The October term heralds another ‘big year’ for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court's new term opens with a roster of high-profile disputes that legal observers expect could produce sweeping doctrinal rulings. After thousands of petitions, the court typically accepts only about 70–80 cases for review each term, and it frequently reverses the lower-court decisions it takes up. That dynamic, combined with several cases already teed up, has prompted predictions that the coming term could be especially consequential. One major case involves climate litigation: Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, in which local governments sued fossil-fuel companies under theories including public and private nuisance, trespass, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy. The Colorado Supreme Court held that federal law does not preempt such state-law claims; if the Supreme Court allows the case to proceed, it could open a pathway to numerous climate-related suits against energy companies. Second Amendment issues feature prominently. Challenges to local bans on AR-15-style rifles and popular 9mm semi-automatic handguns from the Seventh and Second Circuits (Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins) could clarify whether such prohibitions are consistent with the Constitution. The court may also consider Calce v. New York, a case in which the Second Circuit upheld a stun-gun ban; the court previously sent another stun-gun matter back for reconsideration after a lower court failed to follow earlier guidance about weapons not in existence at the founding. Other contentious topics on the docket include religious-discrimination claims by parochial preschools, parental-notice rules in child-welfare cases, and the constitutionality of six-person juries in certain state prosecutions. In St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, challengers argue that Colorado's preschool non-discrimination requirement forces religious schools to choose between participation and adherence to their faith. International Partners for Ethical Care, Inc. v. Ferguson raises parental-rights questions after Washington changed notification procedures in cases involving runaway children and gender-affirming care. And in Kian v. Florida, a defendant convicted by a six-member jury argues the Sixth Amendment guarantees a 12-member panel. The court has yet to fill all of its argument slots and may take additional cases — including potential First Amendment matters such as a Sixth Circuit decision upholding a school ban on “Let’s Go Brandon” apparel and a South Carolina decision upholding restrictions on facial and neck tattoos near certain locations. Observers and advocates on multiple sides are watching closely, noting that the term could alter standards across a range of constitutional and statutory doctrines.