The U.S. Supreme Court opened its new term Monday with three high-stakes cases that could reshape climate policy, gun laws, and immigration enforcement. The court will hear arguments in December on a climate liability lawsuit targeting energy companies, a challenge to state-level bans on AR-15 rifles, and two immigration cases involving deportation practices under the Trump administration.
Supreme Court to review climate liability lawsuit against energy firms
The justices will hear an appeal from Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil seeking to block lawsuits filed by local governments in Colorado and other states. The lawsuits allege that the companies’ fossil fuel products contributed to climate change, increasing the frequency and severity of natural disasters. The energy firms argue that federal law preempts such state-level litigation and that climate policy should be addressed through legislative or regulatory channels. The Trump administration has filed a brief supporting the companies, asserting that the lawsuits represent an improper attempt to regulate emissions through the courts.
Court to weigh Second Amendment challenge to AR-15 bans
The Supreme Court will also consider whether state bans on semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15 violate the Second Amendment. More than a dozen states have enacted such bans, citing the weapons’ disproportionate use in mass shootings. Opponents of the bans argue that AR-15s are among the most commonly owned firearms in the U.S. and that restrictions infringe on constitutional rights. The case arrives as the conservative-majority court has expanded gun rights in recent years, with four justices previously signaling their willingness to review AR-15 bans.
Immigration cases test limits of deportation authority
Two immigration disputes before the court involve the Trump administration’s deportation policies. The first case examines whether migrants who cannot be immediately returned to their home countries may be sent to third nations with which the U.S. has no diplomatic ties—a practice that has resulted in over 25,000 deportations since 2024 under secret agreements with 35 nations. The second case challenges the administration’s policy of automatically detaining undocumented immigrants, including long-term residents, without individualized bond hearings. The court previously allowed the third-country deportation policy to proceed temporarily in a 5-4 decision, with the three liberal justices dissenting.
Political backdrop amid midterm elections
The Supreme Court’s term begins one month before the midterm elections, which could shift control of Congress from Republicans to Democrats. A Republican loss in either chamber would limit President Trump’s ability to advance his agenda legislatively, potentially increasing reliance on the courts to enact policy changes. Trump has publicly criticized several of his appointees, including in a recent interview where he lamented that justices he nominated often ruled against his administration. Despite tensions, the 6-3 conservative majority has delivered multiple victories for the administration, particularly on its emergency docket, which fast-tracks cases without full arguments.
Long-term implications of the cases
The outcomes of these cases could have sweeping consequences. A ruling in favor of the energy companies might curtail future climate liability lawsuits, while a decision upholding AR-15 bans could embolden states to expand such restrictions—or prompt legal challenges to existing ones. The immigration rulings may determine the scope of executive authority in deportation practices, with potential effects on millions of undocumented residents. Legal experts note that the court’s approach to these cases could signal its willingness to defer to or constrain presidential power in politically contentious areas.