The Supreme Court on Friday afternoon added another case to its oral argument docket for the 2025-26 term. The justices agreed to take up the case of Munson Hunter, a Texas man who pleaded guilty in 2024 to aiding and abetting wire fraud. The court will weigh in on issues relating to Hunter’s waiver, as part of his plea agreement, of his right to appeal.

The court will re-enter the complex world of habeas on Tuesday, Oct. 14, in the case of Bowe v. United States.

In 2008, Michael Bowe conspired with three other men to rob an armored car in Palm Beach County, Florida. After driving around in a van looking for a suitable target, the group pulled alongside a Loomis armored car parked at a Wachovia Bank ATM, carrying $560,000 in cash. Bowe got out of the van with a semiautomatic rifle and shot the armored car’s driver and the security guard. Failing to get any cash, Bowe’s coconspirators fled in the van, while Bowe ran away on foot.

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.

Summer has ended at last. And while the justices (and SCOTUSblog) didn’t get much vacation with all the action on the emergency docket, I at least had a few blissfully relist-free months. That ended with a vengeance. On Friday of last week, the Supreme Court granted review in five cases from the end-of-summer “long conference.” And then on Monday, the court relisted 17 long conference cases for consideration a second time at this week’s conference. They involve such a wide variety of subjects that while I treat each case summarily, this post sure doesn’t feel summary.

The Fourth Amendment generally requires police officers to obtain a warrant before they enter a home. But the Supreme Court has recognized several exceptions to that rule for emergencies. On Wednesday, Oct. 15, in Case v. Montana, the justices will consider how certain police must be that there is an emergency before they can enter a home without a warrant. Is it enough, as the Montana Supreme Court held, that police have only “reasonable suspicion” that there is an emergency? Or are police officers required to meet a higher bar and have probable cause to believe that there is an emergency?

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Wednesday, Oct. 15, in Louisiana v. Callais, a challenge to the congressional map that Louisiana adopted in 2024 that may reshape the Voting Rights Act. It is the second go-round at the court for this dispute in less than a year; the justices heard arguments in the case for the first time in March, but didn’t decide it during their 2024-25 term. Here is a brief explainer on the long and complicated history of this case.