List of pending United States Supreme Court cases

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a list of cases before the United States Supreme Court that the Court has agreed to hear and has not yet decided.[1][2][3]

Future argument dates are in parentheses; arguments in these cases have been scheduled, but have not, and potentially may not, take place.

Case Docket no. Question(s) presented Certiorari granted Oral argument
American Hospital Association v. Becerra 20-1114 (1) Whether Chevron deference permits the United States Department of Health and Human Services to set reimbursement rates based on acquisition cost and vary such rates by hospital group if it has not collected adequate hospital acquisition cost survey data; and
(2) whether petitioners’ suit challenging HHS’s adjustments is precluded by 42 U.S.C. § 1395l(t)(12). 		July 2, 2021 November 30, 2021
Arizona v. City and County of San Francisco, California 20-1775 Whether States with interests should be permitted to intervene to defend a rule when the United States ceases to defend. October 29, 2021 (February 23, 2022)
20-480 Is a civil-service pension payment based on dual-status military technician service to the National Guard a payment based wholly on service as a member of a uniformed service? March 1, 2021 October 13, 2021
Badgerow v. Walters 20-1143 Whether federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under Sections 9 and 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act where the only basis for jurisdiction is that the underlying dispute involved a federal question. May 17, 2021 November 2, 2021
20-1312 Whether, for purposes of calculating additional payment for hospitals that serve a “significantly disproportionate number of low-income patients,” the Secretary of Health and Human Services has permissibly included in a hospital’s Medicare fraction all of the hospital’s patient days of individuals who satisfy the requirements to be entitled to Medicare Part A benefits, regardless of whether Medicare paid the hospital for those particular days. July 2, 2021 November 29, 2021
Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP 21-248 (1) Whether a state agent authorized by state law to defend the State's interest in litigation must overcome a presumption of adequate representation to intervene as of right in a case in which a state official is a defendant; and
(2) whether a district court's determination of adequate representation in ruling on a motion to intervene as of right is reviewed de novo or for abuse of discretion; and
(3) whether Petitioners are entitled to intervene as of right in this litigation. 		November 24, 2021
Biden v. Missouri 21A240
21A241 		Whether the Supreme Court should stay, pending appeal, district court injunctions prohibiting enforcement of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services COVID-19 vaccination mandate for healthcare workers. December 22, 2021 (January 7, 2022)
20-1472 Whether the time limit in Section 6330(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code is a jurisdictional requirement or a claim-processing rule subject to equitable tolling. September 30, 2021 (January 12, 2022)
Brown v. Davenport 20-826 May a federal habeas court grant relief based solely on its conclusion that the Brecht v. Abrahamson test is satisfied, as the Sixth Circuit held, or must the court also find that the state court's Chapman v. California application was unreasonable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), as the Second, Third, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits have held? April 5, 2021 October 5, 2021
Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center, P.S.C. 20-601 Whether a state attorney general vested with the power to defend state law should be permitted to intervene after a federal court of appeals invalidates a state statute when no other state actor will defend the law. March 29, 2021 October 12, 2021
Carson v. Makin 20-1088 Whether a state violates the religion clauses or equal protection clause of the United States Constitution by prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or "sectarian," instruction. July 2, 2021 December 8, 2021
20-1566 Whether a federal court hearing state law claims brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act must apply the forum state’s choice-of-law rules to determine what substantive law governs the claims at issue, or whether it may apply federal common law. September 30, 2021 (January 18, 2022)
City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, Inc. 20-1029 Whether the Austin city code’s distinction between on-premise signs, which may be digitized, and off-premise signs, which may not, is a facially unconstitutional content-based regulation under Reed v. Town of Gilbert. June 28, 2021 November 10, 2021
20-1650 Whether, when deciding if it should "impose a reduced sentence" on an individual under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, 21 U.S.C. § 841 note, a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments. September 30, 2021 (January 19, 2022)
20-219 Whether the compensatory damages available under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the statutes that incorporate its remedies for victims of discrimination, such as the Rehabilitation Act and the Affordable Care Act, include compensation for emotional distress. July 2, 2021 November 30, 2021
20-7622 Is the Court of Indian Offenses of Ute Mountain Ute Agency a federal agency such that Merle Denezpi's conviction in that court barred his subsequent prosecution in a United States District Court for a crime arising out of the same incident? October 18, 2021 (February 22, 2022)
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization 19-1392 Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional. May 17, 2021 December 1, 2021
Egbert v. Boule 21-147 (1) Whether a cause of action exists under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents for First Amendment retaliation claims; and
(2) whether a cause of action exists under Bivens for claims against federal officers engaged in immigration-related functions for allegedly violating a plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights. 		November 5, 2021 (March 2, 2022)
Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga 20-828 Whether § 1806(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 displaces the state-secrets privilege and authorizes a district court to resolve, in camera and ex parte, the merits of a lawsuit challenging the lawfulness of government surveillance by considering the privileged evidence. June 7, 2021 November 8, 2021
FEC v. Ted Cruz for Senate 21-12 (1) Whether appellees have standing to challenge the statutory loan-repayment limit in 52 U.S.C. § 30116(j); and
(2) whether the loan-repayment limit violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. 		September 30, 2021 (January 19, 2022)
20-1263 Whether the federal Medicaid Act provides for a state Medicaid program to recover reimbursement for Medicaid’s payment of a beneficiary’s past medical expenses by taking funds from the portion of the beneficiary’s tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses. July 2, 2021 (January 10, 2022)
20-322 (1) Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community; and
(2) whether, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1), the courts below had jurisdiction to grant class-wide injunctive relief. 		August 23, 2021 (January 11, 2022)
20-1034 Whether, upon finding that return to the country of habitual residence places a child at grave risk, a district court is required to consider ameliorative measures that would facilitate the return of the child notwithstanding the grave risk finding. December 10, 2021
20-637 Whether, or under what circumstances, a criminal defendant, whose argumentation or introduction of evidence at trial “opens the door” to the admission of responsive evidence that would otherwise be barred by the rules of evidence, also forfeits his right to exclude evidence otherwise barred by the confrontation clause. April 19, 2021 October 5, 2021
Houston Community College System v. Wilson 20-804 Whether the First Amendment restricts the authority of an elected body to issue a censure resolution in response to a member’s speech? April 26, 2021 November 2, 2021
19-1401 Whether allegations that a defined-contribution retirement plan paid or charged its participants fees that substantially exceeded fees for alternative available investment products or services are sufficient to state a claim against plan fiduciaries for breach of the duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1104(a)(1)(B). July 2, 2021 December 6, 2021
19-896 Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community. August 23, 2021 (January 11, 2022)
20-807 Whether a locomotive is in use on a railroad’s line and subject to the Locomotive Inspection Act (49 U.S.C. § 20701) and its safety regulations when its train makes a temporary stop in a rail yard as part of its unitary journey in interstate commerce, or whether such use does not resume until the locomotive has left the yard as part of a fully assembled train, as held by the Seventh Circuit below, contrary to the decisions of this Court and other circuits. December 15, 2021
20-1641 (1) Congress enacted the Medicare Secondary Payer Act as a means to conserve Medicare resources. Among other things, the Act provides that group health plans may not “take into account” the fact that a plan participant with end stage renal disease is eligible for Medicare benefits. Does a group health plan that provides uniform reimbursement of all dialysis treatments observe that prohibition?; and
(2) Under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, a group health plan also may not “differentiate” between individuals with end stage renal disease and others “in the benefits it provides.” Does a plan that provides the same dialysis benefits to all plan participants, and reimburses dialysis providers uniformly regardless of whether the patient has end stage renal disease, observe that prohibition?; and
(3) Is the Medicare Secondary Payer Act a coordination-of-benefits measure designed to protect Medicare, not an antidiscrimination law designed to protect certain providers from alleged disparate impact of uniform treatment? 		November 5, 2021 (March 1, 2022)
21-328 Does the arbitration-specific requirement that the proponent of a contractual waiver defense prove prejudice violate this Court's instruction in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion that lower courts must "place arbitration agreements on an equal footing with other contracts?" November 15, 2021
National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration 21A244
21A247 		Whether the Supreme Court should stay, pending appeal, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's COVID-19 vaccination mandate for businesses with 100 or more employees. December 22, 2021 (January 7, 2022)
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen 20-843 Whether the State's denial of petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment. April 26, 2021 November 3, 2021
20-979 Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) preserves the jurisdiction of federal courts to review a nondiscretionary determination that a noncitizen is ineligible for certain types of discretionary relief. June 28, 2021 December 6, 2021
Ramirez v. Collier 21-5592 (1) Whether, consistent with the free exercise clause and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, Texas’ decision to allow Ramirez’s pastor to enter the execution chamber, but forbidding the pastor from laying his hands on his parishioner as he dies, substantially burden the exercise of his religion, so as to require Texas to justify the deprivation as the least restrictive means of advancing a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) whether, considering the free exercise clause and RLUIPA, Texas’ decision to allow Ramirez’s pastor to enter the execution chamber, but forbidding the pastor from singing prayers, saying prayers or scripture, or whispering prayers or scripture, substantially burden the exercise of his religion, so as to require Texas to justify the deprivation as the least restrictive means of advancing a compelling governmental interest. 		September 8, 2021 November 9, 2021
20-1410
21-5261 		Petition in 20-1410:
Whether a physician alleged to have prescribed controlled substances outside the usual course of professional practice may be convicted under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) without regard to whether, in good faith, he "reasonably believed" or "subjectively intended" that his prescriptions fall within that course of professional practice.
Petition in 21-5261:
(1) Where the government prosecutes a medical practitioner under the Controlled Substances Act for issuing a prescription outside "the usual course of professional practice," is the government required to prove that the doctor knew or intended that the prescription be outside the scope of professional practice?; and
(2) Does a "good faith" defense in the context of a licensed medical practitioner prosecuted under the Controlled Substances Act protect doctors who have an honest but mistaken belief that they have issued the charged prescription in "the usual course of professional practice;" and, if so, must that belief be objectively reasonable?; and
(3) Should the "usual course of professional practice" and "legitimate medical purposes" prongs of 21 CFR 1306.04(a) be read in the conjunctive or the disjunctive? 		November 5, 2021 (March 1, 2022)
Shinn v. Ramirez 20-1009 Whether application of the equitable rule the Supreme Court announced in Martinez v. Ryan renders the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which precludes a federal court from considering evidence outside the state-court record when reviewing the merits of a claim for habeas relief if a prisoner or his attorney has failed to diligently develop the claim’s factual basis in state court, inapplicable to a federal court’s merits review of a claim for habeas relief. May 17, 2021 December 8, 2021
Shurtleff v. City of Boston 20-1800 (1) Whether the First Circuit’s failure to apply this Court’s forum doctrine to the First Amendment challenge of a private religious organization that was denied access to briefly display its flag on a city flagpole, pursuant to a city policy expressly designating the flagpole a public forum open to all applicants, with hundreds of approvals and no denials, conflicts with this Court’s precedents holding that speech restrictions based on religious viewpoint or content violate the First Amendment or are otherwise subject to strict scrutiny and that the Establishment Clause is not a defense to censorship of private speech in a public forum open to all comers; and
(2) whether the First Circuit’s classifying as government speech the brief display of a private religious organization’s flag on a city flagpole, pursuant to a city policy expressly designating the flagpole a public forum open to all applicants, with hundreds of approvals and no denials, unconstitutionally expands the government speech doctrine, in direct conflict with this Court’s decisions in Matal v. Tam, Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, and Pleasant Grove City v. Summum; and
(3) whether the First Circuit’s finding that the requirement for perfunctory city approval of a proposed brief display of a private religious organization’s flag on a city flagpole, pursuant to a city policy expressly designating the flagpole a public forum open to all applicants with hundreds of approvals and no denials, transforms the religious organization’s private speech into government speech, conflicts with this Court’s precedent in Matal v. Tam, and various circuit precedents. 		September 30, 2021 (January 18, 2022)
Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon 21-309 Whether workers who load or unload goods from vehicles that travel in interstate commerce, but do not physically transport such goods themselves, are interstate "transportation workers" exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act. December 10, 2021
20-659 Whether the rule that a plaintiff must await favorable termination before bringing a Section 1983 action alleging unreasonable seizure pursuant to legal process requires the plaintiff to show that the criminal proceeding against him has "formally ended in a manner not inconsistent with his innocence," as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held in Laskar v. Hurd, or that the proceeding "ended in a manner that affirmatively indicates his innocence," as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit held in Lanning v. City of Glens Falls. March 8, 2021 October 12, 2021
20-603 Whether Congress has the power to authorize suits against non-consenting states pursuant to its War Powers. December 15, 2021
20-915 Did the Ninth Circuit err in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. § 411 requires referral to the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in the subject copyright registration? June 1, 2021 November 8, 2021
20-1459 Whether 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)’s definition of “crime of violence” excludes attempted Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a). July 2, 2021 December 7, 2021
United States v. Tsarnaev 20-443 (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit erred in concluding that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s capital sentences must be vacated on the ground that the district court, during its 21-day voir dire, did not ask each prospective juror for a specific accounting of the pretrial media coverage that he or she had read, heard or seen about Tsarnaev’s case; and
(2) whether the district court committed reversible error at the penalty phase of Tsarnaev’s trial by excluding evidence that Tsarnaev’s older brother was allegedly involved in different crimes two years before the offenses for which Tsarnaev was convicted. 		March 22, 2021 October 13, 2021
United States v. Vaello-Madero 20-303 Whether Congress violated the equal-protection component of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment by establishing Supplemental Security Income—a program that provides benefits to needy aged, blind and disabled individuals—in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and in the Northern Mariana Islands pursuant to a negotiated covenant, but not extending it to Puerto Rico. March 1, 2021 November 9, 2021
United States v. Zubaydah 20-827 Whether the court of appeals erred when it rejected the United States’ assertion of the state-secrets privilege based on the court’s own assessment of potential harms to the national security, and required discovery to proceed further under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) against former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) contractors on matters concerning alleged clandestine CIA activities. April 26, 2021 October 6, 2021
Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana 20-1573 Whether the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcement of a bilateral arbitration agreement providing that an employee cannot raise representative claims, including under the California Private Attorneys General act. December 15, 2021
West Virginia v. EPA 20-1530
20-1531
20-1778
20-1780 		Petition in 20-1530:
In 42 U.S.C. § 7411(d), an ancillary provision of the Clean Air Act, did Congress constitutionally authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to issue significant rules—including those capable of reshaping the nation’s electricity grids and unilaterally decarbonizing virtually any sector of the economy—without any limits on what the agency can require so long as it considers cost, nonair impacts, and energy requirements?
Petition in 20-1531:
Whether 42 U.S.C. § 7411(d), which authorizes the EPA to impose standards "for any existing source" based on limits "achievable through the application of the best system of emission reduction" that has been "adequately demonstrated," grants the EPA authority not only to impose standards based on technology and methods that can be applied at and achieved by that existing source, but also allows the agency to develop industry-wide systems like cap-and-trade regimes.
Petition in 20-1778:
Whether 42 U.S.C. § 7411(d) clearly authorizes EPA to decide such matters of vast economic and political significance as whether and how to restructure the nation’s energy system.
Petition in 20-1780:
Can EPA promulgate regulations for existing stationary sources that require States to apply binding nationwide "performance standards" at a generation-sector-wide level, instead of at the individual source level, and can those regulations deprive States of all implementation and decision making power in creating their Section 111(d) plans? 		October 29, 2021 (February 28, 2022)
20-5279 Did the Sixth Circuit err by expanding the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) in the absence of clear statutory definition with regard to the vague term "committed on occasions different from one another"? February 22, 2021 October 4, 2021
20-493 Whether the Restoration Act provides the Pueblo with sovereign authority to regulate non-prohibited gaming activities on its lands (including bingo), as set forth in the plain language of Section 107(b), the Act's legislative history, and this Court's holding in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, or whether the Fifth Circuit's decision affirming Ysleta I correctly subjects the Pueblo to all Texas gaming regulations. October 18, 2021 (February 22, 2022)
21-401
21-518 		Petition in 21-401:
Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which permits litigants to invoke the authority of United States courts to render assistance in gathering evidence for use in "a foreign or international tribunal," encompasses private commercial arbitral tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fourth and Sixth Circuits have held, or excludes such tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits have held.
Petition in 21-518:
Whether an ad hoc arbitration to resolve a commercial dispute between two parties is a "foreign or international tribunal" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) where the arbitral panel does not exercise any governmental or quasi-governmental authority. 		December 10, 2021

See also[]

References[]

  1. ^ "2021–22 Term". Oyez. Retrieved July 1, 2021.
  2. ^ "Calendars and Lists". www.supremecourt.gov. Retrieved January 8, 2021.
  3. ^ "October Term 2021 Cases for Argument" (PDF). www.supremecourt.gov. Retrieved June 11, 2021.
Retrieved from ""