WASHINGTON — The beginning of June marks the start of the traditional monthlong ruling season at the Supreme Court, when the justices hand down decisions in their biggest and most contentious cases.
As June begins, the Supreme Court has 33 cases to decide out of 62 on the so-called merits docket.
“In a few years, we may no longer be able to say that the emergency docket is an ‘irregular’ procedure.
The Supreme Court resolved the entire case within weeks after it reached the court via an emergency appeal.
“I definitely feel like the court is reserving space in its schedule for emergency docket cases involving Trump administration initiatives,” said John Elwood, another lawyer who argues cases at the court.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s customary month-long ruling season begins in early June, when the justices render judgments in their largest and most controversial cases.
However, this year isn’t like those.
The court calendar has been thrown off balance by President Donald Trump’s second term. The nine justices now spend just as much time, if not more, juggling urgent, consequential cases that require prompt attention as they do on the regular docket of cases that have received months of consideration and deliberation.
According to Leah Litman, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and the author of a new book about the court called “Lawless,” “it highlights the extent to which Donald Trump and the Trump administration are suckling all of the oxygen out of the room.”. “.”.
This can have an impact on the public’s awareness and comprehension of the court’s activities, she said, partly because media outlets are accustomed to investing more resources in June coverage than they might at other times of the year.
It also alters the court’s regular operating rhythms. Decisions in contested cases are always rendered at 10 a.m., and the court notifies parties in advance of when they are anticipated. m. However, emergency decisions can be made without warning at any time of day. A recent ruling was made early on a Saturday morning.
Federal judges have frequently blocked the administration’s aggressive interpretations of federal law in executive orders, which are the subject of almost all emergency cases.
Out of the 62 cases on the so-called merits docket, the Supreme Court has 33 cases to decide as June gets underway. In those cases, the justices heard arguments during their nine-month term, which began in October, and are expected to render in-depth written rulings. Thursday is the next planned ruling day.
Since January, the court has rendered decisions of some kind in 11 emergency cases involving Trump through what has been referred to as the “shadow docket,” and it still has a number of cases pending. In these instances, the justices typically do not hear oral arguments and render decisions through succinct court orders that lack the in-depth, comprehensive reasoning found in significant Supreme Court rulings.
However, decisions made on the shadow docket may have practical significance comparable to those made on the merits docket, raising questions regarding process and transparency.
significant rulings from the Supreme Court this term.
The court has already authorized the removal of legal protections for thousands of Venezuelan immigrants, consented to the termination of independent agency members, and permitted Trump’s ban on transgender individuals in the military to take effect through the shadow docket.
Additionally, the justices ordered Trump to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongfully sent to El Salvador, and halted the administration’s attempt to use a wartime law to deport Venezuelans it claims are gang members.
The court permitted the Trump administration to strip over 500,000 immigrants of their legal protections on Friday.
In contrast to prior years, there aren’t many cases that make headlines on the merits docket.
A Tennessee law that prohibits gender transition care for minors is being challenged, making it the most significant of those cases that have not yet been decided. The court will also rule on a Texas attempt to limit access to pornographic websites and a conservative religious objection to LGBTQ-themed books in a Maryland county’s schools.
In contrast, the court upheld a law that prohibits domestic abusers from owning firearms, rejected a challenge to the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, granted Trump broad immunity from prosecution for events that occurred during his first term as president, and rendered three decisions that undermined federal agency power last June.
Affirmative action in college admissions was terminated by the court in a matter of days in the summer of 2023, and President Joe Biden’s plan to reduce student loan debt as well.
It also overturned Roe v. Wade last summer. Wade, a seminal ruling on abortion rights.
The court’s transformation due to the shadow docket.
Over the past month or so, the court’s merits docket appears to have been nearly absorbed by the emergency docket, according to Greg Garre, a Washington attorney who frequently presents cases in court. He contended that one of the most significant cases of the term would be the one involving Oklahoma’s attempt to establish the first religious public charter school. The court deadlocked 4–4, though, and it fizzled out.
In fact, some cases that start out as emergency applications have turned into merits cases, giving rise to what some refer to as a “rocket docket”—that is, significant cases that swiftly reach the high court rather than requiring months or years to go through the standard appeals process.
We might not be able to claim that the emergency docket is an “irregular” process in a few years. The term “shadow docket” was first used by William Baude, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, who suggested that it might eventually become standard practice for all high-stakes litigation.
A well-known example was the court’s ruling in January to uphold a law that would have banned TikTok if its Chinese owner did not sell it right away. After the case was brought before the Supreme Court through an emergency appeal, it was decided in a matter of weeks.
Additionally, in a further blurring of the regular merits docket and the fast-moving shadow docket, the court decided to hear oral arguments in three shadow docket cases pertaining to nationwide injunctions issued by judges that blocked Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship.
Given what transpired during his first term, some Supreme Court observers have conjectured that the justices purposefully kept their merits docket relatively light this term, aware that there was a chance of cases pertaining to the fall election and a potential surge of cases pertaining to Trump if he won.
John Elwood, another attorney who argues cases at the court, stated, “I definitely feel like the court is reserving space in its schedule for emergency docket cases involving Trump administration initiatives.”.
