Some of the disputes are closely linked to Trump, others are issues on the upcoming calendar that could become difficult if the Biden government were to reverse the Trump policy.
While much has changed in Washington, one thing remains the same: the composition of the court – thanks to Trump – is now divided 6-3 along ideological lines. There will always be a significant number of unanimous cases and other cases where foreign bedmates break expectations. But in cases where the public draws the most attention, including abortion, immigration, affirmative action and suffrage, the Conservatives are likely to unite and treat the Biden government very differently than they did the Trump administration.
On Friday morning, the judges held their usual private telephone conference to discuss an impressive series of important cases. On Monday morning, they will announce a list of issues they will take on or reject and also issue at least one opinion.
Trump-Related Issues: Taxes, Twitter, Compensation
As early as October, Trump’s personal advocates came to court with an emergency request: they asked the judges to temporarily block a ruling in the lower court that allows Trump’s tax returns to go to the Manhattan district attorney while the lawsuit unfolds.
Last year in July, a 7-2 court rejected broad claims of immunity from a state summons of its financial documents. The judges sent the case back to the lower courts so that the president’s lawyers can make more purposeful objections about the scope of the requests. After more losses, Trump returned to the judges who said nothing for more than three months.
Trump also faces a challenge to the first amendment to his decision in 2017 to block followers on his Twitter account. The case is complicated by the fact that the former president was banned from Twitter in the waning days of his presidency and that he is no longer in office.
Other disputes concern accusations that Trump is violating the provisions of the Constitution that prevent the president from receiving ‘compensation’ or benefiting from a foreign or domestic government. This stems from the fact that Trump, unlike other presidents, still retained an interest in his businesses and that he let those businesses take money from foreign and domestic governments. Critics have said officials can regularly go to the properties to win the favor of the former president.
Elections
From election day onwards, a request awaits from the Republicans in Pennsylvania who are challenging a ruling in the Supreme Court that allows the votes received up to three days after election day to be counted.
The judges had no appetite for reviewing the last election, but the case offers them the opportunity to investigate issues that could affect future elections, such as the ability of the U.S. Supreme Court to review rulings on state constitutions.
Abortion
The judges have considered a strict abortion law in Mississippi – which has been blocked by lower courts – banning abortion after 15 weeks which critics say violates nearly 50 years of the court’s precedent dating back to Roe v. Wade. Supporters of abortion rights hope the court denies the case, but fear that Amy Coney Barrett’s increase could move the court to the right in the area of abortion rights.
Another case concerns a Trump-era regulation that restricts family planning clinics that receive federal funds to provide referrals for abortion.
Immigration
On immigration, the court faces a challenge brought by state and local officials against the Trump regulation issued in August 2019, making it more difficult for immigrants to obtain legal status than their public benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps and used home evidence. .
Next month, the court is scheduled to hear arguments regarding the financing of Trump’s border wall, as well as its policy ordering non-Mexican asylum seekers to stay in Mexico while awaiting trial in the United States. Biden has already announced reversals in those areas, and it remains to be seen what his Department of Justice is doing in these matters.
And when he was sworn in, Biden promised to act quickly to pass executive action. If past precedent is set, critics of the new president could act quickly to try to block the policy. Such challenges would eventually return to the Supreme Court, a very different court that reviewed programs of the Obama era.
On the day of the inauguration, Jessica Anderson of the Heritage Action for America warned that ‘conservatives are prepared to fight back against the destructive policies of the far left’.