In Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the Supreme Court is considering whether the University of Texas at Austin’s holistic consideration of race in undergraduate admissions is constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
You are here
In Moore v. Texas, the Supreme Court has been asked to decide, among other things, whether the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is violated by the execution of an inmate after an extended period of incarceration, especially when much of that time has been spent in solitary confinement.
In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Supreme Court is considering whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to provide individuals a right to sue for damages to vindicate individual rights protected by federal law.
In United States House of Representatives v. Burwell, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is considering whether the executive branch acted lawfully when it reimbursed health care insurers for cost-sharing reductions as it is required to do by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), as well as whether the House of Representatives has standing to bring this case against the executive branch.
United States v. Texas centers on the legality of President Obama’s 2014 executive action on immigration.
In West Virginia v. EPA, states and others are challenging the EPA’s Clean Power Plan rule (CPP), which established emission guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to limit CO2 emissions from existing power plants. The goal of these guidelines is to achieve significant reductions in CO2 emissions by 2030 while offering states and utilities substantial flexibility and latitude in achieving these reductions.
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt is a constitutional challenge to Texas HB 2—a package of onerous restrictions designed to shutter abortion clinics across the state—signed into law by Governor Rick Perry in 2013.
In Williams v. Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court is considering whether it violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments for a state supreme court justice to participate in the review of a death penalty case in which he was personally involved when he previously served as district attorney.
In Zubik v. Burwell, the Supreme Court is considering whether an accommodation established by the Department of Health and Human Services, which allows religious nonprofits to opt out of complying with the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage mandate, violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).