Major Supreme Court cases from the 2026–27 term

The Supreme Court of the United States will hear a number of significant cases in its 2026–27 term, which begins on October 5, 2026, and ends in late June or early July 2027. By October 1, 2026, the Court had agreed to hear 29 cases (only 21 of which were then scheduled for oral argument) while continuing to evaluate numerous petitions for review.

Below is a list of nine major cases that the Supreme Court has so far agreed to hear in its 2026–27 term and one major case that it agreed to hear but then dismissed on September 11, 2026.

Scheduled cases

• October 5, 2026, Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County: (1) Does federal law preclude claims under state law that seek relief for injuries allegedly caused by climate change resulting from interstate and international greenhouse gas emissions? (2) Does the Supreme Court have statutory and constitutional jurisdiction to hear this case? Notably, on September 28, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., who holds investments in oil companies, recused himself from the case.
• October 5, 2026, Johnson v. United States Congress: Did the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act (1988) strip district courts of the jurisdiction (previously recognized by the Supreme Court) to hear challenges to the constitutionality of acts of Congress affecting veterans’ benefits?
• November 3, 2026, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy: Does the exclusion of a Catholic preschool from a Colorado state program providing 15 hours of free instruction per week that does not disallow children on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or gender identity amount to a violation of the “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment, because the preschool refuses to admit non-Catholic (as well as LGBTQ) students?
• November 10, 2026, Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC: Does the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) have the power to conduct hearings to determine whether agricultural companies have violated the terms of the H-2A program (authorized by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952), which sets conditions for the temporary employment of foreign nationals in agricultural jobs? Can the DOL then collect money from companies found to have violated H-2A rules?
• November 30, 2026, Wassily v. Blanche: May noncitizens who were granted asylum owing to past persecution or reasonable fear of future persecution in their home countries but whose asylum was later terminated be granted permanent residence under current immigration law?
• December 2, 2026, Viramontes v. Cook County: Does the constitutional right to bear arms, guaranteed under the Second and Fourteenth amendments, permit possession of AR-15s (also called M16s) and other semiautomatic rifles? This case is consolidated with Grant v. Higgins.
• December 7, 2026, International Partners for Ethical Care, Inc. v. Ferguson: Do parents have a right to challenge a law or policy that allows youth shelters to delay or avoid notifying parents of the arrival of a runaway child receiving gender-affirming psychological or medical care, provided that the child does not agree to such notification? The question as framed by the Supreme Court is: “Whether parents have standing to challenge a law or policy that deliberately displaces their decision-making role as to ‘gender transitions’ of their children, and in so doing creates present and likely future impediments to their ability to parent their children as they deem best for them.”
• December 8, 2026, Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota: (1) Does the National Voter Registration Act (1993) prevent states from requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship (such as birth certificates) for state voter registration forms? (2) Does the National Voter Registration Act prohibit states from creating a program, within 90 days of a federal election, for the purpose of canceling the registrations of voters who are not U.S. citizens?

Unscheduled case

• Kian v. Florida: Do the Sixth and Fourteenth amendments guarantee that persons charged with serious felonies are entitled to trials by juries consisting of 12 persons rather than only 6?

Dismissed case

• Genalo v. Black, scheduled for October 13 but dismissed on September 11: (1) Is there a point at which an alien’s detention, pending a decision on whether the person is to be deported, becomes “unreasonably prolonged,” thereby requiring that the alien have an opportunity for a bond under the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution? (2) If so, does the due process clause also require that the government justify the alien’s continued detention with clear and convincing evidence? (3) Is the case itself moot, given that the alien was released from detention in 2022?