The Supreme Court is in its final sprint toward the end of June, with about 20 argued cases still pending as justices work to meet their self-imposed deadline. Among those remaining decisions are potentially seismic rulings on birthright citizenship, presidential firing power, transgender athletes, mail ballots and temporary protected status (TPS) designations.
Trump administration priorities face key tests at the high court as justices consider executive orders and regulatory changes central to the president's agenda. The pace of decisions mirrors that of this time last term, but the stakes are heightened with several landmark cases queued for release.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative legal scholars and Republican officials argue these cases offer an opportunity to restore proper constitutional interpretation and strengthen executive authority. Supporters of overturning Humphrey's Executor say presidents should have clear authority to remove agency heads who are not performing adequately or whose policies conflict with administration priorities.
On birthright citizenship, conservative advocates maintain that Trump has the legal authority to restrict citizenship for children born to undocumented parents. They argue the 14th Amendment was intended to cover children of lawful permanent residents and citizens, not those who entered the country illegally. "The president's executive order reflects a reasonable interpretation of congressional intent," one administration official stated.
West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey expressed confidence that the court will uphold state transgender athlete bans, telling The Hill he expects an 8-1 or 7-2 ruling in favor of the states. Republican-controlled legislatures in nearly two dozen states have passed similar measures.
The RNC and Trump administration argue federal law clearly defines when elections occur, contending mail ballots must be received by polls close on Election Day. "The text of the statute is unambiguous," attorneys for the RNC wrote at oral arguments, urging justices to enforce what they describe as Congress's intent to establish a clear election-day cutoff.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive groups and Democratic lawmakers argue the pending cases represent existential threats to constitutional protections and vulnerable populations. Civil rights organizations warn that overturning the 1935 Humphrey's Executor precedent would fundamentally alter the balance of power between the executive branch and independent regulatory agencies.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which is challenging transgender athlete bans in Idaho and West Virginia, contends the laws discriminate based on sex and transgender status, violating both the 14th Amendment and Title IX. "These bans target young people simply for being who they are," the ACLU has stated in court filings.
Immigration advocates stress that TPS designations protect nationals of countries experiencing armed conflict or natural disasters from deportation. They argue the Trump administration's termination of 13 of 17 country designations represents an abuse of executive discretion rather than a legitimate policy shift. Democratic senators have called the mass terminations "cruel" and "destabilizing" for hundreds of thousands of families who have built lives in the United States.
On voting rights, Democrats warn that restricting mail ballot acceptance could disenfranchise voters, particularly those in rural areas, military personnel overseas and elderly individuals with mobility limitations. They note that 14 states currently accept ballots arriving after Election Day if postmarked by the deadline.
What the Numbers Show
Trump has terminated TPS designations for 13 of 17 countries that held protected status when he took office. Those affected nations include Haiti and Syria, which are specifically before the Supreme Court in pending litigation. The program provides deportation protections and work authorization to nationals from designated countries experiencing armed conflict, environmental disasters or extraordinary conditions.
The Federal Reserve has become a focal point in the independent agency debate. Even as conservative justices have signaled openness to Trump's arguments regarding other agency heads fired without cause, they noted in an unsigned ruling last year that "the Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity" with historical roots in the First and Second Banks of the United States.
Trump has pointed to mortgage fraud allegations against Fed board member Lisa Cook as valid cause for her removal. Cook denies wrongdoing and has not been criminally charged. The justices could rule she was entitled to a hearing to contest the accusations before termination.
The court is considering whether birthright citizenship can be restricted by executive order, with every lower court judge who has examined the legality finding it violates the 14th Amendment's guarantee. Trump's Truth Social post last month acknowledged uncertainty about the outcome: "that is probably why our Country will lose the Birthright Citizenship Case."
The Bottom Line
The Supreme Court is expected to release opinions Thursday as it races toward its end-of-June deadline. These decisions could reshape presidential power, immigration enforcement, civil rights protections and voting procedures for years to come.
If the justices overturn Humphrey's Executor, it would mark a 91-year shift in how independent regulatory agencies operate, potentially subjecting officials who investigate plane crashes, oversee product recalls and adjudicate federal worker disputes to direct White House control. The Federal Reserve may receive different treatment given its unique structure and historical status.
The birthright citizenship ruling will test whether Trump can fulfill a central campaign promise through executive action alone or must work with Congress for legislative changes. Immigration advocates on both sides acknowledge the TPS cases could effectively end related litigation nationwide if justices agree the decisions are unreviewable.
Transgender athlete bans in nearly two dozen states hang in the balance, while mail ballot rules determined by this decision could affect November voting procedures across 14 states that currently accept late-arriving ballots.