The U.S. Supreme Court's emergency docket often results in temporary halts of lower-court rulings because the Court may issue decisions without full briefing or oral argument.
October 06, 2025
high
temporal
Describes procedural characteristics of the Supreme Court's emergency (shadow) docket and how those orders function pending full review.
Frequent grants of emergency applications can create a feedback loop that incentivizes the solicitor general to seek additional emergency relief from the Supreme Court.
October 06, 2025
high
temporal
Describes a policy dynamic in which repeated favorable emergency rulings encourage further use of the emergency docket by the executive branch's legal representative.
By 2025-10-06, in the eight months after President Donald J. Trump began his 2025 term, the U.S. Supreme Court had approved 20 emergency requests from the president to block lower-court orders and had denied three such emergency requests.
October 06, 2025
high
temporal
Statistics describing the Supreme Court's actions on emergency applications during the early months of the 2025 presidential term.
The U.S. Supreme Court's term beginning in October 2025 includes cases addressing the constitutional scope of presidential power, challenges related to the Voting Rights Act, and legal disputes over presidential tariff authority.
October 06, 2025
high
temporal
Overview of major issue areas on the Supreme Court's docket at the start of the October 2025 term.
Emergency orders granted by the U.S. Supreme Court without full briefing and oral argument are temporary and can be revisited when a case returns to the court for full briefing and argument.
October 06, 2025
high
temporal
Procedural characteristic of emergency relief decided by the Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court customarily does not provide public explanations when it declines to take up a case.
October 06, 2025
high
procedural
Describes customary practice of the U.S. Supreme Court when denying review of cases.
U.S. district courts can issue nationwide injunctions that block federal policies across the United States, and the U.S. Supreme Court has issued rulings that narrow the circumstances under which nationwide injunctions may be granted.
October 06, 2025
high
legal
Nationwide injunctions are judicial orders from a single federal district court that can have nationwide effect; the Supreme Court has limited how and when such injunctions should be used.
The U.S. Supreme Court can grant emergency appeals that temporarily allow challenged policies to go into effect while the underlying legal issues are litigated in lower courts.
October 05, 2025
high
procedural
Describes the Supreme Court's use of emergency (stay/administrative) procedures to decide temporary enforcement of policies.
The U.S. Supreme Court can reverse preliminary nationwide injunctions issued by lower federal courts, which can permit challenged policies to take effect pending full judicial review.
October 05, 2025
high
institutional
Explains the impact of Supreme Court reversals on lower-court preliminary injunctions.
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade and returned authority to regulate abortion to individual states.
June 24, 2022
high
legal
Outcome of the Supreme Court decision that altered national abortion precedent.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, some Supreme Court justices received death threats and experienced heightened security at their homes and during public appearances.
June 24, 2022
high
public_safety
Security and threat environment affecting justices after the 2022 abortion decision.
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, removing the federal constitutional right to abortion established by the 1973 Roe decision.
June 24, 2022
high
temporal
Supreme Court decision altering federal constitutional abortion rights.
In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court held that states can regulate health providers' speech when it struck down a California law that required anti-abortion 'crisis pregnancy centers' to provide information about how to obtain abortions.
June 26, 2018
high
legal
A Supreme Court precedent addressing the extent to which states may regulate the speech of health-care providers.
In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.
June 26, 2015
high
temporal
Supreme Court ruling establishing marriage equality as a constitutional right.
A Supreme Court precedent from about 1935 required that a president have cause, such as neglect of duty, before removing certain Senate-confirmed independent-agency officials from their jobs.
January 01, 1935
high
legal
Describes the historical removal-protection rule for some independent-agency officials established by mid-20th-century Supreme Court precedent.
An 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling has long been interpreted to support birthright citizenship for children born in the United States regardless of their parents' immigration status.
January 01, 1898
high
legal
References longstanding Supreme Court precedent (1898) underpinning the doctrine of birthright citizenship.
The Red Mass is an annual Roman Catholic liturgy held to mark the start of the U.S. Supreme Court term.
high
contextual
Describes the purpose and recurrence of the Red Mass.
Michael Nachmanoff argued and won a U.S. Supreme Court case that contributed to reducing racial disparities in federal crack cocaine sentencing.
high
legal-precedent
Notable appellate litigation achievement affecting federal sentencing.