The Court will be releasing one or more opinions today at 10AM eastern time.

Below are the list of what I see as the biggest cases remaining for the term.

Trump v. Slaughter- Whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers and, if so, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States should be overruled. Also whether a federal court may prevent a person's removal from public office, either through relief at equity or at law.

West Virginia v. B.P.J. & Little v. Hecox- Whether Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prevents a state from consistently designating girls' and boys' sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth; and whether the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment prevents a state from offering separate boys' and girls' sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth.

Trump v. Cook- Whether the Supreme Court should stay a district court ruling preventing the president from firing a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

U.S. v. Hemani- Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3), the federal statute that prohibits the possession of firearms by a person who "is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," violates the Second Amendment as applied to respondent.

National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission- Whether the limits on coordinated party expenditures in 52 U.S.C. 30116 violate the First Amendment, either on their face or as applied to party spending in connection with "party coordinated communications" as defined in 11 C.F.R. 109.37.

Watson v. Republican National Committee- Whether the federal election-day statutes, 2 U.S.C. 7, 2 U.S.C. 1, and 3 U.S.C. 1, preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal election day to be received by election officials after that day.

Trump v. Barbara- Birthright Citizenship

Monsanto Company v. Durnell- Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts a label-based failure-to-warn claim where EPA has not required the warning.

Chatrie v. United States- Whether the execution of a geofence warrant violated the Fourth Amendment.

Trump v. Miot & Mullin v. Doe- Whether the Trump administration can end the Temporary Protected Status program for Haitian nationals (Miot) and Syrian nationals (Mullin).

If there is more than one opinion, it will be released soon after the preceding one and after any justice finishes reading from the opinion or his/her concurrence or dissent.

Opinions are also released in reverse seniority with the Chief Justice always being the most "senior" regardless of time on the Court. So if Jackson has the first opinion, then the next one can come from any Justice. If the first opinion is by Alito, it means the next opinion would be either by Alito again, Thomas or the Chief.

As of this morning, there are 30 remaining cases.

Two boxes today, so at least 2-3 opinions.

First today is Fernandez v. US

8-1 by Justice Barrett

Jackson dissents

Kagan and Sotomayor concur in the judgement

Quote:

---

Whether a combination of "extraordinary and compelling reasons" that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255.

The Court rules it does not.

---

Oddly, Jackson's dissent references an as yet undecided case, Rutherford v. US.

Rapier108 said:

---

First today is Fernandez v. US

8-1 by Justice Barrett

Jackson dissents

Kagan and Sotomayor concur in the judgement

Quote:

---

Whether a combination of "extraordinary and compelling reasons" that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255.

The Court rules it does not.

---

Oddly, Jackson's dissent references an as yet undecided case, Rutherford v. US.

---

Because Rutherford is the next case.

Second today is Rutherford v. US

6-3 by Justice Barrett

Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissent

Quote:

---

Whether a district court may consider disparities created by the First Step Act's prospective changes in sentencing law when deciding if "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

This is another case about compassionate release and extraordinary and compelling reasons to reduce a sentence. The court holds in this case that the sentencing disparity created by Congress's nonretroactive change to the mandatory penalties in 18 U.S.C. 924(c), which bars the use and carrying of a gun during a crime of violence, does not qualify as an extraordinary and compelling reason to reduce a sentence.

---

At least one more coming.

#3 is Pitchford v. Cain.

5-4 by Justice Kavanaugh.

Gorsuch dissents, joined by Thomas, Alito, and Barrett.

Quote:

---

Whether, under the standards set forth in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. 2254(d), the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably determined that petitioner waived his right to rebut the prosecutor's asserted race-neutral reasons for exercising peremptory strikes against four black jurors.

The court rules in favor of a defendant who was convicted of capital murder in Mississippi. The Mississippi Supreme Court, the court holds, was unreasonable when it determined that the defendant waived his opportunity to rebut the prosecutor's race-neutral reasons for the peremptory strikes of four black prospective jurors.

---

And not done yet.

Fourth and final today is Flowers Foods v. Brock

9-0 by Justice Gorsuch

Quote:

---

Whether workers who deliver locally goods that travel in interstate commerce but who do not transport the goods across borders nor interact with vehicles that cross borders are "transportation workers" "engaged in foreign or interstate commerce" for purposes of the exemption in Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

The question before the court was whether someone who never crosses state lines or interacts with vehicles who do qualifies as a worker in interstate commerce.

The Tenth Circuit ruled that Brock qualified for the exemption, and today the Supreme Court upholds that ruling.

---

Betting libs on court are drawing out the ejection day case.