Skip to content
Newsletter

SCOTUStoday for Friday, March 27

Carved details along top of Supreme Court building are pictured
(Katie Barlow)

As you might have seen yesterday, we have a favor to ask those of you who are in the legal profession: Could you fill out this brief survey about your work? We’re looking to better understand segments of our audience and the tools they use.

And this week, Justice Clarence Thomas passed Chief Justice John Marshall on the list of longest-serving Supreme Court justices. Thomas is now the fourth-longest serving justice in history and just over two years away from the top of the list.

Week in Review

The court heard four arguments this week, during the first half of the March sitting. Here are the links to SCOTUSblog’s coverage.

And on Wednesday, the court released opinions in two argued cases: Rico v. United States and Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment.

  • In Rico, the court held that the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 does not authorize a rule automatically extending a defendant’s term of supervised release when the defendant fails to report to a probation officer.
  • In Cox Communications, the court held that a company is not liable for copyright infringement for merely providing a service to the general public with knowledge that it will be used by some to infringe copyrights.

At the Court

Today, the justices will meet in a private conference to discuss cases and vote on petitions for review. Orders from that conference are expected on Monday at 9:30 a.m. EDT.

On Monday, the court will hear argument in Abouammo v. United States, on whether federal prosecutors can try a defendant not only in the district where the offense occurred, but also in the district where the crime’s “contemplated effects” were felt; and Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties, on the jurisdiction of federal courts to enforce an arbitration award.

On Wednesday, we will be live blogging as the Supreme Court hears argument in Trump v. Barbara, on President Donald Trump’s executive order limiting access to birthright citizenship.

Morning Reads

US Supreme Court seeks $25.4 million funding boost for security, cyber protection

Nate Raymond, Reuters

In a budget request to Congress addressing the fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1, 2026, the Supreme Court is seeking “an additional $25.4 million to further boost physical and cyber security for the court, including by expanding protective services for the nine justices’ residences and their families,” according to Reuters. The funding would, among other things, allow the court “to expand the security activities of its in-house security force, the Supreme Court Police, by funding an additional six agents per justice and an administrative support position” and “also cover the cost of 25 officers who would enhance security at the Supreme Court’s building; four additional administrative positions to support the Supreme Court Police’s recent growth; and travel to provide security to the justices when they are outside of Washington, D.C.”

Trump Calls for Law Cracking Down on Crime and ‘Rogue Judges’

Chris Cameron, The New York Times

During an appearance at a National Republican Congressional Committee event in Washington on Wednesday, President Donald Trump “call[ed] on Republican lawmakers to pass a crime bill that ‘cracks down on rogue judges.’” “The time has … come for Republicans to pass a tough new crime bill that imposes harsh penalties for dangerous repeat offenders, cracks down on rogue judges. We got rogue judges that are criminals. They are criminals, what they do to our country,” the president said, according to The New York Times. Trump also again criticized the Supreme Court’s tariffs ruling, contending that the court should have made it clear that the government didn’t have to provide refunds. “The Supreme Court didn’t want to put one little sentence that all money taken in up ‘til this day doesn’t have to be paid back,” Trump said. “Going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. So sad to see.”

Trump slams Supreme Court justices he appointed as ‘bad for our country’ after tariff ruling

Michael Sinkewicz, Fox Business

During Wednesday’s National Republican Congressional Committee event, Trump also “expressed frustration with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, though he did not mention them by name,” according to Fox Business. “Two of the people that voted for [the tariffs ruling], I appointed, and they sicken me,” the president said. “They sicken me because they’re bad for our country.”

Trump administration being ‘pragmatic’ on tariff refunds, former officials say

Gregory Svirnovskiy and Daniel Desrochers, Politico

In early March, U.S. Customs and Border Protection faced pushback “when it asked for a 45-day extension to begin the tariff refund process.” But, according to Politico, “[v]eterans of the Biden and first Trump administration are giving the White House relatively high marks for its handling” of that process since then, contending it “has shown no signs of abandoning its obligations.” “To date, the government has actually been pretty pragmatic,” said Greta Peisch, who served as general counsel for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative when President Joe Biden was in office. “My view is [the administration’s refund response] is better than expected.”

What Americans really think about men in women’s sports

Ryan Owens, The Washington Times

In a column for The Washington Times, Ryan Owens highlighted a new survey on sports and gender which found that 79% of Americans show support for policies barring transgender athletes from competing in high school girls’ sports. The survey’s findings, according to Owens, are at odds with comments made when the Supreme Court heard argument in “two cases about whether states may limit girls’ sports teams to biological females.” “An attorney at the court’s January hearing called the issue ‘hotly disputed,’” Owens wrote. “Our data tells a different story.” He continued, “Those views could change over time, but for now, the court could uphold sex-based rules for girls’ sports without facing major public backlash.”

On Site

Relist Watch

Brady violations, child abduction, qualified immunity, and confessions of error

In his Relist Watch column, John Elwood highlighted six petitions for review that were newly relisted for today’s conference. They address such issues as qualified immunity; the Hague Convention and abducted children; and intellectual disability and the death penalty.

relist watch banner art lien
Opinion Analysis

Court rejects billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement by internet service provider

On Wednesday, the court unanimously ruled against Sony Entertainment, rejecting its effort to hold Cox Communications, an internet service provider, liable for copyright infringement by Cox’s subscribers. Justice Clarence Thomas’ brief opinion made it clear that content providers like Sony that are worried about copyright infringement are not going to get anywhere by suing internet service providers like Cox.

The US Supreme court, in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2022.
Opinion Analysis

Court repudiates extension of federal supervised release while a defendant absconds

After completing a term of imprisonment, federal criminal defendants often serve terms of supervised release that usually last between one and five years, depending on the offense for which they were convicted. In a narrow ruling, the court held, 8-1, that this supervised release time does not automatically extend when a defendant on supervision flees.

The Supreme Court Building is pictured on March 25, 2026.
Argument Analysis

Justices debate arbitration exemption for “last-mile” drivers

On Wednesday, the justices considered the scope of an exemption in the Federal Arbitration Act for interstate transportation workers. Specifically, the question is whether that exemption reaches “last-mile” drivers who don’t themselves cross state lines, even though the goods they are delivering are on an interstate journey.

Inside the Supreme Court Building
SCOTUS Outside Opinions

When the Supreme Court let a president get away with redefining birthright citizenship

In a column for SCOTUSblog, Neil Weare explored President William McKinley’s effort to disrupt the long-settled meaning of the 14th Amendment’s “citizenship clause to deny citizenship to people born in Puerto Rico, Guam, and other territories that became subject to the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the United States following” the Spanish-American War, comparing it to Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship that is now before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Building is pictured on March 25, 2026.

Podcasts

Advisory Opinions

Mail-in Ballot Deadlines Challenged in Court

Sarah Isgur and David French discuss two Supreme Court oral arguments: one on Mississippi accepting ballots five days after Election Day and one on turning away asylum seekers before they reach the border.

SCOTUS Quote

JUSTICE GORSUCH: “If you should lose, that’s a question for another day?”

MS. LOVITT: “And then maybe you’ll see me here again in another year.”

Flowers Foods v. Brock  (2026)

Recommended Citation: Kelsey Dallas and Nora Collins, SCOTUStoday for Friday, March 27, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 27, 2026, 9:00 AM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/scotustoday-for-friday-march-27/