With the Supreme Court term usually ending in late June or early July, several major cases could be decided within the next few weeks.takes up a multitude of cases. While some have narrow scopes that may initially affect only a handful of people, the decisions can set precedents with long-lasting impacts. Other cases have the potential to right away change millions of lives in the U.S. and reverse major policies at the state and federal level.
, but several of the court's conservative justices appeared interested in a line of questioning that would limit some lines of prosecution against a former president. The Supreme Court has taken up a case about whether the law used to charge hundreds of defendants accused of taking part in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol — as well as Donald Trump for allegedly encouraging the attack — was allowed to be used in that circumstance.
Oral arguments didn't give a clear picture of how the court would rule, with at least some of the conservative justices appearing skeptical of the government's ability to charge the Jan. 6 defendants using the post-Enron law. Also on the court's decision docket are a pair of abortion cases. The first involved whether a key medicine used in abortions should be limited.
A federal law requires emergency rooms to care for life-threatening cases. In states with abortion bans or restrictions, the question has come up about whether doctors in emergency rooms have an obligation to perform abortions regardless of state law if the life of the mother is at stake. Gun ownership for domestic abusers
It's one of the first cases to ask about the limits of a 2022 decision by the court that expanded the rights of gun owners by requiring the government to point to historical analogues when defending gun restrictions in court. The court is also ruling this term on a federal ban on bump stocks. The devices are attachments for rifles that can speed up how quickly bullets can be fired — essentially turning a semi-automatic gun into an automatic weapon.
The justices again appeared divided during oral arguments, but expressed some desire to limit the carnage bump stocks have facilitated in the past. The Supreme Court has also taken up a case that could have major long-term ramifications for how the federal government operates. The court is deciding whether lower courts should continue to defer reasonable interpretation of federal statutes to agency officials when they are left ambiguous.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: NBCNewsHealth - 🏆 707. / 51 Read more »
Source: 13WHAM - 🏆 256. / 63 Read more »
Source: wfaa - 🏆 543. / 51 Read more »
Source: WTHRcom - 🏆 329. / 59 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: MSNBC - 🏆 469. / 51 Read more »