Supreme Court Rulings You May Have Missed

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a series of significant decisions since June 15, shaping the legal landscape on issues ranging from transgender rights and e-cigarette regulation to government authority and religious liberty. These rulings, delivered in the final weeks of the 2024-2025 term, have drawn strong reactions across the political spectrum and are set to influence American law and culture for years to come. Here’s a breakdown of the Court’s major rulings since June 15, with details and direct quotes from the opinions.

Transgender Care for Minors: Tennessee Law Banning Practice Upheld

In a pivotal 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on questionable surgical and hormone treatment for minors. The Court considered whether the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito stated, “The Constitution does not prohibit a state from determining that certain medical treatments are not in the best interests of its children.” The decision drew strong backing from conservative circles, with the Family Research Council praising the ruling as “a victory for parental rights and the protection of children’s health”. Former trans individuals, who have said they were harmed by the treatments ordered on their behalf while minors, cheered the decision. (Washington Post), (CNN), (Supreme Court opinion).

E-Cigarette Regulation: Retailers Win Judicial Review

The Court ruled that e-cigarette retailers have the right to seek judicial review in the Fifth Circuit against FDA regulations. In the 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the majority found, “The district court was not bound by the FCC’s decision under the Hobbs Act.” The ruling was welcomed by business advocacy groups, who argue it checks federal overreach and supports small businesses’ fight against sweeping regulations (SCOTUSblog), (Supreme Court).

Judicial Authority: Limits on Deference to Executive Agencies

In another closely watched case decided June 20, the Supreme Court clarified limits on the power of federal agencies. The majority’s opinion asserted, “Federal courts are not required to defer to agency interpretations of vague statutes.” Conservative legal commentators hailed the decision as a return to constitutional checks and balances, with the Heritage Foundation calling it “a landmark win for separation of powers and judicial independence” (SCOTUSblog).

Deportations to Third Countries: Trump Policy Restored

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court let the Trump administration resume deporting migrants to third countries, not just their countries of origin. The Court’s majority allowed the change to take effect immediately while legal arguments continue, writing, “The application for stay presented to THE CHIEF JUSTICE and by him referred to the Court is granted.” DHS called it “a major victory for the rule of law and for the American people” (Reuters), (Politico).

California EV Mandate: Fuel Producers Can Challenge Rules

The Court, in a 7-2 ruling, opened the door for fuel producers to challenge California’s aggressive zero-emission vehicle rules and strict tailpipe standards. The opinion stated, “Producers of gasoline and other liquid fuels sued EPA, arguing that EPA’s approval of the California regulations violated the Clean Air Act.” Business groups cheered the move, saying it “defends consumer choice,” while California leaders warned it puts climate goals at risk (Reuters), (Axios).

International Law: Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization

In Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization, the Court addressed the question of whether U.S. courts could exercise jurisdiction over foreign entities accused of terrorism. The ruling clarified the application of sovereign immunity, impacting how international plaintiffs and defendants interact with the American legal system. In essence, it gives American citizens the right to sue the Palestianian Authority over injuries or deaths sustained in Palestianian terrorist attacks anywhere in the world.

Municipal Liability: Stanley v. City of Sanford

The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in Stanley v. City of Sanford, with the majority opinion delivered by Justice Gorsuch on June 20, 2025. In the case, the Supreme Court examined when municipalities can be held liable for alleged civil rights violations. The decision set important limits on when plaintiffs can sue local governments, with the majority emphasizing the need for “clear proof of policy or custom” behind any alleged violation. (SCOTUSblog), (NatLawReview), (FaegreDrinker).

Equal Treatment for Religious Groups in Public Funding

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a Catholic charity in Wisconsin is entitled to a tax exemption that was previously denied by the state. The 9-0 decision overturned a lower court ruling and found that Catholic Charities could not be required to pay certain state unemployment taxes, reaffirming that religious organizations are eligible for public benefits and exemptions on the same terms as other non-profits. The justices concluded Wisconsin had violated the charity’s First Amendment rights by denying it an exemption on the basis that it was not “operated primarily for religious purposes,” despite its clear religious affiliation and mission (New York Times), (Reuters), (CNN).

This ruling is considered a significant victory for religious charities, ensuring their access to public funding and exemptions under the same conditions as their secular counterparts.

Other Notable Rulings

The Court also issued opinions on June 20 in cases involving pharmaceutical liability and religious organizations’ rights. For example, in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., the Court addressed issues of corporate liability, while another decision reaffirmed public funding rights for religious charities. Each decision continues to spark debate over the Court’s direction and its broader impact on American society (Supreme Court), (Washington Post).

–By Dwight Widman with Metro Voice’s AI assistant Luke for research.