Which SCOTUS Cases the Media Wants You to Watch and Why

The Supreme Court began its new term on Monday, agreeing to take up over 20 cases of substantial significance and variety.

Voting Laws: "Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota" will determine whether the state of Arizona must require proof of citizenship for voters. A Fox News (Right bias) opinion suggested that if the Court does not affirm the state's 2022 proof of citizenship law, it will unjustly "han[d] activists something with the force of law." Deseret News (Center) drew parallels between the law and President Donald Trump's proposed "Safeguard American Voter Eligibility" (SAVE) Act. The Washington Post (Lean Left) went a step further and framed the case as part of the Trump administration's "aggressive efforts to restrict voting."

Climate Change: "Suncor Energy Inc. vs. County Commissioners of Boulder County," arguments of which began on Monday, will determine whether the city of Boulder, Colorado, can sue Suncor and ExxonMobil over alleged fossil fuel damages contributing to climate change. Deseret suggested the case "could usher in a flurry of environmental lawsuits," and USA Today (Lean Left) said "billions of dollars are potentially at stake" because the results will set a precedent for other local governments. Fox framed the case as "one of the left's most brazen lawfare campaigns."

Church/State: The state of Colorado "shut out Catholic preschools [from its state funding] because they support Church teaching on sex and gender," according to Fox, which framed the case of "St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy" as "the antithesis of neutrality and a constitutional nonstarter." USA Today instead framed the case as deciding "whether the Catholic Church can exclude children of gay parents." Another case, "Grand v. City of University Heights," will determine whether individuals will be required to obtain a permit to host religious gatherings in their homes.

Immigration: "Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D." will determine whether the Trump administration can deport unauthorized immigrants to countries outside their origin and, as USA Today added, "without letting them argue that they could be persecuted or tortured there." Another case, "Barbosa da Cunha v. Rhoney," will determine whether the administration can detain unauthorized citizens apprehended inside the US. Deseret reported, "The policy has impacted thousands of immigrants and has already been rejected by hundreds of lower courts… but federal appeals courts are divided on the matter."

Parental Rights: "International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson," covered by Fox and The Epoch Times (Lean Right) but not Washington Post, USA Today, or Deseret, will determine whether Washington's runaway-youth-shelter law allows shelters to withhold information from the parents of minors seeking gender transition treatments. Fox criticized that the law "giv[es] the parents the type of treatment normally reserved for abusers." Epoch Times said it makes parents "hesitant to discipline their kids because they may run away to seek treatment."

Gun Control: "Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins," joint cases out of Connecticut and Illinois, will determine whether local governments can ban semiautomatic weapon possession due to the frequency of use in crimes, interpreting the language of both the Second and 14th Amendments. USA Today labelled the case "a response to mass shootings," and outlets across the political spectrum noted the use of AR-15s in school shootings. Epoch Times, however, also highlighted that the long guns are "among the most commonly owned" of their kind in the US.

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.