As the US Supreme Court reconvenes for its fall term, all eyes are on a set of explosive cases that could redefine the scope of presidential authority, voting rights, transgender participation in sports, and religious freedoms—many of which trace directly back to former President Donald Trump’s controversial decisions during his time in office.
At the heart of this term lies a critical question: Does the Constitution empower a president to act unilaterally, or must there be clear legal checks?
According to Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School, “The crucial question will be whether it serves as a check on President Trump or just a rubber stamp approving his actions.” With a court now firmly dominated by a 6-3 conservative majority—including three justices Trump himself appointed—this term could either set boundaries for executive overreach or further cement Trump’s legacy.
The Cases at Hand
-
Trump’s Tariffs: The court will scrutinize whether Trump had the legal right to unilaterally impose tariffs worth hundreds of billions of dollars by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Lower courts have ruled he overstepped.
-
Religious Freedom: A high-stakes case involves Damon Landor, a Rastafarian inmate whose religious rights were allegedly violated when his dreadlocks were cut against his will. His case has drawn rare bipartisan support from legal advocates on both the left and right.
-
Transgender Athlete Bans: The court will also hear challenges to Idaho and West Virginia laws barring transgender girls from girls’ sports.
-
Voting Rights in Louisiana: In a pivotal redistricting case, non-Black voters are contesting the creation of a second Black-majority district. A ruling here could reshape voting rights law across the country.
-
Presidential Powers: Trump’s challenges to remove members from the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Reserve Board will also be reviewed, reigniting debates about executive dominance over independent agencies.
A Pattern of Favoritism?
Since Trump’s return to the spotlight, the Supreme Court has often ruled in his favor—especially through its controversial “shadow docket”: emergency decisions made without full hearings or detailed explanations. Critics like Cecillia Wang of the ACLU argue the court has been “bending over backwards” to uphold Trump-era policies, setting dangerous precedents for future administrations.
Why This Term Matters
This term is not just about legal technicalities—it’s about the fabric of American democracy, the limits of presidential authority, and the rights of individuals against the state. Whether it’s a voter seeking fair representation, an athlete fighting for inclusion, or a prisoner defending his faith, the decisions made this term will ripple across generations.
And while these court cases may sound distant or technical, they affect real people—families, communities, and citizens who look to the highest court in the land for justice, fairness, and accountability.
In a time when trust in institutions is waning, the Supreme Court has a rare opportunity to either rebuild that trust—or risk further erosion of the public’s faith in democracy.
