SCOTUStoday for Wednesday, January 14

Welcome to another opinion day at the Supreme Court. Please join our live blog, which begins at 9:30 a.m. EST, for any opinion announcements.

SCOTUS Quick Hits

• On Tuesday, the justices heard arguments in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., on laws barring transgender athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams. SCOTUSblog hosted a live blog during the arguments, and Amy analyzed what transpired.
• The court has indicated that it may announce opinions this morning at 10 a.m. EST. As noted above, SCOTUSblog will be live blogging any opinion announcements beginning at 9:30.
• After any opinion announcement(s), the justices will hear argument in Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corporation, on whether New Jersey Transit Corporation is an “arm of the state” that can invoke sovereign immunity to prevent suits against it in other states.
• The court has been asked to vacate a stay from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that paused a ruling requiring educators to notify parents if their child changes the name or pronouns they’re using in school. A response to this request is due by 4 p.m. EST on Wednesday, Jan. 21.

Morning Reads

• Supreme Court seems likely to allow state bans of trans athletes in school sports (Associated Press) — The Associated Press on Tuesday shared several details of what the scene was like inside and outside the courtroom as the justices heard arguments on laws banning transgender athletes from women’s and girls’ sports in schools. Reporters noted that U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer was in attendance and that competing demonstrations outside the Supreme Court Building made it difficult to hear the lawyers for each side as they spoke with the press after arguments.
• Supreme Court fills out docket for term: Petitions to watch (Zach Schonfeld, The Hill) — The spotlight on this Friday’s private conference between the justices will be brighter than normal because the court is expected to finish filling out its oral argument docket for the 2025-26 term in the near future, according to The Hill. Among the petitions up for consideration on Friday are “ones that implicate parental rights, the energy industry, guns, Roundup weedkiller and employer retirement plans.”
• Prediction market traders bet against Trump’s tariffs as Supreme Court ruling looms (Amanda Macias, Fox Business) — As the country awaits the court’s ruling on President Donald Trump’s tariffs, prediction platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket continue to take bets on how the case will turn out. Most traders believe the court will strike down the tariffs, according to Fox Business. “Traders on Kalshi now give a nearly 32% chance that the Supreme Court will side with Trump’s tariff plan, down 14 points after oral arguments in November signaled potential skepticism from the justices. … Polymarket mirrors that sentiment, with odds also at 28%, down 9 points over the same period of time.”
• Man to plead guilty to hacking US Supreme Court filing system (Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai, TechCrunch) — On Friday, Nicholas Moore, 24, of Springfield, Tennessee, “is expected to plead guilty to hacking the U.S. Supreme Court’s electronic document filing system dozens of times over several months,” according to TechCrunch. “Prosecutors say between August and October 2023,” Moore “‘intentionally accessed a computer without authorization on 25 different days and thereby obtained information from a protected computer,’ according to a court document.”
• US Supreme Court rejects state petition to take up fight over Alaska subsistence (Alex DeMarban, Anchorage Daily News) — Monday’s order list revealed that the justices will not “review a lower court’s decision in a case involving subsistence fishing in Alaska, a decision that keeps in place a unique federal protection viewed as critical by Alaska Natives,” according to the Anchorage Daily News. The state of Alaska had asked the Supreme Court to address the federal government’s control over “fishing on a 180-mile portion of the Kuskokwim River in Southwest Alaska, as it winds through the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge,” and the preference the federal government gives to hunters and fishermen from rural areas of the state. Alaska contended that the current set-up interferes with its “ability to manage its lands and resources comprehensively.”
• How the Supreme Court Broke Congress (Duncan Hosie, The Atlantic)(Paywall) — In a column for The Atlantic, Duncan Hosie described Congress’ decline in recent decades and the Supreme Court’s ascent over the same period. These changes, according to Hosie, “are fundamentally reshaping the structure and functioning of the American government,” and they will be difficult to reverse, because the court’s work has “reinforc[ed] Congress’s sclerosis,” in part by “preemptively removing entire policy domains,” including labor-organizing protections and restrictions on gun ownership, “from democratic deliberation.”

A Closer Look: Coverage of the Arguments on Transgender Athletes

Yesterday’s oral arguments in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. were covered live by several news outlets and summarized afterward by even more. As we’ve done after arguments in other closely watched cases, we compiled a sampling of headlines used on stories about the discussion, which we believe give us a sense of how the day went for all parties.

Reuters: US Supreme Court conservatives lean toward allowing transgender sports bans

The Wall Street Journal: Supreme Court Appears Likely to Uphold Transgender Sports Bans

The Washington Post: Supreme Court appears skeptical of challenges to bans on trans athletes

NBC News: Supreme Court leans toward backing state restrictions on transgender student-athletes

NPR: Supreme Court appears likely to uphold state bans on transgender athletes

Bloomberg: Supreme Court Suggests Support for Laws Curbing Trans Athletes

The Washington Times: Supreme Court poised to side with states barring trans athletes from girls’ sports

The Hill: Supreme Court seems receptive to transgender athlete bans

Vox: The Supreme Court seems poised to deliver another blow to trans rights

SCOTUS Quote

MS. HARTNETT: “You heard my friend on the other side talk about, not about cross-dressing or other laws. They didn’t have any response to our point because there isn’t one, that transgender people were categorically excluded from immigration to this country under an overall umbrella of being a psychopath. That was the way –that was the actual decision of this Court in the Boutilier case. It was interpreting language of Congress that determined that when Congress used the term ‘psychopathic personality’ to exclude people, they meant to include homosexuals and other sex perverts. And then that –­”

JUSTICE GORSUCH: “Perhaps not our finest hour.”

MS. HARTNETT: “Well, it’s not your fault, but I think that –­”

JUSTICE GORSUCH: “Thank you for that.”

— Little v. Hecox

On Site

Argument Analysis

Supreme Court appears likely to uphold transgender athlete bans

After nearly three-and-a-half hours of arguments in a pair of cases from Idaho and West Virginia on laws barring transgender athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports, a majority of the justices appeared to agree with the states that the laws can remain in place, even if it was not clear how broadly their ruling might sweep.

Opinion Analysis