Skip to main content

Supreme Court Case TrackerThe Court, in plain English

Find a case
Topics

Home
Cases
October Term 2024 (2024–2025)
Page 2

By term

October Term 2024 (2024–2025)

October Term 2024·62 cases·Page 2

All cases
Latest updates
Upcoming arguments
Awaiting decision
Recent decisions
OT 2026

Before Arguments
Awaiting Decision
Decided
Dismissed

Supreme Court Case Tracker

The Supreme Court, with the doors open.

supremecourtcasetracker.com

Find a case
Topics
Glossary
About
Methodology
Contact
Privacy
Terms
Accessibility

Independent, unofficial, and ad-free. Not affiliated with the Supreme Court of the United States.

AI-generated illustrations are labeled where they appear.

© 2026 Odin LLC

Search

49–62 of 62 cases · October Term 2024 · by latest update

PreviousPage 2 of 2Next

StatusCaseDateDocket

DecidedWho can challenge EV rulesDiamond Alternative Energy, LLC, et al., Petitioners v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.The Supreme Court ruled that fuel producers have Article III standing to challenge EPA-approved California regulations requiring more electric vehicles, finding that the producers sufficiently demonstrated that invalidating the rules would likely redress their economic injuries. The decision reversed a lower court holding that the producers failed to prove automakers would manufacture fewer electric vehicles in the absence of the regulations.Decided Jun 20, 202524-7 DecidedDisability rights after retirementKaryn D. Stanley, Petitioner v. City of Sanford, FloridaThis case addressed whether a retired firefighter could sue her former employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for reducing her post-retirement health benefits. The Supreme Court ruled that the ADA's protections apply only to individuals who currently hold or desire a job, not to former employees who have already retired.Decided Jun 20, 202523-997 DecidedDeath row DNA testingRuben Gutierrez, Petitioner v. Luis Saenz, et al.The Supreme Court ruled that a Texas death-row inmate has legal standing to sue state officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to challenge the constitutionality of state laws restricting post-conviction DNA testing. The decision reversed a lower court ruling that had found the inmate's injury was not redressable because a favorable judgment might not guarantee access to the evidence.Decided Jun 26, 202523-7809 DecidedChoice of Medicaid providersEunice Medina, Director, South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Petitioner v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, et al.The Supreme Court held that the Medicaid Act's "any qualified provider" provision does not create a private right enforceable by beneficiaries under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court ruled that the statute addresses state duties rather than unambiguously conferring individual rights, meaning beneficiaries cannot sue states to enforce their choice of a specific medical provider.Decided Jun 26, 202523-1275 DecidedImmigration appeal deadlinesPierre Yassue Nashun Riley, Petitioner v. Pamela Bondi, Attorney GeneralThe Supreme Court ruled that the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review of a removal order is a mandatory claims-processing rule rather than a jurisdictional requirement, meaning it can be waived or forfeited. The Court also determined that a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying Convention Against Torture relief in a withholding-only proceeding does not constitute a final order of removal for triggering this deadline.Decided Jun 26, 202523-1270 DecidedSentence reductions after resentencingTony R. Hewitt, Petitioner v. United StatesThe Supreme Court ruled that the First Step Act's reduced sentencing penalties apply to defendants whose original sentences were imposed before the Act's enactment but were later vacated and required resentencing after the Act took effect. The Court determined that a vacated sentence is not considered to have been "imposed" for the purposes of the statute, allowing these defendants to benefit from the newer, more lenient laws.Decided Jun 26, 202523-1002 DecidedCourts blocking policies nationwideDonald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Applicants v. CASA, Inc., et al.This case addresses whether federal district courts possess the equitable authority to issue universal injunctions that block the enforcement of executive orders against non-parties nationwide. The Supreme Court held that such broad relief likely exceeds the traditional equitable powers granted to federal courts under the Judiciary Act of 1789.Decided Jun 27, 202524A884 DecidedHealth task force appointmentsRobert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al., Petitioners v. Braidwood Management, Inc., et al.The Court considered whether the structure of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, whose members determine mandatory insurance coverage for preventive care, violates the Constitution's Appointments Clause. The Court held that the Task Force members are inferior officers properly appointed and supervised by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, reversing the lower court's decision.Decided Jun 27, 202524-316 DecidedAge checks on porn sitesFree Speech Coalition, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of TexasThe Supreme Court upheld a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of users, ruling that the requirement is subject to intermediate scrutiny rather than strict scrutiny. The Court found that the law constitutionally balances the state's interest in protecting minors from harmful content with the incidental burden placed on adults' access to protected speech.Decided Jun 27, 202523-1122 DecidedFCC power to collect service feesFederal Communications Commission, et al., Petitioners v. Consumers' Research, et al.The Supreme Court ruled that Congress did not violate the nondelegation doctrine by authorizing the FCC to collect contributions for the Universal Service Fund, nor did the FCC violate the Constitution by using a private administrator to assist with those collections. The Court found that the statutory scheme provided sufficient guidance to constrain the agency's discretion and that the FCC retained ultimate authority over the private administrator.Decided Jun 27, 202524-354 DecidedReligious opt-outs in schoolsTamer Mahmoud, et al., Petitioners v. Thomas W. Taylor, et al.Parents sued a Maryland school board for eliminating the ability to opt their elementary-aged children out of curriculum featuring LGBTQ+ storybooks, arguing the mandatory instruction violated their religious rights. The Supreme Court held that the no-opt-out policy unconstitutionally burdened the parents' free exercise of religion by substantially interfering with their ability to guide their children's religious development.Decided Jun 27, 202524-297 DecidedArrests for protected speechHoward Goldey, Associate Warden, et al., Petitioners v. Andrew Fields, III, et al.The Supreme Court reversed a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Goldey v. Fields and sent the case back to lower courts for further review. The Court found this case was meaningfully different from previous cases where it had recognized certain legal principles.Decided Jun 30, 202524-809 DecidedEdgardo Esteras, Petitioner v. United StatesThe Supreme Court ruled that when a district court decides whether to revoke a defendant's supervised release and impose a prison sentence, it cannot consider retributive factors such as the seriousness of the offense or the need for just punishment. The Court held that the relevant statute explicitly excludes these specific sentencing factors, emphasizing that supervised release is intended for rehabilitation rather than additional punishment for the original crime.Decided Jun 20, 202523-7483 DecidedRoyal Canin U.S.A., Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Anastasia Wullschleger, et al.The Supreme Court ruled that when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims after a case has been moved to federal court, the federal court loses jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims. The Court held that jurisdiction is determined by the amended complaint, meaning the case must be sent back to state court once the federal questions are gone.Decided Jan 15, 202523-677

1
2

Next

Search

Search by case name, topic, or docket number.