The Supreme Court of the United States begins another term today, the first Monday in October. Here’s a quick rundown.
Veterans Affairs– Johnson v. U.S. Congress
Question Presented: Did the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act strip district courts of the jurisdiction, recognized by this Court in Johnson v. Robison, 415 U.S. 361 (1974), to hear challenges to the constitutionality of acts of Congress affecting veterans’ benefits?
Climate Phantoms– Suncor Energy, Inc. v. Commissioners of Boulder County
Question Presented: Whether federal law precludes state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate.
Retirement Security– Anderson v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee
Question Presented: Whether, for claims predicated on fund underperformance, pleading that an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) fiduciary failed to use the requisite “care, skill, prudence, or diligence” under the circumstances and thus breached ERISA’s duty of prudence when investing plan assets requires alleging a “meaningful benchmark.”
EPA Regulations– Dept. of Air Force v. Prutehi Guahan
Question Presented: 1. Whether the federal government’s submission to a state or territorial regulator of an application to renew a RCRA permit is “final agency action” that is immediately reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 704.
2. Whether the federal government must comply with the general environmental review procedures of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., before submitting a permit-renewal application under RCRA, which sets forth its own specific procedures to review environmental impacts in the context of hazardous-waste treatment.
Gun Rights– Beaird v. United States
Question Presented: I. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) comports with the Second Amendment?
II. Whether Stinson v. United States still accurately state the level of deference due to the Commentary of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines?
III. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) permits conviction for the possession of any firearm that
has ever crossed state lines at any time in the indefinite past, and, if so, if it is facially
unconstitutional?
Privacy Concerns– Salazar V. Paramount Global
Question Presented: Whether the phrase “goods or services from a video tape service provider,” as used in the VPPA’s definition of “consumer,” refers to all of a video tape service provider’s goods or services or only to its audiovisual goods or services.
All info from supremecourt.gov.