The US Supreme Court enters the fourth year of the conservative revolution with possible Trump cases on the horizon | Elections 2024

Richard Glossip was executed eight times and underwent the ritual of a last meal on death row three times. This week he has a new chance to save his life as his case will be one of the first heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in its new legal year, which begins Monday with two trials focusing on technical and procedural issues. In the coming months, the justices — who have pushed a conservative agenda for the past three years — will deliberate on cases related to firearms, access to pornography, environmental issues, trans rights and one case that underscores the Court’s current orientation: discrimination. against straight people.

New dishes are being added to the menu, some of which are quite juicy. The justices could ultimately decide hypothetical challenges to the outcome of the November 5 election, as well as the criminal cases against one of the candidates: Donald Trump.

Trump was already a central figure in the past judicial year, which begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October of the following year. The justices unanimously rejected attempts to disqualify him from candidacy, saying he violated the anti-insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by encouraging the riot at the Capitol.

In another ruling, the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of obstruction of an official proceeding, affecting many defendants in connection with the attack on the Capitol, including Trump himself. In the most significant decision, however, the conservative majority granted Trump broad immunity from official actions in the case involving his alleged attempts to change the 2020 election results. The justices referred to the lower courts to determine whether the actions he is accused of were official or private, and whether they all fall under presidential immunity.

Special Prosecutor Jack Smith successfully convened a new grand jury to indict Trump again for the same crimes, clarifying the actions he believes fall within the scope of immunity. The Supreme Court may have to rule again on these and other cases. Moreover, the legality of Smith’s own appointment — an issue that has led to conflicting decisions — could also end up before the highest court.

If Trump wins the election, it will create an unprecedented situation — yet another in which the judges will have to rule on the validity of his New York conviction and other charges while he occupies the White House. To complicate matters further, the winner of the presidential election may depend on the Supreme Court’s decisions in the event of a close outcome and potential challenges. In 2020, Supreme Court justices ultimately overturned efforts to overturn the election results, but Trump’s team has prepared its legal arsenal for a potential battle if similar circumstances were to arise.

Two firearms cases

In anticipation of these possible cases, the Supreme Court already has a full agenda. Firearms are back in the spotlight in two major ways. The justices will have to determine whether the Biden administration’s rule imposing restrictions on kits and templates for homemade weapons — commonly called ghost guns, which are difficult to track and whose use has increased significantly — is constitutional. In addition, they must decide whether gun manufacturers have immunity from a lawsuit filed by the Mexican government, which holds them responsible for knowingly maintaining a distribution system that facilitates illegal arms trafficking to Mexican drug cartels.

The court will consider the constitutionality of a Tennessee law restricting puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors, which the Biden administration says violates the Equality Clause of the 14th Amendment. Many states have passed similar laws, so this decision will have significant consequences. In addition, the court will consider an appeal from Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman who claims she lost her job to a gay man and was overlooked for a promotion in favor of a gay woman.

In environmental matters, the court will hear a case on pollutant discharges, as well as another on the government’s authority to grant permits for nuclear waste storage facilities. In addition, the judges will rule on the validity of the health authorities’ ban on certain flavored electronic cigarettes.

Another notable case will assess the validity of a new law in Texas that requires adults to register and provide personal information, including a copy of an ID, to access websites with explicit sexual content, and that requires warnings that porn can be potentially addictive.

The court will also hear appeals from two death row men: one claiming evidence supporting his innocence was hidden, while the other is challenging the decision to reject DNA evidence he believes would exonerate him. In addition, there is a high-profile case involving police brutality.

Technology giants Facebook and Nvidia will defend themselves against class action lawsuits accusing them of hiding or falsifying information in their annual reports and prospectuses.

This will mark the fourth year of the sweeping transformation initiated by a Supreme Court composed of six conservative justices, including three appointed by Trump, and just three progressives. The Supreme Court made its first major impact of 2022 with controversial rulings that overturned the federal right to abortion, undermined efforts to combat climate change, expanded the right to bear firearms, expanded the role of religion in schools and mandated Covid -19 vaccination for women were questioned. employees, and reduced the power of federal agencies.

In 2023, after several rulings suggesting a more centrist stance, the judges ended the year with major decisions against positive discrimination in university admissions, a license to discriminate against gay couples under the guise of free speech, and the annulment of partial student rights . loan forgiveness.

Last year, the justices upheld an eight-to-one vote that banned domestic abusers from using firearms, recognizing that the Second Amendment has its limits. However, they struck down a ban on devices that effectively turn rifles into machine guns, with the six conservative justices voting in favor. They also allowed emergency abortions when the mother’s life was in danger, and unanimously maintained access to the abortion pill.

The Supreme Court upheld the right of social networks to moderate their content, but referred the case to lower courts, leaving the final outcome somewhat uncertain. In addition, they limited the powers of regulators over environmental and financial matters and enforced fines designed to prevent homeless people from settling in cities. Nevertheless, it was the rulings in Trump’s favor that defined the judicial year, and history may well repeat itself.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition