• Zubik v. Burwell
  Does the availability of a regulatory method for nonprofit religious employers to comply with the HHS contraceptive mandate eliminate the substantial burden on religious exercise in violation of RFRA that the Court recognized in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.?
• Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole
  Whether, when applying the “undue burden” standard of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Fifth Circuit erred in concluding that this standard permits Texas to enforce, in nearly all circumstances, laws that would cause a significant reduction in the availability of abortion services while failing to advance the State’s interest in promoting health - or any other valid interest.
• Evenwel v. Abbott
  Does the "one-person, one-vote" principle require states to use voter population, as opposed to total population, when drawing state legislative districts?
• Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association
  Are public-sector "agency shop" agreements unconstitutional under the First Amendment?
• Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin
  Does the use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions by the University of Texas violate the Equal Protection Clause?
• Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
  Whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a bare violation of a federal statute.

Conference of December 11

• AT&T, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Heath Whether a relator asserting a claim under the False Claims Act can satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)’s particular pleading requirement without setting forth specific facts regarding at least one allegedly false or fraudulent claim submitted to the government.
• CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC v. Areso Whether California's Iskanian rule, which categorically exempts representative Private Attorney General Act actions from mandatory arbitration, is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.
• American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (1) Whether the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) created a public forum by accepting for display on its property a wide array of controversial political and public-issue ads, including ads that address the same controversial subject matter as petitioners’ pro-Israel ad, and thus violated the First Amendment by rejecting petitioners’ ad based on its content; and (2) regardless of the nature of the forum, whether the MBTA’s rejection of petitioners’ advertisement based on an advertising guideline that prohibits ads considered by MBTA officials to be “demeaning and disparaging” was a viewpoint-based restriction of speech in violation of the First Amendment.
• Hall v. North Carolina Whether the retroactive application of a sex offender program violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution where the program imposes numerous onerous obligations and restrictions upon a registrant for life, with no opportunity to terminate registration even upon a showing that the registrant does not pose a threat to public safety.

More Petitions »

• Fisher II Symposium
• Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association
• One person, one vote and Evenwel
• Zivotofsky v. Kerry
• William-Yulee v. Florida Bar
• Fair Housing Act symposium
• ACA exchange challenge symposium