Court upholds Tennessee’s ban on certain medical treatments for transgender minors

We’re expecting one or more opinions from the court at 10 a.m. EDT. Join us for the live blog, beginning at 9:30 a.m.

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

• The Supreme Court now has a chance to have the final say on Trump’s tariffs (Alexis Keenan, Yahoo Finance)
• Trump Will Go To Supreme Court If Newsom Wins Troops Fight; Appeals Court Considers Temporary Restraining Order (Dominic Patten, Deadline)
• What Have We Learned about Justice Barrett? (Jonathan H. Adler, Reason)
• Supreme Court faces new headwinds with roughly 2 weeks left in the term (Nina Totenberg, NPR)
• The Supreme Court Cleared Him at Oklahoma’s Behest. Now the State Wants to Try Him Again? (Austin Sarat, Slate)

Coming up: On Friday, June 20, the court expects to issue one or more opinions from the current term. We’ll be live at 9:30 a.m. EDT that day for the opinion(s).

On Wednesday, June 18, we were live as the court released opinions in United States v. Skrmetti, NRC v. Texas, EPA v. Calumet, Oklahoma v. EPA, and Perttu v. Richards. 

Click here for a list of FAQs about opinion announcements.

Continue Reading

Citing the “paralyzing uncertainty” created when tariffs are “added and subtracted at will,” two small businesses came to the Supreme Court on Tuesday asking the justices to quickly weigh in on the legality of President Donald Trump’s reliance on a law giving the president broad authority over economic transactions in a national emergency to impose hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs. “Until now,” the companies wrote on Tuesday, “no President” in the “nearly 50-year history” of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “has ever invoked it to impose tariffs—let alone the sweeping worldwide tariffs imposed pursuant to the executive orders challenged here.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson received more than $2 million in book advances from Penguin Random House in 2024. The news came as part of the justices’ annual financial disclosures, which are filed each year in mid-May and then released in June. The forms, published online on Tuesday by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, chronicled the payments that some justices – including Jackson, whose memoir, Lovely One, was a New York Times bestseller – received from publishing houses, as well as their reimbursements for travel, payments for teaching gigs, and investments.

In Dissent is a recurring series by Anastasia Boden on Supreme Court dissents that have shaped (or reshaped) our country. 

It became one of the great “I told you so” moments in Supreme Court history. Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting alone in Morrison v. Olson, warned that letting Congress chip away at executive power in favor of unelected bureaucrats would come back to bite us – while giving us one of the most memorable judicial lines of all time. Forty years later, for better or worse, the court may finally be ready to follow his lead.