The Story

The countdown is on for SCOTUS’s annual summer vacay. 

Go on.

The highest court in the land traditionally wraps its term in the last week of June. In the weeks leading up to that, justices reportedly “scramble” to resolve outstanding cases and issue decisions — usually saving some of the biggest for the end (see: last year’s abortion ruling). This year appears to be no different. In fact, they apparently have more than ever still on their to-do list. That includes rulings on contentious issues like…

• Affirmative action: For decades, SCOTUS has repeatedly upheld using race as a factor in college admissions to ensure equality in higher education. But now, they could be poised to rule against the practice, after weighing two cases that allege the admissions processes at Harvard and the University of North Carolina end up discriminating against white and Asian American students. While schools argued that minority admissions would drop if affirmative action ended, the court’s 6-3 conservative majority called racial classifications “dangerous” and seemed skeptical of “educational benefits.” It comes as a majority of Americans favor affirmative action, according to a new poll.

• Student loan forgiveness: Reminder, last year, President Biden unveiled a plan to eliminate up to $20,000 in debt for more than 40 million people — a move the admin says it put in place to ease the “financial” harms caused by the COVID pandemic. But not everyone seems to agree that the admin has the authority to unilaterally do so, including some conservative justices who expressed skepticism during oral arguments. Meanwhile, Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberals in questioning whether the plaintiffs had the legal standing to sue in the first place. 

• Election laws: In North Carolina, GOP lawmakers have said the formerly Democratic-held North Carolina Supreme Court overstepped its authority when it struck down Republican-drawn congressional districts. Because, according to the lawmakers, the Constitution gives state legislatures the power to determine how federal elections are run, without any oversight from state courts (aka, the “independent state legislature theory”). If accepted, that could lead to major changes in how federal elections are conducted. Most justices seemed skeptical, but in the end that might not matter. Since oral arguments, North Carolina’s highest court overturned its earlier decision, so it’s unclear if the justices will rule at all.

• Native American adoptions: In 1978, the Indian Child Welfare Act was enacted, requiring that Native American children in foster care or up for adoption be placed with extended family, their Native tribe, or in other Native homes before families with no tribal connections. That was intended to ensure a child’s ties to their cultural heritage and community. But several people trying to adopt Native kids and three states have asked the high court to strike the law, arguing that it’s racially discriminatory and that Congress exceeded its authority by enacting the law in the first place. During oral arguments, the Supremes seemed divided on how to handle the case, with Justice Neil Gorsuch joining the liberal justices, who appeared to support upholding it.

• LGBTQIA+ rights and free speech: In 2016, website designer Lorie Smith sued Colorado over a state law that requires businesses to offer the same services to everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, which Smith says violates her right to free speech. During oral arguments, the conservative-leaning court — which has recently ruled in favor of religious plaintiffs — appeared sympathetic to Smith.