US Supreme Court Final Rulings

By Max Roemer

 Since June 30, 2025, the United States Supreme Court doled out several rulings that President Donald Trump hailed as “amazing decision(s)” as he thanked the conservative Supreme Court justices after the court wrapped up its term. “The Constitution has been brought back,” Trump declared about the conservative majority’s decisions this past term.

  Associate justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Chief Justice John Roberts were in the majority of nearly every decision over the past term’s rulings. Occasionally, Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined with the court’s liberal and left leaning justices, and against Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch. Those decisions included rejections of conservative challenges to Obamacare (The Affordable Care Act) and to a federal subsidy program for internet and phone services for poor and rural communities that are funded by user fees.

  Religious groups continued their several year winning streak at the Court, but there was one exception. That is, the Oklahoma Catholic Church’s bid to create the country’s first religious charter school. The court was deadlocked in their decision of 4 to 4 because justice Barrett recused herself from the case. The case is expected to be returned to the court.

  In the fall, another religious case is headed to the Court to be heard regarding whether prison officials can be sued for violating the religious rights of a Rastafarian inmate whose dreadlocks were forcibly shaved off his head by Louisiana prison guards.

  The rights of tens of millions of American TikTok users in the United States were unanimously voted against by the Court when they upheld a law intended to effectively ban the wildly popular app. However, President Trump has repeatedly declined to enforce the law and he said that he’s working on an alternative solution to the national security concerns of the app being owned and operated by China.

  The 5th U.S. Circuit of Appeals court arguably is the most conversative court of appeals in the country. The Supreme Court, again, heard many appeals from this court and that resulted in rulings upholding the Biden administration’s regulation of untraceable “ghost guns”, the Food and Drug Administration’s rejection of fruit and candy flavored vaping products, and Obamacare’s requirement that health insurers must cover cancer screenings and other preventive care services recommended by a task force.

  The Court ruled on several cases regarding the environment. As it has done in the past few years, the Court is seen as narrowing federal protections for the environment, including taking away a tool the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used to control water pollution. The Court also let federal agencies scale back their environmental reviews of projects in a case involving construction of a railway in Utah. Additionally, the Court said fuel producers can challenge California’s standards for vehicle emissions and electric cars under a federal air pollution law.

  The ideologically divided Court stated that the ban on gender affirming care does not discriminate against transgender people because the restrictions turn on age and the purpose of medical treatment, not whether the patient is transgender. Furthermore, in an emergency order, the court allowed Trump to enforce his ban on transgender people serving in the military. In the Court’s next term starting in October, the Court will hear arguments on bans barring transgender athletes from joining female sports teams. And, that transgender people are to play on sports teams of their biological sex.

  The Courts said yes “ghost guns” can be subject to background checks and other requirements. The Court rejected Mexico’s attempt to hold U.S. gun manufacturers liable for violence caused by Mexican drug cartels that arm themselves with American made weapons. Gun violence prevention groups celebrated because of the Court’s siding with gun manufacturers, they did not give the broad immunity that manufacturers had sought.

  Regarding disability rights, the Court sided with a Minnesota teen trying to use the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) to sue her school for not accommodating her rare form of epilepsy that makes it difficult to attend class before noon. This ruling makes it easier for families to use the ADA to sue schools for damages over the lack of accommodation for a learning disability. However, the Court rejected a case against a retired firefighter who argued that the ADA protects retirees as well as those able to work. The justices decided that the firefighter, who left the force due to Parkinson’s disease, could not sue her former employer for reducing health care benefits for disabled retirees.

  The Court had a busy and divisive term that ended on June 30. President Trump has declared that the term’s rulings were huge “Wins!” for his agenda and the conservative moment. Admittingly, not all ideologies got their way as there were some unwanted rulings from the Court for different philosophies. Yet, the President is declaring a tremendous victory for his agenda and powers, and he has declared major “Wins!” for the Constitution, too. It seems that the conservative authority achieved victory by most of the Court’s rulings this term.

  The Supreme Court’s next term begins on Monday, October 6, 2025.