A case in which the Court will decide whether a plaintiff can state a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) that bars a plan fiduciary from knowingly engaging in a transaction that is an exchange of goods or services between the plan and anyone barred from doing business with the plan, simply by alleging that such a transaction occurred.
A case in which the Court will decide whether courts should apply the “moment of the threat” doctrine when evaluating an excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a manufacturer may file a petition for review in a circuit where it neither resides nor has its principal place of business, if the petition is joined by a seller of the manufacturer’s products that is located within that circuit.
A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Hobbs Act, a federal district court is bound by the Federal Communication Commission’s legal interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a Texas law that requires any website that publishes content one-third or more of which is “harmful to minors” to verify the age of each of its users before providing access should be subject to “rational basis” review or “strict scrutiny.”
A case in which the Court will decide whether a voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 is a “final judgment, order, or proceeding” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).
A case in which the Court will decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits making a “false statement” for the purpose of influencing certain financial institutions and federal agencies, also prohibits making a statement that is misleading but not false.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the First Step Act’s sentencing reduction provisions apply to a defendant whose original sentence was imposed before the Act’s enactment, then vacated and resentenced to a new term of imprisonment after the Act’s enactment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the First Step Act’s sentencing reduction provisions apply to a defendant whose original sentence was imposed before the Act’s enactment, then vacated and resentenced to a new term of imprisonment after the Act’s enactment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a former employee—who was qualified to perform her job and who earned post-employment benefits while employed—loses her right to sue over discrimination with respect to those benefits solely because she no longer holds her job.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to TikTok, violates the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to TikTok, violates the First Amendment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether an award of the “defendant’s profits” under the Lanham Act can include an order for the defendant to disgorge the distinct profits of legally separate non-party corporate affiliates.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal civilian employee called or ordered to active duty under a provision of law during a national emergency is entitled to differential pay even if the duty is not directly connected to the national emergency.
A case in which the Court will consider the scope of property interests and fraud in government contracting, particularly when deception occurs without clear economic harm.
A case in which the Court will decide whether Tennessee Senate Bill 1, which prohibits all medical treatments intended to allow “a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex” or to treat “purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s sex and asserted identity,” violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
A case in which the Court will decide whether and how the expropriation exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act applies in cases involving seized property, specifically regarding the requirements for establishing a commercial nexus with the United States and the burden of proof at different stages of litigation.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Food and Drug Administration’s orders denying respondents’ applications for authorization to market new e-cigarette products was arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a bankruptcy trustee may avoid a debtor’s tax payment to the United States under 11 U.S.C. § 544(b) when no actual creditor could have obtained relief under the applicable state fraudulent-transfer law outside of bankruptcy.
A case in which the Court will clarify the pleading standards to show knowledge or intent for Private Securities Litigation Reform Act claims that rely on internal company documents.
A case in which the Court will decide whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.
A case in which the Court will decide whether, when a noncitizen's voluntary-departure period ends on a weekend or public holiday, a motion to reopen filed the next business day is sufficient to avoid the penalties for failure to depart under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(1).
A case in which the Court was asked to decide whether risk disclosures are false or misleading when they do not disclose that a risk has materialized in the past, even if that past event presents no known risk of ongoing or future business harm.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the phrase “entitled… to benefits” includes all who meet basic program eligibility criteria, whether or not benefits are actually received.
A case in which the Court held that employers seeking to demonstrate the applicability of a Fair Labor Standards Act exemption must do so by a preponderance of the evidence.
A case in which the Court will decide whether reimbursement requests submitted to the Federal Communications Commission's E-rate program are “claims” under the False Claims Act.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1).
A case in which the Court will decide whether the Clean Water Act allows the Environmental Protection Agency (or an authorized state) to impose generic prohibitions in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits that subject permit-holders to enforcement for violating water quality standards without identifying specific limits to which their discharges must conform.
A case in which the Court will decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims must ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1).
