulty of explaining to her son why she had to wear a bulletproof vest. Barrett and Justice Elena Kagan urged Congress to support increased court security funding. The Supreme Court is seeking $228 million for the next fiscal year, including $14.6 million for expanded personal protection and $2 million for residential security and additional police. The testimony followed several recent threats, including a swatting incident targeting Barrett’s home and an armed individual’s arrest near Brett Kavanaugh’s residence. The U.S. Marshals Service reported 564 threats against federal judges in the fiscal year ending in September.

Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett are scheduled to appear before a House appropriations panel to seek funding for expanded protection of the court’s nine members. The court’s proposed $228 million budget includes about $15 million for additional personal-protection agents and $2 million for a residential security post and more police officers. The request follows incidents targeting Barrett’s home and family and the 2022 attempted assassination of Brett Kavanaugh. The U.S. Marshals Service recorded 564 threats against federal judges in the latest fiscal year. Chief Justice John Roberts has warned that political hostility toward judicial decisions is becoming dangerous personal intimidation, while lawmakers may use the hearing to question the justices about the court’s conduct and rulings.

The Supreme Court allowed an $800-per-day contempt fine against former Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge to stand after she refused to reveal sources connected to reports on scientist Yanping Chen. Herridge faces penalties stemming from Chen’s Privacy Act lawsuit over leaked investigative materials, which she says harmed her personal and professional life. A federal judge ruled that identifying the leaker is essential to Chen’s case, overriding Herridge’s claim of reporter-source confidentiality. Media advocates warn the decision risks discouraging whistleblowers and undermining press freedom, while Fox News criticized the ruling as harmful to First Amendment principles.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear challenges to assault-weapons bans in Connecticut and the Chicago area during its next term. The cases will determine whether state and local restrictions on AR-15-style rifles and similar semiautomatic firearms violate the Second Amendment. A ruling could affect bans in roughly a dozen states and major cities nationwide, following the court’s 2022 expansion of Second Amendment protections.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear appeals challenging bans on AR-15s and similar semiautomatic firearms in Connecticut and the Chicago area. The cases could determine whether such restrictions violate the Second Amendment and may affect comparable laws in roughly a dozen states and major cities. The disputes follow the Court’s 2022 decision expanding Second Amendment protections; arguments are expected in the fall.

The US Supreme Court declined to revive Alan Dershowitz’s $300 million defamation lawsuit against CNN over its coverage of his remarks during Donald Trump’s 2020 impeachment defense. Dershowitz argued that CNN selectively aired his comments, falsely implying that a president could avoid impeachment for illegal acts committed to secure re-election. Lower courts dismissed the case because he failed to show actual malice, the standard requiring public figures to prove knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented and called for reconsideration of the standard established by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to revive Alan Dershowitz’s $300 million defamation lawsuit against CNN over its coverage of remarks he made while defending Donald Trump during the 2020 impeachment trial. Lower courts found that Dershowitz had not shown CNN acted with actual malice, the standard required for public figures under New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Dershowitz argued that CNN selectively edited his comments to distort their meaning, while CNN said it aired the full remarks and gave him opportunities to clarify them. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented, calling for reconsideration of the legal standards governing public-figure defamation claims.

Public disagreements among U.S. Supreme Court justices have become unusually visible as the court prepares to issue major rulings affecting Donald Trump’s agenda. Sonia Sotomayor delivered a rare spoken dissent criticizing a decision limiting asylum applications at the southern border, invoking the historical refusal of Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany. Samuel Alito responded unexpectedly from the bench to defend the ruling and the policy’s use by both the Obama and Trump administrations. The tensions follow a public apology by Sotomayor to Brett Kavanaugh and a dispute between Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson over emergency orders allowing Trump to advance key policies. Upcoming decisions are expected to address birthright citizenship and presidential authority over independent agencies.

The US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Bayer cannot generally face state failure-to-warn lawsuits over Roundup because federal regulators approved the product label without a cancer warning. The decision overturns or threatens thousands of claims, including John Durnell’s $1.25 million verdict, and represents a major victory for Bayer after years of costly litigation. Scientific authorities remain divided over glyphosate’s cancer risks: the WHO’s cancer agency calls it probably carcinogenic, while the EPA says it is unlikely to cause cancer when used as directed. Bayer has set aside billions for settlements, proposed a $7.25 billion class-action deal and removed glyphosate from US residential products, while warning that withdrawing it from agricultural markets could harm food supplies. The ruling also creates tension within the Trump administration, as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other pesticide critics oppose glyphosate even as the administration supports its production.

The Supreme Court, by a 6–3 vote, struck down Hawaii’s requirement that people obtain permission before carrying guns onto privately owned property open to the public, such as stores, hotels, shopping malls and gas stations. Owners may still prohibit firearms if they explicitly post or communicate a ban. The ruling is a victory for the Trump administration and gun-rights advocates, while Hawaii argued that its 2023 law protected private property owners’ ability to control firearms on their premises. Other Hawaii restrictions, including bans in certain parks, beaches and alcohol-serving restaurants, remain under lower-court challenge. The decision continues the Supreme Court’s series of major Second Amendment rulings following its 2022 expansion of public-carry rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the federal law barring drug users from owning firearms violates the Second Amendment, upholding the dismissal of Texas marijuana user Ali Danial Hemani’s gun-possession charge. The case followed an FBI raid that found a Glock pistol, marijuana and cocaine in his home. The decision rejected the Trump administration’s defense of the 1968 Gun Control Act and drew support for Hemani from ideologically diverse groups including the ACLU, NRA and NORML.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld a lower-court decision dismissing Ali Danial Hemani’s charge under the federal law barring unlawful drug users from possessing firearms. Hemani had admitted regular marijuana use, but authorities did not allege he was intoxicated when agents found a Glock, marijuana and cocaine during an FBI search. The ruling is a setback for the Trump administration, which defended the 1968 restriction, and follows a series of Supreme Court cases reshaping gun regulation after the Court’s 2022 expansion of Second Amendment rights. The case attracted unusual support from both the ACLU and NRA, as well as cannabis-legalization groups, while gun-safety organizations opposed Hemani’s challenge.

The Supreme Court sided with Ali Danial Hemani, a Texas marijuana user challenging a federal law that bars people who illegally use drugs from possessing firearms. The ruling represents a setback for the Trump administration, which defended the law, and follows a series of Supreme Court decisions expanding or defining gun rights. The case drew unusual support from both the ACLU and NRA, as well as cannabis-legalization groups, while gun-safety organizations opposed Hemani’s challenge. The decision comes amid widespread state-level marijuana legalization despite continued federal prohibition.

The Supreme Court ruled on procedural grounds in favor of the Trump administration in a case brought by immigration judges challenging restrictions on their public speech. The justices held that the judges must pursue their complaint through the federal employee grievance system rather than immediately litigating in federal court. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Amy Coney Barrett, criticized the 4th Circuit for responding to current political controversies. The National Association of Immigration Judges said it was disappointed but emphasized that the case continues, while Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche praised the decision. The ruling may also affect ongoing disputes over the president’s authority to remove members of independent agencies, including the Merit Systems Protection Board.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Meta’s appeal seeking to stop a Vermont lawsuit alleging that Facebook and Instagram harmed young users, allowing the case to proceed. Meta argued Vermont courts lacked jurisdiction because it had no specific ties to the state, while Vermont pointed to the apps’ large teen user base there. The decision follows similar legal setbacks for Meta and YouTube in California and New Mexico. Reports citing Meta’s internal research described alleged links between Instagram use and worsening suicidal thoughts, eating disorders, mental-health problems and body-image concerns among teen girls. Meta says it has introduced tools to support teens and families and would cooperate with states on youth-safety standards.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the NFL’s appeal seeking to force Brian Flores’s racial discrimination lawsuit into arbitration, allowing the case brought by Flores, Steve Wilks and Ray Horton to proceed toward trial in open court. The coaches allege discriminatory hiring practices involving the NFL and several teams. The league said it respected the decision but would defend itself, while the plaintiffs’ attorneys welcomed the ruling and argued that the commissioner should not arbitrate discrimination claims against the league and its teams.

The Supreme Court sent back to lower courts a North Dakota case brought by Native American tribes challenging voting maps, as well as a related Mississippi redistricting case. The 8th Circuit had ruled that only the federal government could bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, conflicting with decades of precedent that allowed voters and advocacy groups to sue. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, arguing that both rulings should have been reversed. The cases come after the conservative Supreme Court majority restricted Voting Rights Act claims in a Louisiana redistricting decision, making future challenges more difficult to win.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Shawn Montgomery may sue freight broker C.H. Robinson over a 2017 Illinois crash in which a speeding truck hit his parked vehicle and caused him to lose part of his leg. Montgomery argues that the company should share liability because it hired a carrier despite the driver’s prior careless-driving citation and the carrier’s recent crash history. The ruling recognizes that federal regulation of trucking does not necessarily prevent state-law safety claims, potentially exposing logistics companies to greater liability and affecting the wider trucking industry.

Clarence Thomas has become the second-longest-serving justice in Supreme Court history, with more than 34 years on the bench and a possible path to surpassing William O. Douglas's longevity record by 2028. Once viewed as an isolated conservative, Thomas is now the senior member of a conservative supermajority shaped by Donald Trump's appointments, and the Court has moved toward his views on abortion, affirmative action, voting rights, and gun rights. His seniority gives him influence over opinion assignments, while former clerks working in Republican administrations and the federal judiciary extend his impact beyond the Court. His tenure remains marked by controversies involving Anita Hill's allegations and undisclosed luxury travel, but scholars describe his jurisprudence as notably consistent and increasingly influential, including his 2022 opinion expanding the right to carry firearms in public.

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that First Choice Women’s Resource Centers can sue in federal court over a New Jersey subpoena connected to an investigation into whether the faith-based pregnancy center misled people to discourage abortions. Although the decision is only a procedural victory, it raises First Amendment concerns and drew support from the American Civil Liberties Union, despite the organization’s support for abortion rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether the Trump administration can quickly terminate Temporary Protected Status for roughly 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians. The administration argues that the Homeland Security secretary has authority to end the protections and that courts cannot review those decisions, while migrant lawyers contend officials failed to follow legally required procedures. A ruling for the administration could affect up to 1.3 million people from 17 countries, many of whom have lived and worked legally in the United States for years but could face job loss, homelessness, or deportation. Lower courts delayed the terminations, with one finding that hostility toward nonwhite immigrants may have influenced the Haitian decision; federal officials deny racial animus. The case is part of a broader set of immigration disputes before the court.

The Supreme Court is considering whether federal pesticide-labeling rules shield Bayer and its Monsanto subsidiary from thousands of state-law lawsuits alleging that Roundup caused cancer and lacked an adequate warning. Bayer argues that the EPA’s finding that glyphosate is not likely carcinogenic when used as directed preempts the claims, while plaintiffs say federal law does not prevent stronger state warnings. The litigation has produced major jury awards, more than 100,000 claims and a potential $16 billion settlement reserve. The dispute is also widening a political rift over pesticide policy, with farmers warning that restrictions could harm agriculture and environmental and MAHA activists demanding greater accountability. A ruling is expected by the end of June.

The US Supreme Court revived Army veteran Winston Hencely’s lawsuit against Fluor Intercontinental over injuries he suffered while confronting suicide bomber Ahmad Nayeb at Bagram Airfield in 2016. Nayeb, an Afghan employee of the contractor, built an explosive vest at the base and detonated it after Hencely intervened, killing five people and injuring more than a dozen. Hencely’s lawyers say the blast caused severe brain and physical injuries, while an Army investigation faulted Fluor for inadequate supervision. Fluor argues that government-contractor immunity shields it from the suit; Hencely contends that immunity applies only to the government.

The U.S. Supreme Court will review an appeal by St. Mary Catholic Parish and other Catholic preschools that were excluded from Colorado’s taxpayer-funded free preschool program because of admission policies affecting LGBTQ+ families and children. The preschools argue that exclusion violates their religious rights, while Colorado maintains that religious schools may participate if they comply with nondiscrimination laws. The case, supported by the Trump administration, adds to the conservative-majority court’s growing body of religious-rights and LGBTQ+-rights disputes.

The Supreme Court unanimously gave oil and gas companies another opportunity to move Louisiana environmental lawsuits into federal court. The ruling follows a state jury’s order requiring Chevron to pay more than $740 million to restore coastal damage linked to Texaco’s dredging, drilling and wastewater practices. The companies, supported by the Trump administration, argue that their World War II-era activities were performed as federal contractors and should not be judged under later state regulations. Louisiana has lost more than 2,000 square miles of coastal land, with government scientists identifying oil and gas infrastructure as a significant contributor, and could lose thousands more square miles in coming decades. Justice Samuel Alito did not participate because of his financial ties to ConocoPhillips.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the Trump administration's surge in appeals to the Supreme Court's emergency docket is unprecedented. She argued that the conservative majority's presumption that blocking executive policies or congressional laws causes irreparable harm has made emergency relief more difficult for challengers, including immigrants and states facing federal funding cuts. The court has generally enabled Trump to proceed with key policies while lower-court cases continue, though it rejected his sweeping tariffs after full briefing and oral arguments. The docket has also exposed divisions among the justices, including a public dispute between Ketanji Brown Jackson and Brett Kavanaugh.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 against Colorado’s ban on conversion-therapy counseling for LGBTQ+ minors, finding that the law raises serious First Amendment concerns and sending the case back to a lower court for further review. Christian counselor Kaley Chiles, supported by the Trump administration and represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, argued that the law restricts voluntary, faith-based speech. Colorado maintained that the law regulates harmful health-care practices rather than protected speech and permits broader discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation. The decision is expected to threaten similar conversion-therapy bans in other states.

An Everytown for Gun Safety report traces more than 250 firearms purchased from Academy Sports + Outdoors stores and later trafficked to crime scenes in cities including New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Boston. The report identifies straw purchasing, illicit resale, and theft as major pathways, often moving guns from Southern states with less restrictive laws to states with tighter controls. Researchers highlight warning signs such as bulk purchases, duplicate firearms, cash payments and use of another person’s credit card, while urging prosecutions of traffickers and greater vigilance from licensed gun dealers. Academy has not been accused of wrongdoing in the cases discussed and did not respond to requests for comment.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously revived Gabriel Olivier’s civil-rights lawsuit challenging a Brandon, Mississippi, ordinance that required him to demonstrate in a designated protest zone. Olivier, an evangelical Christian, argues that the restriction violated his religious and free-speech rights after he was arrested for refusing to move while preaching near an amphitheater. The ruling allows him to pursue a civil suit but does not determine whether he will ultimately win. Brandon maintains that the ordinance was content-neutral, that Olivier had other legal remedies, and that allowing the suit could lead to broader litigation against local governments.

The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to broadly limit lower courts’ ability to block the termination of Temporary Protected Status for migrants from countries including Haiti and Syria. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that the Department of Homeland Security should be able to end protections without judicial intervention, while lower courts have raised concerns about racial animus and humanitarian risks. More than 175 former judges oppose treating emergency-docket rulings as settled law, and attorneys for Haitian migrants warn that ending protections could put lives at risk. The administration has already terminated or moved to terminate protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants from Venezuela, Syria, Honduras, Nicaragua, Nepal, Ukraine, Afghanistan and Cameroon.

The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked a California law that prevented schools from automatically notifying parents when students changed their pronouns or gender expression, allowing schools to disclose that information while the case proceeds. Religious parents represented by the Thomas More Society argued that the policies concealed children’s social transitions and infringed parental rights, while California officials defended student privacy, particularly for students who fear family rejection. The order follows the Court’s recent rulings on LGBTQ+ issues involving minors, parental objections to LGBTQ+-inclusive school materials, and transgender athletes.

The Supreme Court is considering whether federal law may bar regular marijuana users from possessing firearms, producing an unusual coalition that places the Trump administration and gun-control groups on one side and the NRA, ACLU and other gun-rights advocates on the other. The case involves Texas defendant Ali Danial Hemani, whose firearm prosecution was rejected by the 5th Circuit after it found that intoxication while armed was required. The Justice Department argues that habitual drug users with guns pose distinctive public-safety risks and that the restriction has historical precedent, while opponents say the law is vague, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the nation’s gun-rights tradition. The ruling could affect users of other controlled substances and follows the Court’s recent expansion of Second Amendment protections.

The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to permit the termination of temporary protected status for Syrian migrants while litigation continues. The Department of Justice is challenging a New York judge’s ruling that blocked the Department of Homeland Security’s decision, which an appeals court left in place. About 6,100 Syrians could lose work authorization and face possible deportation if the protections end.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously declined to let GEO Group immediately appeal a ruling allowing a lawsuit by immigration detainees in Colorado who allege they were compelled to perform janitorial and other work for as little as $1 a day. The decision is a procedural setback rather than a final ruling on the allegations or the company’s claim of government-contractor immunity. GEO Group, a major private detention operator, also faces similar litigation elsewhere, including a Washington case resulting in a judgment of more than $23 million.

The US Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal by Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil seeking to stop Boulder, Colorado’s climate liability lawsuit from proceeding in state court. Boulder and other governments argue fossil-fuel companies should help cover billions of dollars in damages from climate-amplified wildfires, rising seas and severe storms, while the companies and the Trump administration contend that climate change is a national issue that belongs in federal court. The ruling could affect similar lawsuits across the United States.

The Supreme Court appears likely to invalidate Hawaii's law presumptively barring firearms in privately owned stores, hotels and other businesses unless owners permit them. Conservative justices questioned whether the restriction places the Second Amendment below other constitutional rights, while Hawaii argued that private property owners should control whether guns are allowed. The case was brought by a gun-rights organization and three Maui residents after conflicting lower-court rulings. A decision is expected by late June; it would not affect Hawaii's separate restrictions in locations such as parks, beaches and alcohol-serving restaurants, and businesses could still independently prohibit firearms.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Montana police lawfully entered William Case’s home without a warrant after his former girlfriend reported fears that he might have harmed himself. Although the justices rejected Montana’s overly low standard for emergency entries, they found the officers’ actions objectively reasonable under existing Supreme Court precedent. The ruling also emphasized that emergency-entry authority does not permit searches beyond what is necessary to provide aid and protect officers.

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration must provide Venezuelan migrants sent to a prison in El Salvador with court hearings or return them to the United States. Although more than 200 migrants were later returned to Venezuela in a prisoner swap, the ruling gives them a path to challenge allegations that they belong to the Tren de Aragua gang and were subject to removal under the Alien Enemies Act. The decision intensifies an ongoing dispute between the administration and the judiciary over immigration enforcement and due process.

The Supreme Court declined to halt a lower-court ruling allowing immigration judges to pursue a federal lawsuit over restrictions on their public speech. The decision is procedural rather than final, but it raises broader questions about the Trump administration's firing of officials who oversee federal employee complaints and about presidential authority to dismiss government workers. The Justice Department argued that the firings were lawful and sought to move the case out of federal court; the justices rejected that request for now while cautioning lower courts to proceed carefully. The case could affect other federal employees seeking to challenge firings outside an employee complaint system overseen largely by Trump appointees.

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration’s monthslong deployment of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., unlawfully intrudes on local officials’ authority to direct law enforcement. Judge Jia Cobb held that the president may protect federal property and operations but cannot unilaterally use the D.C. Guard for general crime control or bring in troops from other states. She stayed the ruling for 21 days to permit an appeal. District Attorney General Brian Schwalb called for the troops’ withdrawal, while the White House defended the deployment as lawful and necessary to combat violent crime. More than 2,300 Guard troops from eight states and the District had been deployed, with related challenges involving deployments in other cities also before the courts.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups have asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block California climate-disclosure laws while litigation proceeds, arguing that compelled emissions and climate-risk reporting violates free-speech rights. The laws would require thousands of companies to disclose direct and indirect emissions and potential financial losses from climate change, with civil penalties for noncompliance. California maintains that the measures promote transparency and climate action, while environmental group Ceres supports them. ExxonMobil has filed a separate challenge, and the Supreme Court’s recent skepticism toward federal environmental regulations could influence the case.

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has allowed the Trump administration to enforce its policy requiring passport sex markers to match the sex listed on a person’s birth certificate while litigation continues. The decision pauses a lower-court order that had preserved options for male, female, or X markers aligned with gender identity. The administration argues that the president and Congress have broad authority over passports and that sex markers should reflect biological classification, while transgender and nonbinary plaintiffs say the policy makes passports unusable and exposes them to harassment or violence. The policy reverses changes made under President Joe Biden that removed documentation requirements and introduced the X marker.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to uphold an executive order denying U.S. citizenship to children born to undocumented or temporarily present parents. The appeal could lead to a definitive ruling by early summer, although the administration is not seeking to implement the restrictions before the court rules. Lower courts have consistently found that the order likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment, while Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that those decisions undermine border security and improperly grant citizenship. The American Civil Liberties Union and other challengers say the order is plainly unconstitutional. The Supreme Court previously limited nationwide injunctions but did not address the underlying constitutionality of the birthright-citizenship order.

Documents indicate that Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook described a condominium purchased in 2021 as a vacation home on a loan estimate and as a second home on a security-clearance form, potentially undermining allegations that she falsely claimed it and another Michigan property as primary residences. Trump appointee Bill Pulte referred the matter to the Justice Department, which opened an investigation. Cook sued to block her removal, secured an injunction allowing her to remain in office, and is facing an administration appeal ahead of an expected Federal Reserve interest-rate decision.

The District of Columbia has sued to block President Donald Trump’s deployment of more than 1,000 National Guard troops in Washington, arguing that the operation amounts to an illegal military occupation and violates the Home Rule Act. Attorney General Brian Schwalb also contests federal control over Guard units from other states. The White House maintains that the deployment is lawful and necessary to combat violent crime, while Mayor Muriel Bowser has acknowledged a significant decline in offenses since the intervention began. The Guard’s orders have been extended through December, and Trump has indicated plans to deploy troops to Chicago and Baltimore. The lawsuit follows a federal ruling that found his separate National Guard deployment in Los Angeles illegal, although that decision does not directly govern Washington.

President Donald Trump has deployed federal agents in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles while threatening to expand their role in local policing. Critics argue that federal agencies lack experience with routine community policing, often do not use body cameras, permit masked or poorly identified officers, and provide limited arrest information. Administration officials defend masks as protection against threats, but civic leaders and civil-rights advocates warn that the tactics could weaken accountability and erode trust in local police, despite potentially removing violent individuals from the streets.

The Trump administration has again asked the Supreme Court to halt lower-court orders requiring billions of dollars in foreign aid to remain available, including funding for global health and HIV/AIDS programs. The Justice Department says roughly $12 billion may have to be spent by September 30 and argues that the lower-court orders interfere with negotiations between the president and Congress over aid cuts. Trump has characterized the assistance as wasteful and inconsistent with his foreign-policy goals. Nonprofit groups challenging the freeze say it violates federal law and has disrupted urgent lifesaving programs. The Supreme Court previously rejected the administration’s request in a 5–4 decision, while a divided appeals court recently allowed a suspension but declined to make it effective immediately.

A National Guard armored vehicle collided with a civilian SUV less than a mile from the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., trapping one person who was later hospitalized with minor, non-life-threatening injuries. The cause of the crash was not immediately known. The incident occurred as about 1,900 troops were being deployed around the city under President Donald Trump’s administration. Attorney General Pam Bondi said more than 550 people had been arrested, while the U.S. Marshals offered $500 rewards for information leading to further arrests.

The Trump administration’s expanded federal law-enforcement and immigration operation has disrupted businesses and public life in Washington, D.C., particularly in Hispanic neighborhoods such as Columbia Heights. Vendors report sharply reduced foot traffic and income amid fears of immigration checks and detention, while federal agencies have conducted stops, arrests and raids across the city. The White House says 450 people have been arrested since the operation began and argues that the crackdown has improved public safety, but local officials and residents criticize the intervention as aggressive and discriminatory. A federal investigation into possible falsification of D.C. crime data could reinforce Trump’s claim of a crime emergency, despite recent improvements in reported crime. Additional National Guard troops are expected from Republican-led states, prompting Democratic opposition and questions about the troops’ limited law-enforcement training and the legality, cost and effectiveness of the deployment.

The White House says federal agents and National Guard troops will patrol Washington, D.C., around the clock after President Donald Trump took control of the city's police department for up to 30 days. Hundreds of federal and local officers made 43 arrests and seized seven illegal firearms, while the administration also plans to clear homeless encampments. Mayor Muriel Bowser and Police Chief Pamela Smith say the additional personnel could improve public safety and offset a shortage of nearly 800 city officers, but officials have not received clear success criteria. The deployment has drawn concern from residents and faces potential congressional opposition if Trump seeks to extend it, despite violent crime having fallen sharply in the district.

National Guard members began arriving in Washington, D.C., after Donald Trump activated about 800 personnel and temporarily took control of the city's police department under a law allowing federal oversight for up to 30 days. Mayor Muriel Bowser pledged cooperation while maintaining that the police chief remained in charge and arguing that violent crime has fallen to a 30-year low. The Trump administration cited a crime emergency, deployed hundreds of additional federal officers and removed homeless encampments, while critics said the intervention was primarily a political power play. Extending federal control beyond 30 days would require congressional approval, likely facing Democratic opposition.

President Donald Trump’s promised federal law-enforcement surge in Washington, D.C., was not visibly apparent during an overnight tour, though the White House said more than 120 federal officers would be deployed the following night. The move followed an attempted carjacking involving DOGE employee Edward Coristine and renewed Trump’s threats to take control of the city. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s administration points to sharp declines in homicides and carjackings, while recent local measures have targeted disruptive youth activity. Trump can deploy federal officers and potentially the National Guard, but taking over the police department or ending D.C.’s limited home rule would likely require emergency action, congressional involvement and face legal challenges.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the National Institutes of Health to implement $783 million in research-funding cuts intended to align with President Donald Trump’s priorities and roll back federal diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. A Massachusetts federal judge blocked the cuts, finding that they violated established government procedures and amounted to discrimination against racial minorities and LGBTQ Americans. The Justice Department argues that such challenges belong in the federal claims court rather than district courts, citing a recent Supreme Court emergency-docket decision allowing teacher-training cuts to proceed. The appeal is part of a broader dispute involving nearly two dozen cases and hundreds of canceled NIH research projects.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to complete the deportation of eight immigrants to South Sudan, despite their lack of ties to the country and warnings that they could face detention, torture, or death there. The migrants had been diverted to a U.S. naval base in Djibouti after a federal judge found that they had not been given a meaningful opportunity to challenge removal to a third country. The court’s conservative majority said the judge’s order was no longer enforceable, while Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, arguing that the administration received special treatment. Homeland Security officials said the deportation would proceed immediately.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Montana’s appeal seeking to revive a 2013 law requiring notarized parental consent for minors seeking abortions, leaving in place a Montana Supreme Court ruling that invalidated it. Montana officials argued that the law protected parents’ fundamental rights, while Planned Parenthood said minors’ rights must also be considered in a state constitutionally protecting abortion access. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said the refusal to hear the case reflected technical legal issues rather than agreement with Montana’s position. Montana continues to require parental notification, and the case occurs amid a wider patchwork of parental-consent and notification laws across the United States.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Texas law requiring users to verify their age before accessing online pornography, rejecting a challenge from the adult-entertainment industry group Free Speech Coalition. The group argued that collecting personal information burdens adults’ free-speech rights and creates privacy and security risks, while Texas said improved technology makes age checks quick and comparable to identification requirements at adult stores. Pornhub has stopped operating in several states because of the technical and privacy challenges posed by similar laws, which have been adopted by nearly half of U.S. states.

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to resolve six remaining cases, led by the Trump administration’s challenge to nationwide injunctions blocking its order to deny birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. Other expected decisions concern religious opt-outs from LGBTQ-inclusive school storybooks in Maryland, Louisiana’s congressional map and its second Black-majority district, and a Texas law requiring age verification for access to online pornography. The cases could affect executive power, religious-liberty claims, voting-rights litigation, free-speech protections, and online privacy.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue decisions in six argued cases at the end of its term, including the Trump administration’s challenge to nationwide injunctions blocking its order restricting birthright citizenship. The justices also are considering whether parents may opt their children out of LGBTQ+-inclusive storybook lessons in Maryland schools, whether Louisiana must redraw congressional districts to preserve a second Black-majority district, and whether Texas may require age verification for online pornography without violating adults’ First Amendment rights. The court recently allowed states to cut Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood, while its remaining rulings could affect immigration, religious liberty, voting rights, racial considerations in redistricting and online speech.

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that businesses affected by FDA decisions on vaping products may challenge those decisions in their home-state courts, expanding the litigation options available to manufacturers and retailers. The case was brought by R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. after the FDA refused to authorize its Vuse Alto products, and the ruling allows the company to pursue its challenge in Texas alongside local sellers. The FDA had argued that this enabled judge shopping, while dissenting Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor would have restricted the available venues. Tobacco-control advocates criticized the decision, although vaping companies must still contend with the Court’s separate ruling upholding restrictions on most flavored e-cigarettes.

The Supreme Court is nearing the end of its term with 16 argued cases still awaiting decisions. Major matters include the Trump administration’s effort to revive its order restricting birthright citizenship and its broader challenge to nationwide injunctions; a religious-rights dispute over LGBTQ-themed storybooks in Maryland schools; Louisiana’s congressional redistricting map and the role of race under the Voting Rights Act; and a Texas law requiring age verification for online pornography. The court has appeared inclined to preserve a temporary block on the citizenship restrictions, allow parents to opt their children out of the storybook lessons, uphold or further review Texas’s law, and potentially reject Louisiana’s map.

Illinois-based toy company Learning Resources Inc. has asked the Supreme Court to quickly decide whether President Donald Trump unlawfully imposed tariffs under an emergency-powers law without congressional approval. The company won an initial lower-court ruling, but that decision is paused while an appeals court considers a broader challenge. Learning Resources CEO Rick Woldenberg says tariffs and uncertainty are threatening the company ahead of its key back-to-school and holiday sales periods, while the Trump administration argues that trade deficits constitute a national emergency and justify the tariffs. The Supreme Court is generally reluctant to hear cases before appellate review, making an immediate decision unlikely.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal from First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a New Jersey faith-based pregnancy center challenging a state subpoena seeking information about its donors, advertising and medical personnel. The center argues that the investigation chills its First Amendment rights, while New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office says the subpoena concerns allegations that the organization misled people about abortion referrals. Lower courts declined to intervene because the dispute was not sufficiently advanced, and a state judge has so far urged the parties to negotiate over the requested documents.

The Supreme Court is approaching the end of its term with 21 cases unresolved, including disputes over Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, President Donald Trump’s birthright-citizenship order, LGBTQ-themed books in Maryland public schools, Louisiana’s congressional map, and Texas’s online pornography age-verification law. The justices appear inclined to uphold Tennessee’s law, maintain at least some block on the birthright-citizenship order while potentially limiting nationwide injunctions, side with Maryland parents seeking religious exemptions from LGBTQ-themed lessons, reconsider Louisiana’s second majority-Black congressional district, and possibly uphold Texas’s law despite concerns about adult privacy and First Amendment rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled for a Minnesota girl with epilepsy whose family says her school district failed to provide adequate educational accommodations, including evening instruction when her seizures are less frequent. The decision rejects a heightened requirement that families prove school officials acted in bad faith or with gross misjudgment, potentially making it easier to bring disability-discrimination claims against schools. Osseo Area Schools warned that the ruling could expose understaffed public districts to more lawsuits, while the girl's lawyers said the alternative proposed by the district would have severely threatened disability rights.

The Supreme Court unanimously revived a lawsuit by Atlanta residents Trina Martin and Toi Cliatt, whose home was mistakenly raided by an FBI SWAT team in 2017. Agents broke down the door, used a flashbang grenade and pointed guns at the couple and their 7-year-old son before realizing that a GPS error had taken them to the wrong address. Lower courts had dismissed the case, but the Supreme Court rejected that outcome, allowing the family to pursue claims including assault, false arrest and other violations. The ruling may preserve a broader path for people seeking to hold federal law-enforcement agents accountable.

The Supreme Court ruled that Catholic Charities Bureau does not have to pay Wisconsin unemployment taxes, finding that the organization’s religiously motivated disability services qualify for a religious exemption. Catholic Charities argued that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment by taxing it while exempting other faith groups, whereas the state said the charity’s nonreligious day-to-day operations and public funding disqualified it. Wisconsin warned that the decision could encourage large religiously affiliated employers, including hospitals, to leave the state unemployment system. The Trump administration supported Catholic Charities.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously blocked Mexico’s $10 billion lawsuit against major American firearm manufacturers, including Smith & Wesson. Mexico alleged that the companies’ business practices helped fuel cartel violence and bloodshed, but the justices ruled that U.S. law generally shields gunmakers from liability when their weapons are used in crimes. The decision overturned a lower-court ruling that had allowed the case to proceed under an exception for alleged violations of law.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear The GEO Group’s appeal in a lawsuit alleging that immigration detainees at its Aurora, Colorado, facility were compelled to perform unpaid janitorial work and other jobs for as little as $1 a day. GEO argues that it is protected by the government’s immunity because it operates the facility for federal authorities and that its wages comply with Immigration and Customs Enforcement rules. Migrants’ attorneys say the case concerns inadequate compensation rather than immigration policy. Lower courts allowed the lawsuit to proceed, and similar litigation has resulted in a judgment exceeding $23 million against GEO in Washington state.

The US Supreme Court unanimously revived federal approval for the proposed 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway expansion in Utah, which would connect oil and gas producers to the wider rail network and potentially quadruple production in the region. The ruling adopts a limited interpretation of the National Environmental Policy Act, rejecting arguments from environmental groups and a Colorado county that regulators must assess a broader range of indirect impacts. The project remains subject to additional legal and regulatory challenges.