Groups urge Supreme Court to direct Trump administration to spend billions of withheld foreign aid funds

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.

Confusion abounds over the Supreme Court’s call for reargument in Louisiana v. Callais, the latest chapter in the dispute over Louisiana’s efforts to draw a new congressional map in the wake of the 2020 census. As explained in more detail elsewhere on SCOTUSblog, the justices heard oral arguments in March on whether the drawing of a second majority-Black district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. But on the last day before the justices’ summer recess, the court issued an order setting the case for oral arguments in the 2025-26 term.

AV Ristorante is a recurring series by Brian Fitzpatrick.

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

For the last several years, critics have contended that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has become a conservative pariah. It’s been accused of “dismantling democracy” and “spearheading a judicial power grab.” “It is even too conservative for the conservative Supreme Court!,” commentators say.

To put it simply, the Trump administration’s recent request for interim relief in a dispute over its termination of nearly $800 million in health research grants split the Supreme Court. Four justices wanted to pause a district court’s ruling against the administration in its entirety, and four justices wanted the full ruling to remain in place. Because Justice Amy Coney Barrett voted partly for each side, the court’s Aug. 21 order was more complicated than most. The Trump administration could terminate the grants, the court said, but it couldn’t keep using the internal guidance documents that led to the grant cuts.

The fact that five opinions accompanied the court’s short, unsigned order, made the decision even more unusual. What wasn’t unusual is that the most impassioned one was a solo opinion from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who, in the three years since she joined the court, has quickly become its most conspicuous dissenter. 

Setting the stage for a major ruling on presidential power, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to decide whether a 1977 federal law giving the president certain emergency powers allowed President Donald Trump to levy tariffs on nearly all goods imported into the United States through a series of executive orders.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined hosts Sarah Isgur and David French for a wide-ranging interview on the latest episode of “Advisory Opinions,” The Dispatch’s legal podcast. Recorded in the Lawyer’s Room at the Supreme Court, the roughly 45-minute interview touched on the history of originalism, the increasing contention around the emergency docket, and how “the judiciary is by design a passive branch.”

Barrett, drawing from her new book Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution, spoke on her commitment to originalism with Isgur and French – notably, she characterized it not as a “tool of judicial restraint” but as a framework that requires analyzing both text and context. Specifically, Barrett referenced a hypothetical about “green vehicles” from her book, where a sign allowing “green cars” refers not to the color but emissions of the vehicle, to illustrate the point that language is inherently contextual. Throughout the conversation, Barrett also answered questions on some practical aspects of the court, like how exactly to pronounce “certiorari” (you’ll have to listen to the interview to find out) and what not to do as an advocate before the justices at oral argument (spoiler: it’s straying from the briefs). Barrett also reflected on her role as the second-least-senior justice, called clerking “a little bit like parenting,” and discussed how Justice Antonin Scalia influenced her own interactions with clerks.

You can listen to the full podcast here.