The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here.

The Supreme Court continues to churn through relisted cases at a brisk clip as it works to fill out the rest of this term’s argument calendar ahead of its mid-January deadline.

That churn has already produced both winners and losers. The biggest winner was Terry Pitchford, who has been sitting on death row for years for his role as an accessory to a killing during a botched robbery; after seven relists, the court granted review to hear argument stemming from his claims that the prosecutor impermissibly considered race in striking potential jurors. Another beneficiary is Samuel Fields, also on death row, who persuaded the Supreme Court to entertain his seriously belated rehearing petition arguing that he was entitled to relief under clearly established law. The court will now consider the merits of his rehearing petition at their first January conference.

Cases and Controversies is a recurring series by Carolyn Shapiro, primarily focusing on the effects of the Supreme Court’s rulings, opinions, and procedures on the law, on other institutions, and on our constitutional democracy more generally.

Please note that the views of outside contributors do not reflect the official opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff.

Their names do not appear in the caption of Prigg v. Pennsylvania, but Margaret and Jerry Morgan were at the center of the case. In 1837, the Morgans lived with their children in York County, Pennsylvania. Jerry was a free Black man, and Margaret had always lived as a free Black woman both in Maryland, the slave state where she was born, and in Pennsylvania, a free state, where she later moved with Jerry.

Nuts and Bolts is a recurring series by Stephen Wermiel providing insights into the mechanics of how the Supreme Court works.

Discussion of the Supreme Court’s “shadow docket” is everywhere. But why exactly is this area of the court’s work attracting so much attention, and why now?

Explanations vary. But at least one clear answer lies in the types of issues the justices are deciding, as well as the frequency of and the way in which they are handling these requests. The court has always had an emergency docket, but – with some notable exceptions to be discussed below – historically such cases have been fewer and more “routine.”

Justice, Democracy, and Law is a recurring series by Edward B. Foley that focuses on election law and the relationship of law and democracy.

Please note that the views of outside contributors do not reflect the official opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff.

Redistricting law is an utter mess. One major culprit is the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause, which held, 5-4, that addressing partisan gerrymandering is beyond the reach of federal courts.

One might think that once the judiciary has washed its hands of a topic, at least there’s no more ill that can come from that abdication. Yet Rucho looks worse and worse with each fresh redistricting case that the court must confront.

Immigration Matters is a recurring series by César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández that analyzes the court’s immigration docket, highlighting emerging legal questions about new policy and enforcement practices.

Please note that the views of outside contributors do not reflect the official opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff.

When the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to consider the legality of President Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, it presented the justices with two cases in which the government had lost in the courts below. The justices’ decision to add one of these cases to its docket, but not the other, suggests that the road to an opinion that deals head-on with the constitutionality of the president’s directive isn’t clear. Though chances are still high that the court will decide whether Trump’s order is legal, it left open the possibility that it will instead focus on a technical procedural issue.