A case in which the Court will decide whether a Texas law that requires any website that publishes content one-third or more of which is “harmful to minors” to verify the age of each of its users before providing access should be subject to “rational basis” review or “strict scrutiny.”

A case in which the Court will decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which prohibits making a “false statement” for the purpose of influencing certain financial institutions and federal agencies, also prohibits making a statement that is misleading but not false.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 is a “final judgment, order, or proceeding” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).

A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a former employee—who was qualified to perform her job and who earned post-employment benefits while employed—loses her right to sue over discrimination with respect to those benefits solely because she no longer holds her job.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the First Step Act’s sentencing reduction provisions apply to a defendant whose original sentence was imposed before the Act’s enactment, then vacated and resentenced to a new term of imprisonment after the Act’s enactment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, as applied to TikTok, violates the First Amendment.

A case in which the Court will decide whether an award of the “defendant’s profits” under the Lanham Act can include an order for the defendant to disgorge the distinct profits of legally separate non-party corporate affiliates.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.

A case in which the Court will consider the scope of property interests and fraud in government contracting, particularly when deception occurs without clear economic harm.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal civilian employee called or ordered to active duty under a provision of law during a national emergency is entitled to differential pay even if the duty is not directly connected to the national emergency.