WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Tuesday, Dec. 3

The justices will hear oral arguments this morning in Republic of Hungary v. Simon. The case involves a lawsuit brought by survivors of the Hungarian Holocaust and their heirs who sued Hungary and its national railway, MÁV, for compensation for property seized during the extermination campaign that killed over two-thirds of the country’s Jewish population.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Tuesday morning read:

• Supreme Court doesn’t seem convinced FDA was unfair in blocking flavored vapes as teen use increased (Lindsay Whitehurst, The Associated Press)
• Supreme Court appears sympathetic to FDA’s rejection of flavored vapes (Justin Jouvenal & Rachel Roubein, The Washington Post)
• How a Supreme Court decision on health care bans for transgender youth could impact trans people nationwide (Elizabeth Wolfe, CNN)
• Inside the Supreme Court Ethics Debate: Who Judges the Justices? (Jodi Kantor & Abbie VanSickle, The New York Times)
• My daughter is trans. Supreme Court must protect health care for kids like her. (Brett Freeman, USA Today)

CASE PREVIEW

At Supreme Court, Holocaust survivors seek right to sue for compensation of seized property

It has been nearly 80 years since World War II officially ended in Europe. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the latest chapter in efforts by the victims of the war’s atrocities to recover confiscated property. At issue is whether a lawsuit by survivors of the Hungarian Holocaust, seeking to recover property that was seized, can go forward, or whether – as the Hungarian government alleges – it is barred by the federal law governing lawsuits against foreign countries in U.S. courts.

More than 560,000 Jews in Hungary, over two-thirds of the country’s pre-war Jewish population, lost their lives at the hands of the Nazis and the Hungarian government during the Holocaust. Most of those deaths occurred in a three-month period in 1944. In November 1944, the Hungarian government declared that all valuables owned by Jews were part of the national wealth. The government then confiscated virtually all of the property – including cash, jewelry, art, and gold – owned by Jews in Hungary.

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Monday, Dec. 2

The court will begin the December session this morning with oral arguments in FDA v. Wages and White Lion Investments, LLC and U.S. v. Miller. The first case is a dispute over the FDA’s 2021 rejection of two companies’ applications to sell fruit and candy flavored vape liquids, which the agency said are a risk to youth. The justices will then consider a case on whether a payment to the IRS shortly before a debtor files for bankruptcy must be returned.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read:

• Supreme Court hears fight over FDA’s refusal to approve flavored vapes (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News)
• Teen vaping hits a decade-low. Could Supreme Court review of flavored vapes reverse this? (Maureen Groppe, USA Today)
• First transgender attorney to argue before the Supreme Court, challenging health care ban for minors (Lindsay Whitehurst, The Associated Press)
• How a Supreme Court case on vaping could affect the FDA (David Ovalle & McKenzie Beard, The Washington Post)
• Ex parte Milligan and the Limits of Martial Law (Steve Vladeck, One First)

CASE PREVIEW

Supreme Court to hear dispute over FDA rejection of flavored vapes

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Monday in a dispute over the Food and Drug Administration’s rejection of two companies’ applications to sell flavored liquids for use in e-cigarettes. A federal appeals court in Louisiana set aside the FDA’s orders denying applications by Triton Distribution and Vapetasia, complaining that the agency had sent those companies and other makers of e-cigarette products “on a wild goose chase.”

The stakes in the case are high: Medical groups, including the American Medical Association, say that the use of flavored e-cigarettes by young people is a “public health crisis.” Members of the vaping industry counter that such products can help adults to quit smoking traditional cigarettes, and they add that a ruling against the companies could “decimate the vaping industry.”

WHAT WE'RE READING

The morning read for Friday, Nov. 29

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read:

• The Supreme Court will hear arguments over Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors (Mark Sherman & Geoff Mulvihill, The Associated Press)
• Supreme Court hosts government power struggle over flavored vapes (Kelsey Reichmann, Courthouse News Service) 
• The Supreme Court restrained Trump last time. Will it do so again? (Justin Jouvenal and Ann E. Marimow, The Washington Post)
• U.S. Supreme Court ponders review of Wisconsin gender-identity case (Judith Ruiz-Branch, Kiowa County Press)
• SCOTUS could be the check on Trump’s tariffs plan that Congress should be (Jessica Levinson, MSNBC)