Cases compared
N. R. v. Keith M. Ellison, Attorney General of Minnesota vs. Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio vs. Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
Civil Rights cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
No. 25-1287No. 25-1361No. 25-183
Side by side
| Fact | N. R. v. Keith M. Ellison, Attorney General of Minnesota | Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio | Thomas Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | 25-1287 | 25-1361 | 25-183 |
| Status | Before Arguments | Before Arguments | Before Arguments |
| Date | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | Argued Nov 30, 2026 |
| Question presented | 1. Whether this Court lacks jurisdiction because the decision below rests on adequate and independent state law grounds. 2. Whether Petitioners lack standing to challenge ICWA and MIFPA’s placement preference s for extended family members because otherwise applicable Minnesota law also grants the twins’ extended family members placement prefer-ence over Petitioners. 3. Whether the Juvenile C ourt’s consideration of Petitioners’ challenge to ICWA and MIFPA as part of the permissive-intervention analysis comported with the First Amendment and due process, when Petitioners had no legally pro-tected stake in the juvenile proceedings, when Petitioners’ challenge was considered only as evidence of Petitioners’ attitude toward the children’s tribal identity, and when the Juve-nile Court had multiple independent grounds for denying permissive intervention. 4. Whether ICWA and MIFPA’s preferences for placement of tribal member children with their extended family members rather than non-relative foster parents — regardless of the race of any potential placement — comports with equal protection. | 1. Whether this Court’s Opinion in Knick, supra, permits a federal cause of action against a municipal entity for an uncompensated physical taking when the municipal entity has materially impaired the value and precluded the alienability of the Petitioners’ property. 2. Whether the actions of the Village in singling out the Petitioners’ property and engaging in concerted actions to prevent its sale at auction are sufficient to state a claim for violation of Petitioners’ rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. | Whether Title IX provides employees of federally funded educational institutions a private right of action to sue for sex discrimination in employment. |
| Summary | Former foster parents of two children covered by the Indian Child Welfare Act challenge Minnesota child-placement decisions that applied federal and state Indian-child placement preferences. They argue that the preferences violate equal protection and that they should be allowed to pursue that challenge in the children’s case; the Supreme Court has not yet decided the petition. | Steve and Tim Snyder ask the Supreme Court to review the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in their dispute with the Village of Luckey, Ohio. They contend that the Village impaired their property’s value and blocked its auction sale, amounting to an uncompensated taking and violations of due process and equal protection. | The Court will decide whether Title IX’s ban on sex discrimination by federally funded schools lets employees sue their educational employers for sex discrimination. The case arises from claims by former Georgia Tech women’s basketball coach MaChelle Joseph that the university treated her program less favorably than the men’s program and later terminated her employment. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Civil Rights
- Why compared
- Reviewed Civil Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.