Courts & Judges

The Supreme Court

The nine justices, the president who appointed each, and the opinions the Court has released this term and last.

Justices9One Chief Justice, eight Associate Justices
Appointed by Republican presidents6
Appointed by Democratic presidents3
October Term 20262Opinions released
October Term 202574Opinions released

The justices, in order of seniority

John G. Roberts, Jr.

Chief Justice of the United States

Appointed byGeorge W. Bush Republican
CommissionedSeptember 29, 2005
Took the seatSeptember 29, 2005
Senate vote78-22
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (2003-2005)
Born1955

Clarence Thomas

Associate Justice

Appointed byGeorge H.W. Bush Republican
CommissionedOctober 18, 1991
Took the seatOctober 23, 1991
Senate vote52-48
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (1990-1991)
Born1948

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Associate Justice

Appointed byGeorge W. Bush Republican
CommissionedJanuary 31, 2006
Took the seatJanuary 31, 2006
Senate vote58-42
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1990-2006)
Born1950

Sonia Sotomayor

Associate Justice

Appointed byBarack Obama Democratic
CommissionedAugust 6, 2009
Took the seatAugust 8, 2009
Senate vote68-31
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1998-2009)
Born1954

Elena Kagan

Associate Justice

Appointed byBarack Obama Democratic
CommissionedAugust 6, 2010
Took the seatAugust 7, 2010
Senate vote63-37
Prior courtNone (Solicitor General of the United States, 2009-2010)
Born1960

Neil M. Gorsuch

Associate Justice

Appointed byDonald J. Trump Republican
CommissionedApril 8, 2017
Took the seatApril 10, 2017
Senate vote54-45
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (2006-2017)
Born1967

Brett M. Kavanaugh

Associate Justice

Appointed byDonald J. Trump Republican
CommissionedOctober 6, 2018
Took the seatOctober 6, 2018
Senate vote50-48
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (2006-2018)
Born1965

Amy Coney Barrett

Associate Justice

Appointed byDonald J. Trump Republican
CommissionedOctober 26, 2020
Took the seatOctober 27, 2020
Senate vote52-48
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (2017-2020)
Born1972

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Associate Justice

Appointed byJoseph R. Biden Democratic
CommissionedApril 8, 2022
Took the seatJune 30, 2022
Senate vote53-47
Prior courtU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (2021-2022)
Born1970

Verified against the Court's biographies on November 8, 2026. Commission dates and Senate votes from the Federal Judicial Center.

October Term 2026: opinions

Per curiam 2

Date Case Docket Opinion by Citation
Mullin v. Friends of the Ruidosa ChurchThe District Court lacked jurisdiction under §102(c)(2)(A) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to adjudicate respondents’ claim that the Secretary of Homeland Security exceeded his statutory authority in waiving legal requirements for border-barrier construction, because invocation of the major-questions doctrine does not transform a statutory claim into a constitutional one. 26A560 Per curiam 610/1
FCC v. BrownThe Fourth Circuit’s mandamus order requiring the Federal Communications Commission to resolve an application for review within 48 hours of its entry is stayed because the order improperly interferes with the Commission’s discretion to determine the timing and procedures of its deliberative process. 26A476 Per curiam 610/1

Slip opinions as posted by the Court, including per curiam opinions on applications. "Opinion by" is the author of the opinion of the Court. Links open the Court's PDF.

October Term 2025: opinions

Per curiam 17 Barrett 7 Gorsuch 7 Kavanaugh 6 Roberts 6 Kagan 6 Alito 6 Thomas 6 Sotomayor 6 Jackson 6 Decree 1

Date Case Docket Opinion by Citation
People Not Politicians v. OnderThe Court grants the application for stay, and the prior stay entered by this Court on September 10, 2026, likewise remains in effect pending any further order of this Court lifting that stay. The District Court and Court of Appeals should not enjoin or otherwise prohibit the use of the 2022 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri; the District Court and Court of Appeals should not order or otherwise require Missouri to use the 2025 map in the 2026 congressional election in Missouri. 26A388 Per curiam 609/2
Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women VotersThe Court grants the Government’s application to stay the District Court’s order—which set aside and vacated the Government’s modified Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program and its related notices—pending the disposition of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. 26A308 Per curiam 609/2
National Republican Congressional Committee v. BrownBecause the Fourth Circuit likely lacked jurisdiction to review the Federal Communications Commission’s lowest-unit-charge requirements while the candidates’ application for review remained pending before the Commission and the party committees would otherwise suffer irreparable First Amendment harm, the party committees’ application for a stay is granted. 26A274 Per curiam 609 U.S. 1082
National Park Service v. National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United StatesBecause the government has established that it is likely to prevail in showing that the Trust lacks Article III standing to challenge the East Wing project in federal court, that it would likely suffer irreparable harm without a stay, and that the balance of equities tips in its favor, the injunction entered by the District Court is stayed pending the disposition of the government’s forthcoming petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. 26A203 Per curiam 609 U.S. 1068
Trump v. CaliforniaThe Government’s application to stay the District Court’s injunction in 26A124—which forbids the Government to implement §§2 and 3 of Executive Order No. 14399—is granted; the application for a stay in 26A139 is denied as moot. 26A124 Per curiam 609 U.S. 1032
West Virginia v. B. P. J.Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex; West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by maintaining female sports teams for biological females. 24-43 Kavanaugh 609 U.S. 958
National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Comm’nThe Federal Election Campaign Act’s restrictions on a political party’s spending on campaign activities in coordination with candidates, 52 U. S. C. §30116(d), violates the First Amendment. 24-621 Kavanaugh 609 U.S. 908
Trump v. BarbaraChildren born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. 25-365 Roberts 609/2
Watson v. Republican National CommitteeThe federal election-day statutes—3 U. S. C. §1, 2 U. S. C. §§ 1, 7—do not prevent Mississippi from counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received up to five days thereafter; nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day. 24-1260 Barrett 609 U.S. 672
Chatrie v. United StatesPolice officers conducted a Fourth Amendment search when they acquired Okello Chatrie’s location data from Google because an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his cell-phone location information. 25-112 Kagan 609 U.S. 605
Trump v. CookThe Government’s application to stay the District Court’s order preliminarily enjoining the purported firing of Federal Reserve System Governor Lisa Cook pending the conclusion of litigation over her attempted removal is denied. 25A312 Roberts 609 U.S. 528
Trump v. SlaughterThe Federal Trade Commission’s for-cause removal provision, 15 U. S. C. §41, is contrary to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. 25-332 Roberts 609 U.S. 422
Monsanto v. DurnellThe Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U. S. C. §136v(b), expressly preempts Durnell’s state-law failure-to-warn claim because the claim would require Monsanto to add a cancer warning to its Roundup products’ label. 24-1068 Kavanaugh 609 U.S. 371
Mullin v. DoeSection 1254a(b)(5)(A) bars judicial review of non-constitutional claims related to Temporary Protected Status (TPS); Miot respondents’ equal protection claim—that Haiti’s TPS designation was terminated because of race—is unlikely to succeed because a race-neutral explanation for the Government’s action exists: the current administration opposes the TPS program as it has been implemented in the past and has terminated every TPS designation that has come up for renewal. 25-1083 Alito 609 U.S. 324
Mullin v. Al Otro LadoUnder the Immigration and Nationality Act, an alien “arrives in the United States” for purposes of 8 U. S. C. §§1158(a)(1) and 1225(a) only when the alien crosses the border into the United States; the INA neither entitles an alien standing at the border in Mexico to apply for asylum nor requires an immigration officer to inspect him. 25-5 Alito 609 U.S. 258
Wolford v. LopezHawaii’s law prohibiting licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express authorization violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. 24-1046 Alito 609 U.S. 185
Cisco Systems, Inc. v. DoeCourts may not create new rights of action to remedy violations of international law under the Alien Tort Statute; neither the ATS nor the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 imposes liability for aiding-and-abetting offenses. 24-856 Barrett 609 U.S. 141
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación Cimex, S. A. (Cuba)The Helms-Burton Act, formally known as the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, §301, 110 Stat. 815, 22 U. S. C. §6021 et seq., abrogates the sovereign immunity of Cuban agencies and instrumentalities; plaintiffs who sue Cuban agencies or instrumentalities under the Act need not also satisfy one of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s enumerated exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity. 24-699 Kavanaugh 609 U.S. 108
Landor v. Louisiana Dept of Corrections and Public SafetyState employees may not be held liable in their personal capacities under a Spending Clause statute such as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 unless those individuals have voluntarily and knowingly consented to answer private suits under the statute; the individual defendants in this case did not do so here, so Landor’s case cannot proceed against them. 23-1197 Gorsuch 609 U.S. 59
Pung v. Isabella CountyThe proper baseline for measuring “just compensation” following a fairly conducted tax sale is the auction sale price, not the property’s hypothetical fair market value; Isabella County did not violate the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause by failing to compensate the taxpayer for his property’s fair market value. 25-95 Alito 609 U.S. 30
Blanche v. LauThe Immigration and Nationality Act does not require a border officer to have clear and convincing evidence that a lawful permanent resident has committed a crime involving moral turpitude before deeming the resident an applicant for admission. 25-429 Thomas 609 U.S. 1
McCarthy v. HernandezThe Second Circuit exceeded its authority in holding that Hernandez is entitled to habeas relief under 28 U. S. C. §2254(d)(1); no clearly established federal law required the trial court to instruct the jury about the rule that Justice Kennedy adopted in Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U. S. 600, and the Second Circuit erred in holding otherwise. 25-748 Per curiam 608 U.S. 809
United States v. HemaniProsecution of Ali Hemani under 18 U. S. C. §922(g)(3)—for knowingly possessing a gun in his home while being an unlawful user of a controlled substance—is inconsistent with the Second Amendment. 24-1234 Gorsuch 608 U.S. 772
Hunter v. United StatesAn agreement not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable when it would result in a miscarriage of justice—meaning, when it would leave in place the kind of egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute. 24-1063 Kagan 608 U.S. 713
T. M. v. University of Md. Medical System CorporationThe Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars federal district court jurisdiction over cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and seeking district court review and rejection of those judgments, regardless of whether the state-court judgment remains subject to further review in state appellate proceedings. 25-197 Sotomayor 608 U.S. 668
Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc.To determine whether an omission of a claim in the bankruptcy context was inadvertent or mistaken for purposes of the judicial estoppel doctrine, courts should look to the totality of the circumstances surrounding the omission; the Fifth Circuit erred in narrowing its inquiry in this case to whether the debtor had knowledge of the underlying facts or a potential motive to conceal the claim. 25-6 Jackson 608 U.S. 647
FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd.Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act does not impliedly empower private parties to sue for rescission of contracts that allegedly violate the Act. 24-345 Barrett 608 U.S. 608
Abouammo v. United StatesA defendant charged with knowingly falsifying a document with the intent to obstruct a federal investigation in violation of 18 U. S. C. §1519 must be tried in the district where the falsification occurred; the defendant cannot be tried in a different district where the investigation was located because no “conduct constituting the offense” happened there. 25-5146 Kagan 608 U.S. 597
Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc.Amarin has failed to state a claim for actively inducing infringement of its brand-name drug’s patented uses in violation of 35 U. S. C. §271(b), so its complaint cannot withstand Hikma’s motion to dismiss. 24-889 Jackson 608 U.S. 580
Sripetch v. SECA showing of pecuniary loss to investors is not required before the SEC may obtain a disgorgement award under 15 U. S. C. §78u(d)(5) or §78u(d)(7). 25-466 Gorsuch 608 U.S. 555
FCC v. AT&TBecause forfeiture orders issued under 47 U. S. C. §503(b)(4) do not definitively resolve the parties’ legal obligations, and the FCC’s factual findings in its forfeiture proceedings are not conclusive, it does not violate the Seventh Amendment for the FCC to issue forfeiture orders without the involvement of a jury. 25-406 Roberts 608 U.S. 531
Allen v. MilliganThe applications for stay presented to JUSTICE THOMAS and by him referred to the Court are granted; at this preliminary stage, the State has shown that it is entitled to interim relief from the District Court’s injunction. 25A1314 Per curiam 608 U.S. 511
Whitton v. DixonThe Court of Appeals erred in considering post-trial DNA evidence when assessing whether the Florida Supreme Court reasonably determined that jailhouse informant Ozio’s testimony was immaterial to the jury’s verdict, because evidence not presented to the jury could not have influenced the jury’s verdict and therefore sheds no light on whether Ozio’s testimony influenced that verdict. 25-580 Per curiam 608 U.S. 493
Rutherford v. United StatesWhen Congress declines to make a sentencing amendment retroactive—as with the change to 18 U. S. C. §924(c)—the resulting sentencing disparity cannot serve as an “extraordinary and compelling” reason that warrants a sentence reduction under §3582(c)(1)(A)(i). 24-820 Barrett 608 U.S. 454
Fernandez v. United StatesA prisoner who collaterally attacks the validity of his conviction must proceed through 28 U. S. C. §2255, not 18 U. S. C. §3582; the supposed invalidity of a conviction is not among the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that justify compassionate release. 24-556 Barrett 608 U.S. 411
Pitchford v. CainIn Pitchford’s direct appeal of a capital murder sentence, the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably applied the clearly established precedents of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 79, to determine that Pitchford waived his opportunity to rebut the prosecutor’s asserted race-neutral reasons for the peremptory strikes of four black prospective jurors. 24-7351 Kavanaugh 608 U.S. 391
Flowers Foods, Inc. v. BrockThe Federal Arbitration Act’s exemption from compelled arbitration for workers “engaged in . . . interstate commerce,” 9 U. S. C. §1, can apply to a worker who transports goods on an intrastate leg of an interstate journey and who does not cross state lines or interact with vehicles that do. 24-935 Gorsuch 608 U.S. 380
Margolin v. NAIJThe Fourth Circuit’s decision to vacate and remand based on an issue the parties had not raised in the District Court violated the principle of party presentation, and its judgment is reversed. 25-767 Per curiam 608 U.S. 339
Texas v. New Mexico 141, Orig. Decree 608 U.S. 346
Hamm v. SmithCertiorari dismissed as improvidently granted. 24-872 Per curiam 608 U.S 278
M & K Employee Solutions, Inc. v. Trustees of IAM Nat. PensionThe provisions of ERISA governing the calculation of withdrawal liability from an underfunded Multiemployer Pension Plan— i.e., the withdrawing employer’s share of the plan’s unfunded vested benefits—do not require that actuarial assumptions underlying the calculation be selected on or before the statutory measurement date. 29 U. S. C. §§1391, 1393. 23-1209 Jackson 608 U.S. 264
Havana Docks Corp. v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.In action filed by the Havana Docks Corporation pursuant to Title III of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, 22 U. S. C. §6021 et seq., related to its property interest in the operation of docks at the Port of Havana, respondent cruise lines’ use of the docks is sufficient to establish that they used “property which was confiscated by the Cuban Government;” Havana Docks is not required to establish that the cruise lines “trafficked” in Havana Dock’s property interest. 24-983 Thomas 608 U.S. 235
Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLCA claim that one company negligently hired another to transport goods is not preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act because States retain authority to regulate safety “with respect to motor vehicles” under the Act. 49 U. S. C. §14501(c)(2)(A). 24-1238 Barrett 608 U.S. 219
Jules v. Andre Balazs PropertiesA federal court that has previously stayed claims in a pending action under §3 of the Federal Arbitration Act has jurisdiction to confirm or vacate a resulting arbitral award on those claims as prescribed in §9 and §10 of the Act. 25-83 Sotomayor 608 U.S. 200
First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. DavenportIn a 42 U. S. C. §1983 suit challenging a subpoena issued by the New Jersey Attorney General demanding documents and donor information, First Choice has established a present injury to its First Amendment associational rights sufficient to confer Article III standing. 24-781 Gorsuch 608 U.S. 174
Louisiana v. CallaisBecause the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 52 U. S. C. §10301 et seq., did not require Louisiana to create an additional majority-minority district, no compelling interest justified the State’s use of race in creating SB8, and that map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. 24-109 Alito 608 U.S. 85
Enbridge Energy, LP v. NesselBecause 28 U. S. C. §1446(b)(1)’s text, structure, and context are inconsistent with equitable tolling, Enbridge’s removal of the case to federal court outside the statute’s 30-day deadline was untimely. 24-783 Sotomayor 608 U.S. 67
Hencely v. Fluor Corp.The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit erred in finding Winston Hencely’s state-law tort claims preempted where the Federal Government neither ordered nor authorized Fluor Corporation’s challenged conduct. 24-924 Thomas 608 U.S. 31
District of Columbia v. R.W.Because Officer Vanterpool clearly had reasonable suspicion to stop R. W., the judgment of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded. 25-248 Per curiam 608 U.S. 22
Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines ParishChevron has plausibly alleged a close relationship between its challenged crude-oil production and the performance of its federal aviation gas refining duties and has therefore satisfied the “relating to” requirement of the federal officer removal statute, 28 U. S. C. §1442(a)(1). 24-813 Thomas 608 U.S. 1
Chiles v. SalazarColorado’s law banning conversion therapy, as applied to petitioner’s talk therapy, regulates speech based on viewpoint, and the lower courts erred by failing to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny. 24-539 Gorsuch 607 U.S. 627
Rico v. United StatesThe Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 does not authorize a rule automatically extending a defendant’s term of supervised release when the defendant fails to report to a probation officer. 24-1056 Gorsuch 607 U.S. 609
Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music EntertainmentInternet service provider Cox Communications neither induced its users’ infringement of copyrighted works nor provided a service tailored to infringement, and accordingly Cox is not contributorily liable for the infringement of Sony’s copyrights. 24-171 Thomas 607 U.S. 583
Zorn v. LintonBecause the Second Circuit failed to identify a case where an officer using a routine wristlock on a protester after issuing a verbal warning, without more, was held to have violated the Constitution, Sergeant Jacob Zorn was entitled to qualified immunity; the Second Circuit’s contrary conclusion was erroneous. 25-297 Per curiam 607 U.S. 568
Olivier v. City of BrandonPetitioner Gabriel Olivier’s suit seeking purely prospective relief—an injunction stopping officials from enforcing an ordinance in the future—can proceed, notwithstanding his prior conviction for violating that ordinance; Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U. S. 477 (1994), does not hold otherwise. 24-993 Kagan 607 U.S. 552
Urias-Orellana v. BondiThe Immigration and Nationality Act requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ agency’s determination whether a given set of undisputed facts rises to the level of persecution under 8 U. S. C. §1101(a)(42)(A). 24-777 Jackson 607 U.S. 537
Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp.The New Jersey Transit Corporation is not an arm of the State of New Jersey and thus is not entitled to share in New Jersey’s interstate sovereign immunity. 24-1021 Sotomayor 607 U.S. 509
Mirabelli v. BontaThe application filed by parents and teachers to vacate the Ninth Circuit’s stay of the District Court’s injunction pending appeal is granted as to the parents under the four-factor test in Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs., 594 U. S. 758, 763 (2021) (per curiam). 25A810 Per curiam 607 U.S. 492
Villarreal v. TexasA trial court’s qualified conferral order that prohibits only discussion of the defendant’s testimony for its own sake during a midtestimony overnight recess permissibly balances the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel against the burden of offering unaltered trial testimony and does not violate the Constitution. 24-557 Jackson 607 U.S. 465
Geo Group, Inc. v. MenocalBecause the Court’s decision in Yearsley v. W. A. Ross Constr. Co., 309 U. S. 18 (1940), provides federal contractors a potential merits defense rather than an immunity from suit, a pretrial order denying Yearsley protection is not immediately appealable. 24-758 Kagan 607 U.S. 438
Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. PalmquistBecause the District Court’s erroneous dismissal of Whole Foods Market did not cure the jurisdictional defect that existed when this case was removed to federal court, the Fifth Circuit correctly vacated the judgment in favor of Hain Celestial Group. 24-724 Sotomayor 607 U.S. 421
Postal Service v. KonanThe United States retains sovereign immunity for claims arising out of the intentional nondelivery of mail because both “miscarriage” and “loss” of mail under the Federal Tort Claims Act’s postal exception, 28 U. S. C. §2680(b), can occur as a result of the Postal Service’s intentional failure to deliver the mail. 24-351 Thomas 607 U.S. 391
Learning Resources, Inc. v. TrumpThe International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 91 Stat. 1626, does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. 24-1287 Roberts 607 U.S. 229
Klein v. MartinBecause the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the award of a new trial based on reasoning that departed from the strict standards that govern the grant of federal habeas relief to prisoners convicted in state court prescribed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, the Court grants the State’s petition for a writ of certiorari and reverses the judgment below. 25-51 Per curiam 607 U.S. 213
Berk v. ChoyDelaware law requiring a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice to provide an affidavit from a medical professional attesting to the suit’s merit, Del. Code, Tit. 18, §6853(a)(1), conflicts with a valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and does not apply in federal court. 24-440 Barrett 607 U.S. 187
Ellingburg v. United StatesRestitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 is criminal punishment for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause. 24-482 Kavanaugh 607 U.S. 163
Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. BurtonFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1)’s reasonable-time limit applies to a motion alleging that a judgment is void under Rule 60(b)(4). 24-808 Alito 607 U.S. 155
Barrett v. United StatesCongress did not clearly authorize convictions under both 18 U. S. C. §§924(c)(1)(A)(i) and (j) for a single act that violates both provisions—therefore, one act that violates both may spawn only one conviction; the part of the Second Circuit’s judgment that held otherwise is reversed. 24-5774 Jackson 607 U.S. 128
Case v. MontanaUnder the standard set in Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U. S. 398, 400, the Fourth Amendment allows police officers to enter a home without a warrant if they have an “objectively reasonable basis for believing” that someone inside needs emergency assistance; that standard was met here. 24-624 Kagan 607 U.S. 107
Bost v. Illinois Bd. of ElectionsAs a candidate for office, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the rules that govern the counting of votes in his election. 24-568 Roberts 607 U.S. 71
Bowe v. United StatesTitle 28 U. S. C. §2244(b)(3)(E) does not bar this Court’s review of a federal prisoner’s request to file a second or successive §2255 motion for postconviction relief, and §2244(b)(1) does not apply to second or successive motions filed under §2255(h) by federal prisoners challenging their convictions or sentences. 24-5438 Sotomayor 607 U.S. 13
Doe v. Dynamic Physical Therapy, LLCBecause a State lacks the power to confer immunity from federal causes of action, the Louisiana Court of Appeal’s judgment that a plaintiff’s federal claims are barred by a Louisiana statute immunizing health care providers from civil liability during public health emergencies is reversed. 25-180 Per curiam 607 U.S. 11
Clark v. SweeneyThe Fourth Circuit departed from the principle of party presentation and abused its discretion in granting a new trial. 25-52 Per curiam 607 U.S. 7
Pitts v. MississippiA defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to meet his accusers face to face may not be denied without case-specific findings of necessity, notwithstanding Mississippi’s right-to-screening statute, Miss. Code Ann. §99–43–101(2)(g). 24-1159 Per curiam 607 U.S. 1

Slip opinions as posted by the Court, including per curiam opinions on applications. "Opinion by" is the author of the opinion of the Court. Links open the Court's PDF.

Sources: Supreme Court of the United States, Supreme Court of the United States, Federal Judicial Center. Updated November 9, 2026.