(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up a series of cases to be decided during its next term, which begins in October, involving issues such as transgender rights, campaign finance law, gay “conversion therapy,” crisis pregnancy centers, religious rights and capital punishment.
Here is a look at some of the cases due to be argued during the court’s upcoming term. The court also separately has acted on an emergency basis in a number of cases involving challenges to President Donald Trump’s policies.
TRANSGENDER SPORTS PARTICIPATION
The court on July 3 decided to hear a bid by Idaho and West Virginia to enforce their state laws banning transgender athletes from female sports teams at public schools, taking up another civil rights challenge to Republican-backed restrictions on transgender people. Idaho and West Virginia appealed decisions by lower courts siding with transgender students who sued. The plaintiffs argued that the laws discriminate based on sex and transgender status in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection as well as the Title IX civil rights statute that bars sex-based discrimination in education. No date has been set for the arguments.
CAMPAIGN FINANCE
The court agreed on June 30 to hear a Republican-led challenge on free speech grounds to a provision of federal campaign finance law that limits spending by political parties in coordination with candidates running for office in a case involving Vice President JD Vance. Two Republican committees and Vance, who was running for the U.S. Senate in Ohio when the litigation began, appealed a lower court’s ruling that upheld restrictions on the amount of money parties can spend on campaigns with input from candidates they support. At issue is whether federal limits on coordinated campaign spending violate the Constitution’s First Amendment protection against government abridgment of freedom of speech. No date has been set for the arguments.
GAY ‘CONVERSION THERAPY’
The justices on March 10 agreed to hear a Christian therapist’s challenge on free speech grounds to a Democratic-backed Colorado law banning “conversion therapy” intended to change a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Licensed counselor Kaley Chiles appealed a lower court’s decision rejecting her claim that the 2019 statute unlawfully censors her communications with clients in violation of the First Amendment protections. The state has said it is regulating professional conduct, not speech. Chiles is a Colorado-based therapist and practicing Christian who “believes that people flourish when they live consistently with God’s design, including their biological sex,” according to court papers. No date has been set for the arguments.
CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTERS
The court on June 16 agreed to consider reviving a New Jersey crisis pregnancy center operator’s bid to block the Democratic-led state’s attorney general from investigating whether the Christian faith-based organization deceived women into believing it offered abortions. First Choice Women’s Resource Centers appealed a lower court’s ruling that the organization must first contest the attorney general’s subpoena in state court before bringing a federal lawsuit challenging it. Crisis pregnancy centers provide services to pregnant women with the goal of preventing them from having abortions. They do not advertise their anti-abortion stance, and abortion rights advocates have called them deceptive. First Choice has argued it has a right to bring its case in federal court because it was alleging a violation of its First Amendment rights to free speech and free association. No date has been set for the arguments.
RASTAFARIAN INMATE
The justices on June 23 took up a Rastafarian man’s bid to sue state prison officials in Louisiana after guards held him down and shaved him bald in violation of his religious beliefs. Damon Landor, whose religion requires him to let his hair grow, appealed a lower court’s decision to throw out his lawsuit brought under a U.S. law that protects against religious infringement by state and local governments. The lower court found that this law did not permit Landor to sue individual officials for monetary damages. The law at issue protects the religious rights of people confined to institutions such as prisons and jails. No date has been set for the arguments.
DEATH ROW INMATE
The court on June 6 decided to hear an appeal by Alabama officials of a judicial decision that a man convicted of a 1997 murder is intellectually disabled – a finding that spared him from the death penalty – as they press ahead with the Republican-governed state’s bid to execute him. A lower court ruled that Joseph Clifton Smith is intellectually disabled based on its analysis of his IQ test scores and expert testimony. Under a 2002 Supreme Court precedent, executing an intellectually disabled person violates the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment bar on cruel and unusual punishment. No date has been set for the arguments.
LOUISIANA ELECTORAL DISTRICTS
The court is expected to hear arguments for a second time in a dispute involving a Louisiana electoral map that raised the number of Black-majority U.S. congressional districts in the state. The justices heard arguments in the case on March 24 but on June 27 ordered that the matter be argued again. State officials and civil rights groups have appealed a lower court’s ruling that found that the map laying out Louisiana’s six U.S. House of Representatives districts – with two Black-majority districts, up from one previously – violated the Constitution’s promise of equal protection. No date has been set for the arguments.
COX COMMUNICATIONS PIRACY VERDICT
The justices on June 30 took up a copyright dispute between Cox Communications and a group of music labels following a judicial decision that threw out a $1 billion jury verdict against the internet service provider over alleged piracy of music by Cox customers. Cox appealed a lower court’s decision that it was still liable for copyright infringement by users of its internet service despite the ruling to overturn the verdict. The labels include Sony Music, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group. No date has been set for the arguments.
CHEVRON AND EXXON COASTAL POLLUTION
The court on June 16 agreed to hear a bid by Chevron, Exxon Mobil and other oil and gas companies to have lawsuits brought by two Louisiana localities accusing them of harming the state’s coast over a period of decades moved out of state court and into federal court. The companies appealed a lower court’s ruling rejecting their claims that the lawsuits belong in federal court because the parishes of Plaquemines and Cameron were suing over oil production activities undertaken to fulfill U.S. government refinery contracts during World War Two. Federal court is considered a friendlier venue for businesses in such litigation. No date has been set for the arguments.
ENBRIDGE PIPELINE DISPUTE
The justices on June 30 decided to hear Enbridge’s bid to change the venue of Michigan’s lawsuit seeking to force the Canadian pipeline operator to stop operating a pipeline underneath the Straits of Mackinac, waterways linking two of the Great Lakes, over environmental concerns. Enbridge has appealed a lower court’s ruling rejecting the company’s request to move the case from state court into federal court, a venue considered more friendly to defendants in such cases. No date has been set for the arguments.
(Reporting by John Kruzel, Andrew Chung, Blake Brittain and Nate Raymond; Editing by Will Dunham)
Comments