Supreme Court Term 2025-2026

We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.

All Cases

574 Supreme Court Cases

Nieves v. Bartlett, 17-1174
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019

Free Speech

Criminal Law Reform

Nieves v. Bartlett, 17-1174

Whether a plaintiff who claims that a police officer retaliated against his First Amendment-protected expression by arresting him for a misdemeanor is barred from suing if the police had probable cause for his arrest.
Explore case
Nieves V. Bartlett, 17-1174. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019
Nieves v. Bartlett, 17-1174

Free Speech

Criminal Law Reform

Nieves v. Bartlett, 17-1174

Whether a plaintiff who claims that a police officer retaliated against his First Amendment-protected expression by arresting him for a misdemeanor is barred from suing if the police had probable cause for his arrest.
Nieves V. Bartlett, 17-1174. Explore Case.
Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, 17‐1702
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019

Free Speech

Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, 17‐1702

Whether the private operator of a public access channel in New York City is a state actor, and therefore bound by the First Amendment, for the purpose of selecting and scheduling its broadcasts, where federal, state, and city laws and policies so strictly circumscribe its content decisions that all independent editorial judgment is displaced.
Explore case
Manhattan Community Access Corp. V. Halleck, 17‐1702. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019
Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, 17‐1702

Free Speech

Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, 17‐1702

Whether the private operator of a public access channel in New York City is a state actor, and therefore bound by the First Amendment, for the purpose of selecting and scheduling its broadcasts, where federal, state, and city laws and policies so strictly circumscribe its content decisions that all independent editorial judgment is displaced.
Manhattan Community Access Corp. V. Halleck, 17‐1702. Explore Case.
Smith v. California 18-7094
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019

Capital Punishment

Racial Justice

Smith v. California 18-7094

Whether the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to prevent courts from allowing prosecutors to use prospective jurors’ opinions about the O.J. Simpson trial or other potential racial proxies as “race-neutral” explanations for striking black jurors without further inquiry.
Explore case
Smith V. California 18-7094. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019
Smith v. California 18-7094

Capital Punishment

Racial Justice

Smith v. California 18-7094

Whether the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to prevent courts from allowing prosecutors to use prospective jurors’ opinions about the O.J. Simpson trial or other potential racial proxies as “race-neutral” explanations for striking black jurors without further inquiry.
Smith V. California 18-7094. Explore Case.
Almighty Supreme Born Allah v. Milling, 17-8654
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019

Religious Liberty

Almighty Supreme Born Allah v. Milling, 17-8654

Whether the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to re-evaluate the qualified immunity doctrine, which protects government officials from liability for violating an individual’s constitutional rights in a wide range of situations.
Explore case
Almighty Supreme Born Allah V. Milling, 17-8654. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019
Almighty Supreme Born Allah v. Milling, 17-8654

Religious Liberty

Almighty Supreme Born Allah v. Milling, 17-8654

Whether the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to re-evaluate the qualified immunity doctrine, which protects government officials from liability for violating an individual’s constitutional rights in a wide range of situations.
Almighty Supreme Born Allah V. Milling, 17-8654. Explore Case.
Bucklew v. Precythe, 17-8151
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019

Capital Punishment

Bucklew v. Precythe, 17-8151

Whether the execution of Russell Bucklew by lethal injection would violate the Eighth Amendment as cruel and unusual punishment because he suffers from a rare medical condition that would cause him to choke on his own blood and suffocate for four minutes before dying.
Explore case
Bucklew V. Precythe, 17-8151. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2019
Bucklew v. Precythe, 17-8151

Capital Punishment

Bucklew v. Precythe, 17-8151

Whether the execution of Russell Bucklew by lethal injection would violate the Eighth Amendment as cruel and unusual punishment because he suffers from a rare medical condition that would cause him to choke on his own blood and suffocate for four minutes before dying.
Bucklew V. Precythe, 17-8151. Explore Case.
3132
33
3435...

How Do Terms Work?

Between October and late June or early July the Supreme Court is “in session,” meaning it hears oral arguments, issues written decisions, and decides whether to take additional cases.

Submitting petitions

Our legal team at the Ƶfiles a cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, a type of petition that usually argues that a lower court has incorrectly decided an important question of law that violates civil rights and should be fixed to prevent similar confusion in similar cases.

term starts

U.S. Supreme Court decides to take a case

On average, the Court considers about 7,000 ‐ 8,000 petitions each term and accepts about 80 for oral argument.

Oral arguments

This is the period where the U.S. Supreme Court listens to our case in court.

U.S. Supreme Court makes final decisions

While the U.S. Supreme Court makes decisions throughout the term, many are released right before the term ends. If a decision doesn't go in our favor, we fight back!