chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.
October 07, 2024 Top Legal News of the Week

Supreme Court term to take up transgender rights, guns and more

At a preview of the new U.S. Supreme Court term, held online by the ABA Division for Public Education and American University Washington College of Law, legal experts said the court term, which begins Monday, Oct. 7, includes some potential blockbuster cases.

The new U.S. Supreme Court term was previewed in a recent webinar co-hosted by the ABA Division for Public Education.

The new U.S. Supreme Court term was previewed in a recent webinar co-hosted by the ABA Division for Public Education.

Getty Images

Issues before the Supreme Court include transgender rights, water quality standards, the First Amendment and ghost guns, among others.

Steve Wermiel, moderator of the program and professor of Practice in Constitutional Law at American University’s Washington College of Law, said to expect “a lot of action” on the shadow docket, the emergency applications that could potentially deal with election-related issues following the Nov. 5 general election.

Daniel P. Tokaji, dean of the University of Wisconsin Law School and an election law expert, said that in 2020 there were 424 cases involving election litigation. At this point, he said, it’s “not clear whether we’re going to meet or exceed that total.”

Abbie L. VanSickle, Supreme Court correspondent with The New York Times, said the U.S. v. Skrmetti case stands out from other cases on the docket because it is “one of the main cases this term that touches on a culture war issue, medical care for transgender minors.”

“This is the first time the court has taken up this particular issue,” she said. The case could have broad ramifications outside of Tennessee since about half of the states have enacted similar measures that in some way curtail transgender minor care, VanSickle said. The case has not yet been scheduled for argument.

The ABA has filed an amicus brief arguing that the Tennessee law that prohibits gender-affirming medical care for minors violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The brief, filed in support of the federal government’s challenge to the law, contends that the Tennessee law, known as Senate Bill (SB) 1, impermissibly denies the fundamental right to medical autonomy for certain groups while allowing it for others.

“Equal protection forbids differential treatment in the exercise of important constitutional rights absent the strongest justification, and Tennessee’s SB1 cannot withstand scrutiny under that standard,” the brief says. It adds: “The ABA has recognized in its past policy statements, state policy denying any individual access to needed medical care for reasons wholly unrelated to any medical justification — as SB1 does — is inimical to equality and equal dignity before the law.”

Two environmental cases are on the docket, City of San Francisco v. EPA, which will be argued on Oct. 16, and Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, which hasn’t been set for oral argument.

Gregory G. Garre, partner at Latham & Watkins, said the court’s interest in environmental cases isn’t surprising. “They have what the court seems to be looking for, which is aggressive regulation based on expansive interpretations of broad statutory provisions.”

“I think it’s fair to say that environmental cases have become something of a flashpoint in the court’s seeming assault on the administrative state,” he said.

Garland, Att’y Gen. v. VanDerStok involves the regulation of “ghost guns,” untraceable firearms that are assembled from kits and do not have a serial number. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, said other possible Second Amendment cases that could be heard hinge on who can have guns, the type of weapons people can possess and where they can have weapons.

“Any of these or all of these could come before the court in the coming year,” he said.

Related links: