SCOTUStoday for Tuesday, February 24

On Monday, the Supreme Court announced that it will hear argument next term in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, on whether Boulder, Colorado, can hold oil and gas companies liable under state law for damage caused by climate change. For more on this case and Monday’s order list, see Amy’s coverage in the On Site section below.

Also on Monday, the court heard arguments in Havana Docks Corporation v. Royal Caribbean Cruises and Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación Cimex, S.A., two cases brought by U.S. businesses that are seeking to recover losses they suffered when Cuba’s communist government came to power and seized their assets more than 65 years ago.

As noted above, the court has indicated that it may announce opinions this morning at 10 a.m. EST. We will be live blogging beginning at 9:30.

After the possible announcement of opinions, the court will hear argument in Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel, on whether district courts are authorized to extend the 30-day deadline for a defendant to move to remove a case to federal court.

The court also may announce opinions tomorrow morning. We will be live blogging then, as well.

President Donald Trump on Monday posted again about the tariffs ruling on his Truth Social account, describing the Supreme Court as “incompetent” and predicting that it may also rule against him in the birthright citizenship case, according to The Hill. “The next thing you know they will rule in favor of China and others, who are making an absolute fortune on Birthright Citizenship, by saying the 14th Amendment was NOT written to take care of the ‘babies of slaves,’ which it was as proven by the EXACT TIMING of its construction, filing, and ratification, which perfectly coincided with the END OF THE CIVIL WAR,” Trump wrote. He continued, “Let our supreme court keep making decisions that are so bad and deleterious to the future of our Nation – I have a job to do. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Over the weekend, the Trump administration began rebuilding its system of tariffs using Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, “which allows the president to impose temporary tariffs as a response to economic instability,” according to Courthouse News Service. Section 122 tariffs, however, expire after “150 days unless Congress approves an extension,” and “Senate Democrats said Monday they would block any effort to” approve such an extension, “effectively dooming the White House’s latest set of import duties to expire this summer.” “Thanks to the Senate filibuster, Republicans would likely need a handful of Democratic votes to pass any legislation aimed at extending the Section 122 tariffs.”

In its Monday order list, the court announced that it had declined “to revive the National Rifle Association’s lawsuit accusing a former New York state official of coercing banks and insurers to avoid doing business with the gun rights group,” according to Reuters. “The justices in 2024 had reinstated the group’s lawsuit accusing Maria Vullo, the former superintendent of New York’s Department of Financial Services, of violating its free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. But they declined to do so a second time after a lower court again dismissed the lawsuit,” holding that “Vullo was immune from the NRA’s claims.”

In June, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of parents who had challenged their school district’s refusal to allow them to opt their children out of instruction that included LGBTQ+ themes. On Friday, the group’s legal team announced that a district judge has ordered “Montgomery County Public Schools [to] pay $1.5 million to the families,” according to The Baltimore Banner. The order also instructs the school board to “notify families in advance when the schools plan to use one of the books at the heart of the case — or any similar book — in a lesson.”

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on Friday “lifted an order that had stopped” Louisiana from enforcing its law requiring displays of the Ten Commandments in public-school classrooms, according to The Times-Picayune. The ruling did not address “the constitutionality of the law. Instead, the majority said it is too soon to block the law on constitutional grounds because there are many ‘unresolved’ questions, such as what the Ten Commandments posters will look like, how prominently they will be displayed and whether teachers will incorporate them into their lessons.” The multifaith group of families that challenged the law on religious freedom grounds have said they are considering whether to appeal the 5th Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court.